Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Design Principles

principles.design

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 76 posts

Re: Design Principles

#41

Post by crdoconnor »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #37
crdoconnor wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen #1 used many times to solve the problem of "too many regressions" with "the team just needs to communicate more" or "we should set up regular meetings to deal with this issue". It was hard to argue that those teams weren't following both the message and spirit of the agile manifesto, as individuals and interactions were plainly taking precedence over tools and processes. It doesn't, after all, say "individu…

I think the proper understanding of those principles is "when in doubt, choose this over that", and not "always choose this over that". That said, the problem you described isn't really with the manifesto, but with people refusing to use common sense - or even more likely, with incentives within the organization being so aligned that decisionmakers benefit from making bad calls. It's something that happens surprising…

>I think the proper understanding of those principles is "when in doubt, choose this over that", and not "always choose this over that".

That's exactly how the teams I worked with applied it. They were in doubt and they decided on individuals and interactions.

>That said, the problem you described isn't really with the manifesto, but with people refusing to use common sense

It absolutely is a problem with the manifesto and it isn't a common sense decision.

Expending a not insignificant level of resources on automated regression testing and CI, or indeed, any other kind of tooling or process is far from a common sense decision - it's a pretty delicate trade off, in fact. Some tooling is worth it, some isn't.

If the manifesto said "think carefully about tooling and recognize the delicate trade offs involved" then maybe the problem wouldn't be with the manifesto. It doesn't. It says "individuals and interactions over tools and processes". Ergo meetings > tools.

Re: Design Principles

#43

Post by chillingeffect »

olivermarks wrote: post #2

This feels more like corporate mission statements and unique selling propositions than 'design principles' to me, am I missing something?

It's probably the context. These examples are mostly (not all) for corporate contexts, complete with highly generalized wording to reduce individual responsibility and promote selective enforcement, as opposed to design principles for democracy or managing physical disabilities.

Re: Design Principles

#44

Post by iaml »

beaconstudios wrote: post #31
iaml wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that you don't like how it looks means only that you don't like how it looks. I'm sure most of the people don't mind or like it (me included).

you called out a fallacy and then fell straight into it yourself. All we know from your two comments is that one of you likes the design and one of you doesn't.

Second part of my comment is just proof that personal opinion is irrelevant.

Re: Design Principles

#45

Post by arethuza »

iaml wrote: post #22
Double_a_92 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand why designers have started with those huge fonts. Seriously not everyone visits your site from some mobile device ffs!

The fact that you don't like how it looks means only that you don't like how it looks. I'm sure most of the people don't mind or like it (me included).

When I open that page full screen I can see 6 words and an icon and I have to scroll down to actually read anything...

Re: Design Principles

#46

Post by icebraining »

pasta wrote: post #19

I think I will stick with the 10 principles of Dieter Rams: Good design is innovative Good design makes a product useful Good design is aesthetic Good design makes a product understandable Good design is unobtrusive Good design is honest Good design is long-lasting Good design is thorough down to the last detail Good design is environmentally-friendly Good design is as little design as possible

I find most of the Zen of Python fits well for graphical design as well as code design :)

Re: Design Principles

#47

Post by hateduser2 »

majewsky wrote: post #38
pasta wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But a microwave oven with dozens of buttons don't follow the other rules. So I think you can see all ten rules as a complete set.

Yeah, but then I don't really see what purpose the first rule serves. I'd maybe put it last and rephrase it to something like "Good design is innovative when necessary".

Good design doesn’t follow necessity it leads it.. removing head phone jack as example of good (controversial) design.

Re: Design Principles

#48

Post by martin-adams »

majewsky wrote: post #29
pasta wrote: post #19

I think I will stick with the 10 principles of Dieter Rams: Good design is innovative Good design makes a product useful Good design is aesthetic Good design makes a product understandable Good design is unobtrusive Good design is honest Good design is long-lasting Good design is thorough down to the last detail Good design is environmentally-friendly Good design is as little design as possible

I agree with the last 9, but I have my quarrels with the first one. It just begs for people to make innovative designs even though the original one worked perfectly. Like a microwave oven with dozens of buttons even though the one with two dials (power, time) and the door-opener button works 99% of the time.

I also agree that the first (being innovative) isn't quite right. To be innovative depends on the state of innovation of what everyone else is doing. To be innovative you have to do something new, which is different from what's already been doing. So it's implying that you have to be different to have good design. I don't agree that good design has to be different.

All the rest are spot on in my opinion.

Re: Design Principles

#49

Post by rglover »

GuiA wrote: post #9
rglover wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. Unfortunately, much of the design industry's exports as of late have become by-and-large impractical fluff. I say this as a designer. If these ideas were expanded upon and articulated with case studies or practical advice then absolutely. If you're curious about principles backed with implementation details, check out https://cadence.cc . Looks unassuming but one of the best books on design I've ever read.

Designer here as well, similarly frustrated with the lack of analytical rigor in the discipline. Cadence & Slang did not impress me. I read it a few years ago now so I can’t quote exact examples, but at the time it felt like more fluff to be honest. Well written fluff, but still fluff (ie will design students in 20 years, or even now, benefit from reading it like they would a classic such as “Grid systems for visual…

Hadn't heard of The Humane Interface, I'll have to check it out :)

Re: C&C, a couple of things (just picking from my highlights).

Chapter 2 - Consistency & Character

This informed my own work quite a bit. Especially notes about how consistency aids clarity in the product. Also nice "hmm, now there's an idea" type of stuff like "a designer creates an architecture of information within the mind of the recipient of his work." This triggered a bit of a waterfall, leading to stuff like reading Christopher Alexander's _Notes on the Synthesis of Form_.

Also from this chapter is the point about how having a consistent behavioral language. Meaning, if two elements perform similar tasks, they should look similar to one another.

Lots of great little beats like this that have wedged themselves into my thinking.

Chapter 3 - Simplicity

The one about only forcing a user to create an account when it provides value really informed my ability to design solid onboarding experiences. Taught me to build gradually invasive products that speak to the user like you would a new acquaintance. Over time, you slowly get comfortable asking them for more and more (e.g., use things like local storage to persist data temporarily to give the feel of hitting a DB).

---

Man, is there a place to talk about stuff like this? You got my hamsters spinning.

Re: Design Principles

#50

Post by majewsky »

hateduser2 wrote: post #47
majewsky wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, but then I don't really see what purpose the first rule serves. I'd maybe put it last and rephrase it to something like "Good design is innovative when necessary".

Good design doesn’t follow necessity it leads it.. removing head phone jack as example of good (controversial) design.

Yeah, it's really good design when I cannot use my 200$ headphones with my new phone. /s
Post reply on HN