[HN Gopher] Design's Unsexy Middle Bits (2020)
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Design's Unsexy Middle Bits (2020)
        
       Author : mooreds
       Score  : 25 points
       Date   : 2022-10-09 02:07 UTC (3 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (eleganthack.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (eleganthack.com)
        
       | throw771 wrote:
       | This 'design thinking' approach is such a rubbish. Having quite a
       | bit of background into how design is done at Apple or some top
       | studios, this kind of process couldn't be further away from how
       | good design is actually made and yet, sadly, the web is filled
       | with self-proclaimed gurus of this kind.
        
         | gofreddygo wrote:
         | enlighten us.
        
           | jjtheblunt wrote:
           | well one reality I partook in at a FAANG (engineering) for
           | years essentially allowed the quality of design to be an
           | emergent phenomenon through extremely vast internal testing
           | and data collection, with evolution of alternatives competing
           | for favor among testees. A tirelessly iterative process.
           | 
           | Thus, "good design" was derived from experiences, an emergent
           | phenomenon, not something prescribed.
           | 
           | It's possible that distinction is what people are alluding
           | to.
        
       | davbryn wrote:
       | Somebody has been paid to put together a huge document explaining
       | how they document instinctive design decisions. I really don't
       | get how this is an industry. 'People will click buttons'. 'people
       | react to this HUE value'.
       | 
       | It will forever blow my mind that people are paid to say where a
       | button lives
        
       | jrm4 wrote:
       | This kind of windy article further confirms my belief that
       | "design" is relatively hollow at its core; essentially a jargon-
       | filled way to try to generalize a task that must be very
       | specific, wherein not much of this jargon is very useful.
       | 
       | Some user(s) have some kind of task that they want to achieve.
       | They could get together and communicate well with some kind of
       | developer who can help them achieve or complete that task; all of
       | which is likely doable without this middle layer of whatever this
       | is.
        
         | meheleventyone wrote:
         | > Some user(s) have some kind of task that they want to
         | achieve. They could get together and communicate well with some
         | kind of developer who can help them achieve or complete that
         | task; all of which is likely doable without this middle layer
         | of whatever this is.
         | 
         | Whilst this is definitely true the question is what would the
         | end result be like. All you're doing is having the developer
         | engage in design which isn't a bad thing if they have the
         | temperament and skillset to do it. Which not all developer's
         | actually do. As someone leading a very practically oriented
         | design team that develop all their designs it's painfully
         | obvious that very experienced developers are not inherently
         | good product designers even if they are very good at designing
         | the code they write. In a large part I think the process of
         | design is mostly universal but the nitty gritty parts of it are
         | actually what matter.
         | 
         | There's definitely a lot of fluff written by consultants with
         | things to sell you though. But that's not really different to
         | other disciplines. In particular "design thinking" is the
         | "agile coach" for designers.
        
         | seanwilson wrote:
         | > essentially a jargon-filled way to try to generalize a task
         | that must be very specific, wherein not much of this jargon is
         | very useful
         | 
         | I think if you tried to do a similar breakdown of what it's
         | like to design computer code in general it probably wouldn't
         | help much either because there's rarely a rigid process -
         | you're usually going by intuition to weigh up what's most
         | productive to try next where the intuition was gained from
         | experience vs jargon filled articles. I'm not sure why UI/UX
         | design content is so thick with this kind of text in comparison
         | though.
        
           | jrm4 wrote:
           | I mean, I think I get why -- it's that "design" is where all
           | the cool kids are, essentially. Selling people the idea of
           | "design" itself is profitable and/or fruitful. I teach
           | undergraduate IT, and this whole thing definitely gets butts
           | in seats; obviously I find it a mixed bag at best.
        
         | karaterobot wrote:
         | > Some user(s) have some kind of task that they want to
         | achieve. They could get together and communicate well with some
         | kind of developer who can help them achieve or complete that
         | task; all of which is likely doable without this middle layer
         | of whatever this is.
         | 
         | What you just described is the middle layer. You're describing
         | a layer in the development of a product wherein the goals of
         | the user and the business are translated into features that can
         | be specified at a level of clarity which allows them to be
         | implemented as part of a holistic, functional system.
         | 
         | If a developer does this, he is doing design.
         | 
         | If you agree that this is an important process, and is non-
         | trivial to perform, you may find yourself saying "well, maybe
         | some developers would be better at this than others," and now
         | you've created a role called "Design Developer" or something
         | like that.
         | 
         | And then if you find that this Design Developer spends more of
         | their time specifying features for other developers to
         | implement, and less time coding, you can go ahead and optimize
         | your hiring process for people who are good at talking to users
         | and translating that understanding into specifications, rather
         | than writing code. You've now recreated the role of designer.
         | 
         | If instead, you say "well, this actually _is_ a trivial
         | process: any developer could do that work and still be a high-
         | functioning programmer at the same time, " then I would ask for
         | some examples of this, and probably be able to give you ten or
         | twenty times as many counterexamples.
        
         | gofreddygo wrote:
         | A maxim I heard and stand by "Design is a marketers tool. Not a
         | designers"
         | 
         | Very real when you think about it. Good design comes from good
         | understanding of the problem and the environment. Requires
         | being a part of the environment, making accurate observations
         | and some flight of imagination.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-10-12 23:02 UTC)