[HN Gopher] Good Design vs. Great Design
___________________________________________________________________
Good Design vs. Great Design
Author : gymshoes
Score : 21 points
Date : 2021-09-18 20:19 UTC (2 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.andy.works)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.andy.works)
| TheRealNGenius wrote:
| The navbar is suboptimal. Having a transparent background makes
| it so black things scrolling by obscure the logo for instance.
| designcode wrote:
| His apps are badly designed wrapped up in loud visual design
| that's trying to do / say too much.
|
| Just adding 3d doesn't mean you've stumbled upon a new era of
| interface design.
| armchairhacker wrote:
| Strange figurative wording aside, I think the author is
| reiterating that, in order to go "above and beyond" and stand out
| from the competition, you have to create something novel and
| radical. And directed more towards art and creative fields.
|
| "Good design" is following all the classic design tips. Like a
| material website that implements material design correctly, is
| good design. And this is actually OK and better than "great
| design" for most situations.
|
| "Great design" needs to stand out. And the only way to stand out
| is to do something weird. Take some fancy website made out of
| ASCII: not something you should write your IT software in, but
| maybe good for a portfolio.
|
| Radical "great design" is really good for art and music: almost
| nobody cares about a beautiful portrait, people want something
| strange and creative. It's really bad for software architecture
| "design": when writing code, you practically never want to stray
| from the obvious, traditional path. For UX design and websites
| it's somewhere in the middle, and depends on what the software is
| for (e.g. business solution UX is less creative, video game is
| more creative UX).
| overgard wrote:
| I think the author is confusing art and design. Art is all the
| things he says are great: challenging, messy, unconvential,
| etc. etc. But design in a lot of ways is more about empathy and
| engineering. Someone wants to do something and you're figuring
| out how to make that as understandable and efficient as
| possible. You don't need to be super creative to make a great
| design, you need to understand what the person is trying to do
| and make solving that as obvious as possible. IMO this guy
| wants "design" to be Art, and that's just confusing most of the
| time.
|
| If I'm downloading some app it's probably because I need it to
| do something. I don't give a shit about the designer's ego, I
| do not need my mind blown, I just want to do the thing I set
| out to do and move on with my life.
|
| The problem with most design is everyone thinks they're the
| next incarnation of Steve Jobs and if they just get rid of more
| buttons and make their typography really really nice everyone
| will see their creative genius. So we're constantly dealing
| with apps and their "bold" redesigns of things that everyone
| understood perfectly fine before. It's incredibly frustrating.
| Even reading what this guy is doing on his site, it's like
| reinventing all the built in apps that work fine with "Bold"
| new versions. Yeah, I don't really need a bold new calculator
| or weather app.
| [deleted]
| happytoexplain wrote:
| The "great" side is very vague - it's hard to tell what the
| author is trying to say.
| the_arun wrote:
| According to author - Great design describes how to market our
| failures.
| karmakaze wrote:
| TL; DR [without the labels] is usable.
| challenges. solves problems. enriches the soul.
| functional. is fulfilling. is invisible.
| is in your face. is good process. is usually messy.
| is familiar. is uncomfortable. optimizes.
| discovers. is consistent. is unexpected.
| follows patterns. sets the new patterns. is
| understandable. opens new vistas. is clear.
| leaves room for interpretation. gets out of the way. has
| something to say. is for all. is for you.
|
| You can decide for yourself which is better.
| Zababa wrote:
| A few of the ones of the right could be an evolution of the
| ones on the left (functional and fullfilling, solves problems
| and enriches the soul, is for all and is for you), some others
| are terrible (is in your face, usually messy, uncomfortable).
| croes wrote:
| I prefer good design.
| jareklupinski wrote:
| I'll buy good design for my business and clients, but I'll buy
| great design for my home.
| codingdave wrote:
| I thought this was just a snarky response until I read the
| article, but yes - based on TFA's description, I'll take "good"
| any day.
| Zababa wrote:
| Great design is design that stays good even after fullfilling
| all the list from the "great". But most design fail at that,
| and thus are not good anymore.
| [deleted]
| overgard wrote:
| Great design sounds awful
| true_religion wrote:
| I actually have a lot of criticism for their designs, but I'm
| going to hold my tongue since they make a calculator app for the
| iPad and don't charge money for its or feature creep their way
| from calculator into social media.
|
| Edit.
|
| Whoops. I spoke too soon.
|
| I downloaded the app, and it says I have a week to decide if I
| want to pay 14$ a month for it.
|
| A month! For a calculator app!
| jareklupinski wrote:
| great design challenges you... to pay $14 a month for a
| calculator app :^)
| [deleted]
| jstummbillig wrote:
| Good design is getting hired by Google in 2021. Great design is
| choosing to work for Google in 1998.
| draw_down wrote:
| Aphorisms aren't as deep as their authors would have you believe.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-09-18 23:02 UTC)