Overall Satisfaction with InVision
Designers at Calendly use InVision to hand off feature designs to developers. User stories that are defined and ready for implementation typically include InVision links. They also use InVision to share early prototypes/sketches with product leadership.
- Simplicity. As a developer, I only use InVision to reference the mocks that the designer/UX person created. InVision lets me easily accomplish that.
- Inspect mode is very useful for developers: instead of just looking at a static image, I can inspect individual elements to see their dimensions and styles like font size and color.
- Sometimes I can't inspect the right element because some other transparent element is blocking it. Invision should handle this better and allow me to ignore certain elements or cycle through different elements at the mouse cursor.
- No support for reusable styles (e.g. color variables).
- No support for building an entire library of reusable components that all designers would then use. This results in frequent discrepancies between what's in the mocks and common styles of UI components (e.g. buttons, dialogs) in the actual product.
- The Jira plugin is slow, allows only 1 attachment per issue, and is cumbersome to use (you need to generate a special share link to embed an Invision mock). So we just put the old-fashioned links in the issue description.
- I wasn't a decision-maker, nor do I own the implementation of the tool at my current company, so I can't answer this question.
- It's been positive, overall, I feel.
Do you think InVision delivers good value for the price?
Yes
Are you happy with InVision's feature set?
Yes
Did InVision live up to sales and marketing promises?
I wasn't involved with the selection/purchase process
Did implementation of InVision go as expected?
I wasn't involved with the implementation phase
Would you buy InVision again?
Yes