The terms OOA and OOD were created at the beginning of the 1990s, with the (debateable) mindset of having separate "phases" analysis, design and implemention in the development process, and the idea of "extending" object orientation from the "implementation phase" to the "former phases". Peter Coad and Edward Yourdon wrote two books about it with exactly those titles "Object Oriented Analysis" and "Object Oriented Design". You will find an introduction to their ideas here. These methods tried to distinguish themselves from older techniques like structured analysis.
OOA and OOD describe tools for making analysis and design with OO means (like objects & classes, attributes & associations), but not the order in which they are applied. The way I understand these terms they are quite orthogonal to the specific software development process (like waterfall model, iterative model, spiral model).
At the time when the terms were becoming popular, there were some competing graphical notations for modeling classes and business processes. This lead finally to the UML standard. I am pretty sure today the terms "OOA/OOD" will be used synonymously to "doing analysis/design using UML" by most people.
Now, when does one make a certain analysis or design activity during a development (like scetching an UI, or drawing an activity diagram)? That depends on
but it does not depend on if you are using OO and/or UML means for this.
Let me give some examples:
when you are creating a new version of a software where the only task is to implement a new "coorporate look" at the UI, your first and foremost analysis activitiy will be to create the new UI, nothing else.
when you design a software like a specific purpose library without any user interface, the question of when to apply the activity "user interface design" is pointless.
when you have build a system over a certain time period in several iterations, and for the last iteration it will be necessary to change some behaviour in the order in which some files are processes, and you think an activity diagram is well suited to describe this change, then you will use this kind of diagram at a very late phase of your development. An UI design will probably not be necessary here.
So "Object Oriented Analysis and Design" is not a process model, but it is nethertheless reasonably defined (at least, to some degree - surely they are differences between different authors). And software development (object oriented or not) is not like a conveyor-belt process where you just
shovel some requirements into,
follow a step-by-step-list in a fixed oorder like "first draw an activity diagram, then scetch an UI, then make a class diagram, then write some code"
to finally get some business application as a result. It is activity where you need to use your brain and think what steps makes most sense next, for your current situation.