[dead]
Claude Design
401–410 of 819 posts
Re: Claude Design
#402On Notes on the Synthesis of Form, Alexander defines design as the rationalization of the forces that define a problem. You’ll won’t find a better definition. But people tend to think design is the synthesis and its results. This misunderstanding of the role of design and the designer is responsible for all the unfit designs we encounter on a daily basis. Anyone equipped with a synthesis tool and feeling empowered to…
> I feel sorry for anyone that will think using tools equals doing design, because of the truly marvelous human experiences that they’ll miss, and that could never be replaced by the shallow pride of empty achievement. What if you don’t give a shit about design and it’s a means to an end for a project that involves something different that you do care about?
Then no design is taking place.
Re: Claude Design
#403Earlier quoted context omitted.
I assure you, working with LLMs is intellectually challenging, and becomes more so as the technology matures.
It really really really depends on how you are using it and what you are using it for. I can get LLMs to write most CSS I need by treating it like a slot machine and pulling the handle till it spits out what I need, this doesnt cause me to learn CSS at all.
This isn’t necessarily a bad thing. I know a little css and have zero desire or motivation to know more; the things I’d like done that need css just wouldn’t have been done without LLMs.
Re: Claude Design
#404Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There is also no pride. Is the pride not in solving the users' problems? > nobody talks about it, treats it with interest, or pays above market rate to work on it. Definitely needs a citation for this one. For so many products the user isn't paying for standout design. They're paying for insight, leverage, velocity, convenience, whatever. The market definitely supports this by paying above market salaries. Good des…
To prove the above person’s point, sap and salesforce have some of the most notoriously bad ux in the market and yes they make bank. Design is much harder for power user tools compared to consumer. There is far more complexity and the expectation often is users must be trained to even use the tool. Design only goes so far.
> sap and salesforce have some of the most notoriously bad ux in the market and yes they make bank.
Why ? Since its so notoriously bad why have there been no attempts to improve it ?
Re: Claude Design
#405Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What if you don’t give a shit about design and it’s a means to an end for a project that involves something different that you do care about? Thank you for so succinctly demonstrating the problem with using AI for everything. You used to have to either care enough to do the design yourself or find someone who cared and specialized in that to do it for you. Now you quickly and cheaply fill in the parts you don't per…
> You used to have to either care enough to do the design yourself or find someone who cared and specialized in that to do it for you. You think most UI/UX designers, or the artists creating slop for content marketing spam factories for the past decades, cared? Some, maybe. Most probably had higher ambitions, but are doing what actually pays their bills. It's similar to software developers. Most of those being paid t…
I do think they cared.
The paychecks weren’t great. Everyone was offering to pay designers with “exposure”. If they didn’t innately care about the field they would have done something more lucrative.
Re: Claude Design
#406Earlier quoted context omitted.
To prove the above person’s point, sap and salesforce have some of the most notoriously bad ux in the market and yes they make bank. Design is much harder for power user tools compared to consumer. There is far more complexity and the expectation often is users must be trained to even use the tool. Design only goes so far.
> sap and salesforce have some of the most notoriously bad ux in the market and yes they make bank. Why ? Since its so notoriously bad why have there been no attempts to improve it ?
Because the people making purchasing decisions for SAP and Salesforce are not people who spend any substantial share of their time using it directly or care about the UX.
Re: Claude Design
#407Earlier quoted context omitted.
I assure you, working with LLMs is intellectually challenging, and becomes more so as the technology matures.
It really really really depends on how you are using it and what you are using it for. I can get LLMs to write most CSS I need by treating it like a slot machine and pulling the handle till it spits out what I need, this doesnt cause me to learn CSS at all.
I find it a lot more useful to dive into bugs involving multiple layers and versions of 3rd party dependencies. Deep issues where when I see the answer I completely understand what it did to find it and what the problem was (so in essence I wouldn't of learned anything diving deep into the issue), but it was able to do so in a much more efficient fashion than me referencing code across multiple commits on github, docs, etc...
This allows me to focus my attention on important learning endeavors, things I actually want to learn and are not forced to simply because a vendor was sloppy and introduced a bug in v3.4.1.3.
LLMS excel when you can give them a lot of relevant context and they behave like an intelligent search function.
Re: Claude Design
#408Earlier quoted context omitted.
> your labor is always actively being transformed into a product sold on a market. there are no "marvelous human experiences", there is only production and consumption. The first time I used Mac OS/X, circa 2004-2005, I was blown away by the design and how they managed to expose the power of the underlying Unix-ish kernel without making it hurt for people who didn't want that experience. My SO couldn't have cared les…
> Sure it was the Apple engineers' and designers' labor transformed into a product, but it was a fucking great product and something that I'm sure those teams were very proud of. The same was true with the the iPod and the iPhone. ... > Work doesn't have to be exploitive. Products don't have to exploit their users. bruh do people have any idea what they're writing as they write it? you're talking about "work doesn't…
So the definition of art is work except you don’t get paid?
Re: Claude Design
#409Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is reducing the role of Design as some lego-blocks assembling process. And higher quality being seen as adding ‘pizzazz’. You are right, though. Many products don’t need more than that. But I fear that this will greatly impact design innovation and progress. We might get stuck in the current UI paradigm for a long time.
Is "design innovation" a thing we really need? I'm not trying to be flippant, but every time I've come across an "innovative" design the only thing it's done is made me spend time learning whatever bespoke conventions the designer put in.
Thats rather unavoidable to some extent anything thats better is going to be somewhat different
Re: Claude Design
#410Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a really verbose way to say that using generative AI has a detrimental effect on the user because one deprives themselves of the learning experience.
What if you’re a musician and use design as part of your marketing? Why should a musician deep dive design when they really only care about music?
The argument is not that only designers can design, nor that everyone should design like a designer. It’s to not confuse shopping for or generating generic solutions with the activity of problem solving. Per Alexander, trivial problems, those that can be solved without balancing interactions between conflicting requirements, are not design problems. So, don’t worry and just pick what you need and like!