HammerKit has a huge downside to it. After using it for years you get used to the idea that project and team work can be really easy. You forget all the pain you used to have in the past with your web projects. After all, that pain was the original reason why HammerKit was made. Recently I was asked to participate in a project where HammerKit was not used. I had the same weird sensation as if losing internet connection, electricity and running water all at the same time. Suddenly you notice all the everyday luxuries you have in your life. Like Jeremy Clarkson from Top Gear would say about so called caravan holidays, “THIS IS NOT A REAL HOLIDAY”. I could say the same from web-projects made without HammerKit, they are no walk in the park, or nothing to be enjoyed – unlike projects with HammerKit.
After I got over the initial shock of working without HammerKit, I had to analyze the situation and make a list of what was going on. What really is different, and why am I going to be happy as a clam to be back using HammerKit for our projects.
The main problem is usually the communication (or lack of it) between different people participating in the project. Usually, the people involved in a project are from ”different planets”. Even a simple web-project includes a list of different kinds of people, or better, ”alien races”: business people, graphic designers, software architects & designers, coders, ”the server dude” and naturally someone who is titled as the project manager. So most likely there are about 3 to 4 different kinds of aliens trying to understand each other. And then the project manager (the only earthly person with some diplomatic skills) is supposed to be the middleman making sure that things get understood and done in a constructive spirit.
Usually bigger companies have bigger teams to handle projects faster. This again creates even a bigger problem because a need for more communication arises, more managers and more likely more ”alien races” are needed etc. The main problem is that all different ”aliens” have their own set of tools and working methods, so there is no common ground to make the communication easier.
To point out why having different tools is such a hassle, just imagine a simple web site that makes somekind of database search (lets say a web shop with a list of products you can buy). Usually a designer creates the original layout on photoshop or a similar tool. Then a coder takes that layout and remakes it by coding HTML and PHP with some simple text/code editor. He tries to make it resemble the original layout as much as possible by using the graphics he gets from the designer. Then comes the painful part. There are always some layout & graphic changes needed and most likely the CSS styles are not exactly as the designer wanted. Then the designer makes new set of CSS and graphics etc. These are sent to the coder with some instructions and hopes for the best. If they are lucky, the coder understands the designer and everyone is happy. But in most cases there is a need of several iterations until the designer is happy. In many cases there is a need of having some technical changes later on, and once again the designs might get screwed. This way we can be sure that the designer and especially the coder (who is responsible of making all changes, and moving the codes on the server etc.) will waste a huge amount of time.
Imagine if all these ”alien races”, from business people to designers and coders (even that server dude), were using one common tool. Yes, they would still speak a different language, but if they all used the same tool it would make direct communication possible. Instead of waiting for days for the full chain of command, fixes and issues can be pointed out immediately. Especially designers will benefit from this kind of tool. They can make any style, layout or graphic related changes directly inside the tool as well as immediately preview the result on a browser. Projects become more agile than ever. No more scheduled scrum meetings required. Imagine that!
My angst does not stop at the initial project level. I am also stressed about the continuation. What happens once the project goes live? Usually in modern web era we do not fully complete a piece of software, because we want results fast. Therefore, we make the first version that does the essentials and then we improve it and add features. Think about improving a project that is made traditionally without tools like HammerKit. Only the coder and/or the server dude has even access to it, and figuring out those old pieces of code can be a huge pain and waste of time. In many cases the next version is actually recoded, even if the original codes are only about 2 years old.
When you need to change the layout or add new features, tools like HammerKit are your best option. If it is a new feature – it usually means adding a new module with no need to even look at the old code. Any coder can make it. Making changes to the layout, styles etc. is something that the designer can be doing all the time on their own without any technical person in between. It does not even matter if these changes are done directly to a live site. The risks in there are so much smaller than in traditional projects where any change means a change in cod
I needed to write this. To get on paper what really makes me frustrated. In short, projects made with HammerKit are just so much easier to control. You get to experience true team work where everyone is working in the same environment sharing the tools. When working with HammerKit I just have so much less stress and worries that I never want to go back to the traditional way of web projects and feel like Jeremy Clarkson on caravan ”holiday”.
