And then, design became a commodity • Hacker News Board

Re: And then, design became a commodity

#11

Post by stylejam » Sun, May 08, 2011, 10:43 PM UTC

ippisl wrote: post #10

stylejam wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good enough in web design is a website that is kind of clear and kind of converts. If it's ok for the customer it's ok for me, but considering that I hardly believe it's ok for the customer here we have a big problem. And there's no such thing as a "perfect logo" :)

But conversion rates are easily measurable. in theory it's possible to offer a results based service: improved conversion rate for a fee or profit sharing.usually businesses go for this sort of arrangement because it's low risk investment. I bet there are some services like this , but i'm not sure it's a service fit for a small company: it just seems like a lot of work and takes a lot of time and traffic to do it rig…

I don't really understand your answer - conversion should be point 1 for every design, call it graphic, call it web, call it interaction, but you suggest it's some kind of "pro" service. In my opinion it's not, a design that doesn't convert doesn't have any business value. For what reasons someone should pay for a website if that website doesn't have any mean or any return? You understand that this is exactly what I'm talking about? A customer buys something that has no use and no impact, of course he wants to spend less, and he is damn right. And that's also why I say that a designer must be a designer, if you have no clue about human interaction you're simply not a designer - can you imagine an industrial designer crafting some crap without any idea about how the user will interact with it? No, it's totally laughable, that's why it doesn't happen.

Re: And then, design became a commodity

#12

Post by tomjen3 » Mon, May 09, 2011, 5:22 AM UTC

stylejam wrote: post #8

tomjen3 wrote: post #5

The thing he glosses over is that most businesses don't need or even want a perfect logo - good enough is perfectly fine especially as it can be had for a tenth of the price. And that is properly a bigger change than these spec work sites.

Good enough in web design is a website that is kind of clear and kind of converts. If it's ok for the customer it's ok for me, but considering that I hardly believe it's ok for the customer here we have a big problem. And there's no such thing as a "perfect logo" :)

Unless the logo is extremely bad it won't effect conversation, and it's more important to be able to change parts of the rest of the graphics cheaply for ab testing purposes than devine the result initially (a great design can improve conversation say 15% better than the result from one of those sites, but that can be done with a few an tests).

Re: And then, design became a commodity

#13

Post by stylejam » Mon, May 09, 2011, 7:14 AM UTC

tomjen3 wrote: post #12

stylejam wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good enough in web design is a website that is kind of clear and kind of converts. If it's ok for the customer it's ok for me, but considering that I hardly believe it's ok for the customer here we have a big problem. And there's no such thing as a "perfect logo" :)

Unless the logo is extremely bad it won't effect conversation, and it's more important to be able to change parts of the rest of the graphics cheaply for ab testing purposes than devine the result initially (a great design can improve conversation say 15% better than the result from one of those sites, but that can be done with a few an tests).

I guess you mean conversion and not conversation. A/B testing is part of every sane design process, there's no "divination", only iteration. Knowing the process of design would definitely help here.

Re: And then, design became a commodity

#14

Post by lobster_johnson » Wed, May 11, 2011, 6:34 PM UTC

mathgladiator wrote: post #7

Everything is a commodity. When you hire an employee, you hire a probabilistic machine that may produce stuff closer to what you want. When you contract out, then you pay a probabilistic machine that may produce what you have specified which hopefully was what you wanted.

> Everything is a commodity.

Well, no. That's a very unhelpful generalization that tries to subvert an established nomenclature for an easy, hip-sounding soundbite. The term "commodity" is very precisely defined and has nothing to do with "hiring probabilistic machines".

A commodity is a product which can be supplied and purchased at no difference in quality. It doesn't matter if I buy petroleum from maker A or maker B, because both are, to the extent that I care, petroleum. Commodities allow you to deal with abstract notions of goods, separate from the physical goods, thereby fundamentally changing the way you trade goods, since (for example) you can buy from the cheapest supplier and sell to the highest bidder, with no concern for the actual stuff being exchanged.