It's better than iRise, Mockplus, uxpin etc for high fidelity prototypes. But for more visual UI and vectors I would recommend Sketch if you are a Mac user.
Due to the use of variables and possibility of adding complex user flows and related conditions Axure gives a feel of real solution, which may be tested without a particular scenario (freely used by the user, if a feature or app os complete). Other tools are rather UI focused, …
Figma is a well known design tool but is heavily skewed towards creating pixel perfect UI interface designs and hence more suited to UI designers. Sketch and AdobeXd, similar to Figma have always been vector based software design tools which affords a designer more control over …
Axure is my go-to choice because although it is more manual, I have more direct control and can create rich prototypes and interactions that other tools just can't do. With Axure I can mockup physical hardware as well as on-device screens and deep menus. You just can't do that …
Axure RP has its place among the competitors. Every product has its pros and cons. Axure works well for larger and less visual design projects or deliverables. In some cases we might use Axure along with another tool, such as Sketch or Photoshop, to create different …
Sketch and Axure serve different levels of fidelity for our designs. Axure is able to provide rapid, lower-fidelity prototypes that will demonstrate workflows to customers, whereas Sketch is great for higher-fidelity designs that are non-functional, but exact down to the pixel …
Axure stacks up pretty nicely against other tools, in terms of available functionality and support for users. It’s probably the best tool I have used to create the most realistic and complex prototypes for sales purposes. However, its interface is outdated compared to other …
Overall, Axure RP is a reliable prototyping and wireframing tool that has been around for a while. Due to its longevity, it has a large number of features and a large base of help documentation. Contrary, Axure RP does not always feel as thought out as some of its competitors, …
We initially based our decision on Axure's reputation as the industry standard for prototyping. It is the best as what it does for now, but this is a highly competitive field. There seems to be a new UX/UI tool coming out monthly. I think Axure will continue to be the best for …
Since Axure RP is a desktop software that can work without a cloud connection, it is easy to have approved within a highly restricted corporate environment for a low cost with a small team. iRise is a solution that requires greater amounts of management, best service a group of …
Axure is more full features than most of its competitors. We needed the interactivity that Axure provides and that others were lacking in. We also had some individuals on the team that were familiar with Axure from their prior experience and we wanted to take advantage of that …
As I stated, I find myself reaching for Axure less. Though it is certainly more powerful than an other tools I've used, it is also the slowest and least simple to build out a prototype. For quick turnaround for a client, I'll always reach for one of the other programs. For a …
We were looking for something that we will be able to install on our computer because it is easier to work, we know few other solutions that has better collaboration but is less good in designing, and at the end of a day it is important to have good customer understanding to …
More tools; and a more professional interface. Balsamic is great for casual projects and simple designs. Axure better suited for mid-level projects. I would like to see features improve in regards to large-scale projects. Bottom line Axure is the best and only mid to high-level …
Despite the three being less sophisticated than Axure, I lean towards them because they make rapid prototyping genuinely rapid. I haven't had to show a clickable prototype in my absence, so I prefer showing a prototype that's more user flow oriented than "feature" heavy.
We also use some other prototyping tools like InVision, but Axure works great on projects where you start from low-fidelity wireframes (so just boxes and dummy text), creating simple animations, testing out the concepts with users and stakeholders - then translating the same …
Axure is king when it comes to functional prototypes. Sketch looks better visually and is an easy interface to use but is limiting because there is no option to build in interactions.
InVision and Marvel are hotspot-based applications, so you are limited to the types of interactions that you can create. You can create any interaction in Axure by building it yourself with a combination of adding cases to dynamic panels with clauses. Learning how to do a …
I've used Balsamiq and Adobe Illustrator. Illustrator is not helpful for wireframes because it's basically the same as a sketch with straighter lines. Balsamic is helpful but it doesn't have as much functionality built in, so you can only communicate so much. Its also hard for …
Very similar - the only reason I chose Axure is because the company i was working for had the license for Axure and not irise but they are very similar as i have used both
Neither of tools around are a complete solution. Axure is the most complete tool in the market at this moment. In my perspective and daily use, the strongest feature of Axure is prototyping for mobile and tablet devices. Axshare is very helpful, but still I wish to have the …
Adobe XD is so much more than UXPin, with Adobe Cloud you can easily share designs as well. We used Adobe XD before changing to UXPin. At first UXPin seems so advanced and helpful, but don't get fooled. You're heavily limited in the long run, and after all the training and …
The first thing I’ll say is the learning curve is way lighter on UXPin. Also UXPin updates their app, and performance routinely and adds new features based on community needs.
It’s the first web-based tool that outputs code rendered in the browser from a design created in a …
Marvel was great for helping to define app flows and apply app designs to give our clients a better visual of how their apps would flow and work in order to assist with UX. However, we needed something a bit more robust. We weren't just looking for something that was pretty. We …
There are definitely pros to these other tools, but UXPin gains a significant edge by providing tools to perform several significant steps of the design workflow in one place. For instance, we could wireframe in LucidChart, prototype in Marvel, then manually perform user …
Quick to prototype, easy to share, multiple devices, fully responsive breakpoints, export CSS, publishing from the tool, Photoshop integration. Has a fairly easy to use interface when compared to InVision and quite easy to integrate with other tools and collaboration solutions …
Between UXPin and Balsamiq, I think UXPin gives you better control over the designs and iterations. UXPin seems to continuously iterate on their own product to make it better. I like how UXPin fits in nicely with my workflow.
We'd been using Adobe Photoshop for our high fidelity wireframes up until now. Photoshop is a great tool (one of my favorites!), however, UXPin is allowing us to provide living, breathing, interactive wireframes/prototypes that really help us communicate with our engineers and …
I went through several tools trying to find something that was easy to use and made me faster. Visio was such a pain at creating something reusable to make me faster, too much building. Axure and Balsamiq looked like great options but were too cumbersome for my needs and I …
Axure RP is a great user experience design toolkit that gives UX designers the ability to create user flows, Low-Fidelity, and High-Fidelity mockups all within the same tool. Overall, it works well with teams of designers looking to collaborate on the same project(s). Axure RP allows you to set up masters and components, giving you and your team the ability to share and re-use styled objects. This not only cuts down on the time allotted for wireframing, but it also means design styles are upheld and the overall software becomes more consistent. I would not recommend Axure for High-Fidelity visual design mockups (use Sketch App instead), as Axure is limited in it's the ability to style components.
If you're a very simple designer, with very simple requirements UXPin is very good, especially because you can share the designs very easily. If you are an advanced designer with specific client requirements never use UXPin. Don't even get started because you will waste your time. Example is their component feature, it has a lot, but misses very crucial aspects to be functional on a broader scale.
High fidelity prototypes: Axure is excellent for creating prototypes that are visually indistinguishable from the real product. You do not need advanced Photoshop or other image editing software skills to create mockups that look real with Axure. If you do have Photoshop skills though it definitely can help as you can easily bring in edited images into Axure from it.
Realistic interactions: On top of creating prototypes that look real, you can also easily make them interact like a real site would. This is useful for not only showing developers and stakeholders but for user testing as well.
Sharing prototypes: Sharing Axure prototypes with others is easy, even if they don't have the Axure software. You can either upload your file to Axshare, Azure's free hosting service or host it on your own servers and share the link with viewers. The link allows users to interact with the site as though it were real as well as easily switch between pages with a collapsible site map.
Sometimes, it can be a bit buggy and slow if the prototype is complex with dozens of layers.
The learning curve can be steep the first time you use it. Or, if you haven't used the app for awhile; I sometimes need to relearn it if I haven't used it for a month or so.
The loading times can be quite slow where a page gets stuck. It would be great if this didn't happen.
We'll definitely continue to use UXPin. Right now it provides us with everything we need in order to deliver quality projects to our clients. If at any point in time, UXPin doesn't provide us with what we need, we'll start vetting other software out there that may be similar. My guess is that UXPin will continue to make updates and improvements so we'll likely stick with it for quite some time.
Axure feels like a tool that started with a simple interface that wasn't redesigned over time. Simple tasks sometimes require clicking through multiple layers. Crucial pieces of functionality are hidden under text links, or just flatly aren't discoverable. Much of the quirks of the interface only come from having screwed up numerous times, and knowing that certain things are just difficult to accomplish.
I've never used the support for Axure but they do have an online community that can be helpful when you're unsure how to accomplish a specific bit of interactivity. Overall the community for Axure is a great benefit for the software. There are also a lot of shared library assets which can help reduce the time you spend on projects.
As far as I know, my teams have only had to use the UXPin support once. The experience went really well. We just needed a bit of assistance with using the Documentation feature. UXPin's support was quick and helped my team in a matter of minutes. We will definitely reach out to their support without hesitation in the future.
I think that the online training videos cover all product features and are a great resource to point people to. The newsletter is also frequent and passes on a range of tips and techniques for users that are eager to learn more, or just want to keep themselves up to date
Axure stacks up pretty nicely against other tools, in terms of available functionality and support for users. It’s probably the best tool I have used to create the most realistic and complex prototypes for sales purposes. However, its interface is outdated compared to other tools, and it’s a less efficient tool than other tools, such as Sketch, that enable users to create and iterate upon designs more quickly. We will continue to use Axure for complex designs, particularly for prototypes that need to be external-facing, but we’ll opt to stick with Adobe XD or another tool for internal use, to save time and energy by using a more straightforward tool.
I went through several tools trying to find something that was easy to use and made me faster. Visio was such a pain at creating something reusable to make me faster, too much building. Axure and Balsamiq looked like great options but were too cumbersome for my needs and I couldn't get to the live link fast enough. Moqups was my first choice before I heard about UXPin. I switched to UXPin because the had more built in features, more icons and just an overall better and more usable interface that appealed to my design side.
When understanding the minimal needs to describe multiple dimensions of UX using this tool, a designer can very quickly create a prototype using this tool and can help reduce the time needed to assess very usability requirements and business validity for an application.
The generated files source code absolutely cannot be used in the application code. Measures should be taken to ensure the code is not used in the application code or else you risk rework in development/implementation.
Saving money by using one tool for lo-fi wireframing, high fidelity wireframing, prototyping, and user testing, rather than four separate tools.
The ability to create and use team libraries enables us to create visually consistent designs with less effort than creating every single design from scratch, which allows us to save considerable time (and therefore money!)
In-platform collaboration saves our team a lot of time and energy. With everything in one place (wireframes, prototypes, user feedback, collaboration comments), we can all be on the same page about the design workflow and pinpoint discussion points that are based on up-to-date designs.