Can i style my websites with metro design from windows 8/windows phone 7 for free?
Does microsoft charge anything for that?
Just answer, whether i can or not. If no - describe why.
Metro is two things. It is an execution shell inside Windows 8. But, it is also a design language - prescriptive guidance for developers on how to layout, style, and create excellent user experiences. The first is part of Windows 8. The second is just a guide or a style which designers and developers can use to help them choose their UI and UX.
If your web site conforms to the principles of the Metro design language, and as a result looks "Metro", then good for you. Microsoft does not own a "look". The design language is intended to improve software and to help developers. You're good, buddy. Carry on.
Related
I'm currently using UFT One for web automation (mostly screen scraping, form submissions, file uploads, SF Lightning manipulation, etc.) but there is potential for more extensive automation/testing in the future. Our current license is up for renewal shortly and I want to be sure that it makes sense to stick with UFT One over UFT Developer.
Can anyone speak to the major differences between UFT Developer and UFT One?
What do you mean for "but there is potential for more extensive automation/testing in the future"?
I’m asking, because to answer you, depends in what your team are aiming for to test.
For example:
We use UFT ONE and Mobile Center, I’m making script's for emulators, browsers, Androids and IOS, pushing queries from the database etc etc...
UFT ONE have a lot to explore, and can do almost every functionality test, and also other kind of test.
Other thing to have in consideration is, look at your team and the skills they have. If you have low programming skills UFT ONE whit the VBscript have a lower curve to learn, since VBscript are easier to understand and get the logic.
If you go at UFT DEV, you can have a huge learning curve. Or you can have programmers that are testing something whit the wrong perspective.
So in the end you have to adjust at your needs, but think well about some questions.
Best luck.
Regards
UFT Developer (previously known as LeanFT) is more developer oriented, you can write your tests in more developer friendly languages (JavaScript, Java, .NET).
UFT One (previously known as UFT) is more "tester friendly", it uses VBScript for the test's code but it has a much richer feature set and is more established in the testing community.
UFT Developer is used for parallel execution .you can integrate with TestNG .you can use eclipse and all .it has separate recording option.
Does Umbraco offer inbuilt feature or interface to create categories, menus, or product gallery?
I have been searching an easiest way to do so for my clients.
Hope, I can find an smart answer to my question
Another place to try would be to look at how some of the e-commerce starter kits work like the uWebShop or TeaCommerce packages. They have a category/products structure in content that you could take a look at.
Umbraco comes with a limited number of starterkits, skins and macro templates. You can use any of these as you like, but as they are fairly simple, generally you will end up building what you want. One of the great advantages of Umbraco is this kind of flexibility. Umbraco is geared towards developers who have a .Net background, and is very easy if you have .Net experience. If not, there's a little bit of a learning curve, but there are a good number of resources available as well as an active community to aid in the learning process.
Umbraco has about 4 or so built in starterkits and Our Umbraco has several more that other users have contributed.
Background: I have created a CRUD web app using a java based RAD tool called Wavemaker. I am considering developing the app again in a framework that has greater support. Even though I have some experience in development I still get confused by all of the terms. My understanding is that there are languages (C#, PHP, Javascript, Java, etc), frameworks (Wavemaker, Ruby on Rails, Yii, Symfony, Code Igniter, Zend, etc) and editors (Dreamweaver?)?
I outsourced the development of a mobile version of my web app and this was created using jquery mobile, php and ajax. I started using Dreamweaver because I read it had integration for development with jquery mobile and hence I could perform modifications on my mobile app.
I was wondering whether Dreamweaver was a viable choice for the development of a CRUD web app? I used dreamweaver many years ago for the create of html pages and it would automatically create a lot of "unclean" code that made it hard to maintain. I fear that I would put myself in a similar situation here with server-side code.
If Dreamweaver is not appropriate could you kindly suggest a framework that may meet my requirements?
The main things I liked about Wavemaker:
Drag and drop widgets
A lot of the database functions were automatically handled
The main things I don't like about developing with Wavemaker (not Wavemaker itself):
Support: The support generally involves posting to the forums and hoping for a reply that may never come. I would rather paid support over this option which to be fair is offered by vmware but I found it too confusing.
Small number of freelance contractors: Much of the functionality within my app required coding or workarounds outside of the standard features of wavemaker and it is very hard to find a freelance wavemaker developer for help
Ongoing bugs that cause a headache during development
With that being said my priorities are:
Support: great documentation with rapid response to problems (even if this requires a paid subscription)
A large number of freelance contractors available (I guess this means a popular framework using a popular language).
Simple and easy to use (I understand there would be an initial learning curve)
Stable: I won't be running into bugs that hold up my development and need me to wait for the next release for a fix
The ability to incorporate reporting like BIRT reports or Jasper.
Possibly steer clear of Java as I have found Tomcat to be an extra level of complication that it would be great to do without.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks.
Dreamweaver was a viable choice for the development of a CRUD web app?
Yes, but with caveats. It still does not produce code that advanced users would consider "clean" but the integration of JQuery Mobile in CS5.5 makes it a good choice for non-coders or beginning coders who need to spin up rapidly and will worry about elegance later.
That being said, if you are outsourcing the design it is likely that the code you get back will be editable in Dreamweaver but not written in such a way as to take advantage of Dreamweaver's built-in behaviors (automatic code writing). Dreamweaver expects to see code written to its specs in order to take over for the user. If not, it is still a great wysiwyg editor and above-average code editor.
But it's not a framework. In your sitution, JQuery Mobile is the framework and any JQuery Mobile developer should be able to step in and run with the project. But if you write big chunks of the CRUD using Dreamweaver, developers may tell you that they will want to rewrite those sections. Some won't care.
By day, I am a front-end web developer but in my off time I dabble with other languages such as C, Objective-C, Python, etc. When I first got into web development the idea of web applications was just getting started.
Since then two amazing frameworks have appeared, SproutIt's SproutCore and 280 North's Cappuccino (+Objective-J). SproutCore is being used by Apple for it's MobileMe application and 280 North released 280 Slides. Both of these applications are amazing and they are a testament to what is possible on the web. So the momentum is shifting. Web applications starting to look and act like desktop applications.
So my question is this: should web based applications follow web standards, separation of markup (content), presentation (design), and behavior (functionality) or no?
I am not sure about SproutCore since I have not look at the source code, but I know that if you go to 280slides.com and turn off the JavaScript everything basically disappears. You are left with some meaningless words.
Let me clarify, I understand that web based applications such as 280 Slides is meant to have JavaScript on and not meant to be functional without it but in my day job my main focus is writing clean markup, separating content, presentation, and behavior so that our site and applications can be used by as many people as possible.
It seems like the other people who have answered so far have no idea what you're talking about.
Like me, you've had it pounded into your head to make your web applications as accessible as possible. That is, they should work without scripting and without stylesheets. JavaScript and CSS should only be used to enhance the experience. They should not be required.
SproutCore and Cappuccino are frameworks for front-end development that require the user to have both JavaScript and CSS enabled. Your question is around how we reconcile this with the dogma of the day.
Unfortunately, I don't have a clear-cut answer. I like the fact that SproutCore and Cappuccino (and probably others) are testing the limits of what's possible within a web browser. I also believe firmly that information and services provided on the web should be available to as many people as possible, given the limitations of the technology.
How you approach your solutions needs to be based on a deep knowledge of your user-base. If you're working on an iPhone app, you don't need to worry about traditional web accessibility because the experience is intensely visual. If you're building a web application for a general audience, these new frameworks are probably a poor choice (if you value the widest possible access to your information and services).
Over time, screen reader software is likely to get better at interpreting JavaScript-heavy interfaces, so perhaps this issue will fade. Thing is, something else is likely to "sprout" up in its place.
Javascript is a Web standard — certainly more so than, say, Flash, which was previously (and still often is) used for rich Web applications. In this regard, SproutCore and Cappuccino are giant improvements in my book.
The question here really seems to be how important accessibility is. And that is largely a personal decision based, as Andrew said, on knowing your users. For some apps, accessibility really doesn't make that much sense — 280 Slides is a good example of this. It's a graphic design app that's largely about visual behaviors. It doesn't make very much sense for it to degrade to plaintext. (At least, a text-based app meant to accomplish what 280 Slides does would be really be a completely different thing.)
Yes. It will be difficult at first, but once the codebase matures you will be thankful you followed those rigorous standards.
Edit: An added benefit will be portability to many web-based platform via CSS profiles and whatnot.
The MVC model can be applied just as easily to desktop applications as it can to web based applications. I don't see much reason to distinguish between the two, especially since the line is more blurred in the case of web applications.
I don't know about these particular frameworks, but a lot of web frameworks these days are structured around the MVC model, such as ASP MVC, CakePHP, Ruby on Rails, etc.
Separate as much as you can and it will pay out in the end. When things get complicated and hairy :)
I think they should. Following that type of MVC design allows for changes to be more easily implemented, provides good separation of concern, and is generally easier to understand for newcomers to a project.
We have a user experience designer in our team who has no programming background. He is expected to design screens within Eclipse as a development environment. His (valid) complaint is that every time he designs a specific screen and gives it to development - they tell him what is not possible technically using either SWT or GEF. So, he wants me to teach him basics of SWT/GEF so that he can make informed decisions and maybe even try out certain things in eclipse (as opposed to using Photoshop) before proposing designs to save time.
My personal belief is that design should not be constrained by technical possibilities and in theory, everything that the designer dreams of (at least the practical things) should be possible technically - albeit with workarounds or a little hacking.
So, my question is this - how important do you think is programming knowledge for user interface design? And if it is, how do you go about teaching someone with absolutely no programming experience the graphical frameworks on various platforms?
In principle, I agree with you. Programming knowledge shouldn't be necessary to be a skilled designer of UIs and work flows. However, knowing the abilities and limitations of the technology in use can help a UI designer work more effectively with the programming staff.
Where programming knowledge can help is if the development staff is blowing smoke that something cannot be done when it can be, some knowledge of the tools being used can help refute that. If the development staff is correct that something cannot be done, then knowledge of the tools can help the UI designer find an appropriate solution that meets the design goals and is achievable.
With a properly cooperative development staff, the UI designer would need very little (if any) knowledge about the specific GUI tools being used.
I've been on the developer side of this where I was being asked to do something impossible or impractical. I always worked with the designers to find a happy middle that met the design goals. Sometimes what I thought was impossible was in fact possible. Sometimes we had to do things a different way. A few things had to be put off as "possible, but too much effort." (Such as an SWT based application that became a Windows task bar. Definitely possible, but impractical for the project in question as it would require native code.)
What is most important is that both sides realize that they are on the same team.
Its very important..
Not knowing about:
technology in general
the technology you have chosen to dedicate your time investing into to produce the end product
Will result in a complete waste of time for everyone..
Even the end user needs to learn a bit about the technology employed in able to use whatever product we make..
Someone who drives a car will always need to know how to fill in the gas and know the basics of what a car is and what it can do, software works in a similar fashion.
Its like asking someone who doesn't know that cars (the ones of today) need wheels to make a drawing of your next release model.
The way to make them more aware of the technology is:
Show him/her similar products to the ones you should be making
Show him/her stand alone implementations of the building blocks you might consider using
But by all means...this doesn't mean you should stifle their creativity..have them draw away what they dream, just make them that little bit aware of reality as needs be in order to have something done in this lifetime
So, my question is this - how important do you think is
programming knowledge for user
interface design?
I think a basic knowledge of the standard user interface for the platform is required (text fields, combo boxes, radio buttons, etc). A good designer should be familiar with the capabilities and limitations of these GUI components, from a developer's point of view. So I guess some basic programming knowledge would be useful.
My personal belief is that design
should not be constrained by technical
possibilities and in theory,
everything that the designer dreams of
(at least the practical things) should
be possible technically - albeit with
workarounds or a little hacking.
I think there are important qualifications here --- each OS has guidelines on what constitutes good GUI design, and it's beneficial for your product that you follow them because the user has a certain mental model of how he or she should interact with applications on that platform. (Having said that, there may be good reasons for breaking some design conventions, e.g. in games, specialized graphics/music applications.)
how do you go about teaching someone
with absolutely no programming
experience the graphical frameworks on
various platforms?
Each toolkit makes available a whole bunch of small sample programs to demonstrate the use of different components --- this is probably a good first step to acquaint oneself with them.
Is not as important as common sense in my opinion.
It helps of course. But if the designer is asking for something that could be done ( because some other application uses it ) the development lead should at least present a workaround.
Programming knowledge probably not, but limitations on the chosen platform certainly.
I think it's better to learn up front, but if your UI designer is forced to learn on the fly, make sure that each time he is turned away, it's explained why something can't be done rather than just a flat refusal. This will keep him from getting as frustrated as he might otherwise be because he'll be able to form at least some logical framework for what he can and can't do.
I think the designer should be aware of the features and limitations that the tools he's using offer, and he should be aware of the limitations and the deadline of the current project that those guys are making.
He should also be aware of the background processing that's going on to show the screen UI, and all these things will come only if he has some rudimentary knowledge of programming.
He doesn't have to dabble in the depth of OOP, learn SQL, know the intricacies of reflection or anything fancy like that. He just has to know his platform well, and that I think is a requirement even for the designers.
The very core of "design" is to find a way to achieve a desired result within the constraints. If you don't anything about a part of the constraints that affects your goal, then you can't design.
It all depends on your tools.
Edit: What I mean is there are tools that are designed for designers, and tools for programmers. Eclipse, for one is not a designer tool. Photoshop is. Flash maybe, Flex not. I wouldn't require a Flash designer to program, but a Flex designer does need to program.
As for telling them about the limits of your tools it depends, really good creative designers will embrace those limits and make incredible work, mediocre designers will perceive the limits as roadblocks and stop being creative and just following the rules with fear.
I have given it some thought and based on the answers given previously, i have reached certain conclusions:
A preliminary knowledge about what is possible and what are the constraints while designing on a given platform is mandatory. This means that the graphics designer should be aware of the following:
The basic design guidelines on that platform
The standard UI toolkit / widgets provided on that platform (for ex: textboxes, drop-down lists, etc)
What is not possible (or is too cumbersome) on a given platform (for ex: creating translucent modal dialogs while fading out the background in Eclipse)
This amount of knowledge might not require the designer to dabble in programming.
The second level is where the designer is making an attempt to either create new widgets or to (knowingly) go against the set standards for a given platform. For instance, if the design includes graphs or the need to depict special relationships or a unique combination of text, graphics and images that is not implicitly supported by any standard toolsets. In this case, the designer should be aware of the technical possibilities and the limits of a given platform. In this case, i would argue that the designer should be able to write a little code and try out a few things to ascertain what might be within the realms of possibility.