Live data from Hacker News

Design is losing its seat at the table

mokriya.quora.com

21–30 of 78 posts

Re: Design is losing its seat at the table

#21
post #20
post #3

""" Most people make the mistake of thinking design is what it looks like. That’s not what we think design is. It’s not just what it looks like and feels like. Design is how it works. """ — Steve Jobs

Ironic, coming from a company with such a terrible approach to design. "You're holding it wrong."

Or aluminium plus glass, such a brittle combination just for the sake of aesthetics.

Re: Design is losing its seat at the table

#22
Regarding Carousel: it was only in the past few weeks that they finally got around to letting users exempt content.

I really wanted to like Carousel. I've tried several times, but somewhere in my Dropbox are a mess of backed up websites, most of which aren't even mine. Scrolling through the very lovely Carousel views wasn't quite as rewarding as the demos when the photos I cared about were mixed up with stock photo thumbnails, web graphics and other junk.

Dropbox bought cloud photo services SnapJoy and Loom, they've got good people. But the letting the ability to filter content fall by the wayside for years was a terrible failure of design and likely contributed to Carousel's foundering.

Re: Design is losing its seat at the table

#23
Design never had a seat at the table to begin with. The very idea of having design goals is largely anathema to most companies, they could never imagine actually letting a product dictate organizational proceedings.

The goal is to make money, not make a product. To make money, you figure out where to jam a lever in, then pry as much cash flow as you can from it. This is why people are worried about SEO rather than UX.

Design does not work as a competing voice in a cacaphony. It has to be the only voice, the main voice. Design is the table. That was what Jobs understood, that's what he built into his company, that's why Apple is still killing it.

Re: Design is losing its seat at the table

#24

Design never had a seat at the table to begin with. The very idea of having design goals is largely anathema to most companies, they could never imagine actually letting a product dictate organizational proceedings. The goal is to make money, not make a product. To make money, you figure out where to jam a lever in, then pry as much cash flow as you can from it. This is why people are worried about SEO rather than UX…

The goal is to make a great product that makes money. Its not one or the other. Design by definition sits in the middle of business requirements and user needs. Otherwise its just art.

Re: Design is losing its seat at the table

#25
I don't know. Aren't there are also plenty of recent successes that owe a lot of their success to good design? This feels like an attempt to slap on a grand narrative when it's really nothing more than "most new products fail". More relevant would be a study of the exceptional cases--successes--to see if there's a correlation with an improving standard of design.

Re: Design is losing its seat at the table

#26

Design never had a seat at the table to begin with. The very idea of having design goals is largely anathema to most companies, they could never imagine actually letting a product dictate organizational proceedings. The goal is to make money, not make a product. To make money, you figure out where to jam a lever in, then pry as much cash flow as you can from it. This is why people are worried about SEO rather than UX…

"It has to be the only voice"... what?

I'm a product manager at a tech company, and the job is listening to that cacophony & prioritizing. Sometimes that's design, sometimes not. It's not black and white

Re: Design is losing its seat at the table

#27
I don't think it's fair to judge Paper too harshly based upon download metrics -- if I had to guess, Paper was an experiment designed to produce two things: a working prototype of a modernized Facebook UX as "something to point at" for further thinking, and tooling/processes that would allow the wider company to iterate towards that vision in their main app. The idea that Paper was intended to be a popular app, potentially outstripping the downloads, etc of the primary branded Facebook app seems far-fetched.

Re: Design is losing its seat at the table

#28
post #24

Design never had a seat at the table to begin with. The very idea of having design goals is largely anathema to most companies, they could never imagine actually letting a product dictate organizational proceedings. The goal is to make money, not make a product. To make money, you figure out where to jam a lever in, then pry as much cash flow as you can from it. This is why people are worried about SEO rather than UX…

The goal is to make a great product that makes money. Its not one or the other. Design by definition sits in the middle of business requirements and user needs. Otherwise its just art.

A great product will make money. Otherwise it wasn't a great product. You can make money without a great product, but you can't have a great product that doesn't make money. Therefore design comes first, business requirements comes second, otherwise your offerings are mediocre to bad. Like my Nexus 5.

There's this trend amongst big companies these days, particularly Google and Amazon, to come up with products that don't solve any of their customer's problems. The way these products happen is business requirements gain priority over design ideals. Someone looking at a spreadsheet looking for places to jam a lever in is choosing product direction.

Re: Design is losing its seat at the table

#29
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The goal is to make a great product that makes money. Its not one or the other. Design by definition sits in the middle of business requirements and user needs. Otherwise its just art.

A great product will make money. Otherwise it wasn't a great product. You can make money without a great product, but you can't have a great product that doesn't make money. Therefore design comes first, business requirements comes second, otherwise your offerings are mediocre to bad. Like my Nexus 5. There's this trend amongst big companies these days, particularly Google and Amazon, to come up with products that do…

This seems like a narrow definition. A product can be great in the sense of solving an important problem brilliantly but be ahead of its time or not well marketed or not economical to produce.

To me, solving a problem really well is what makes a product great. Making money is certainly related, but it's a distinct challenge.

Re: Design is losing its seat at the table

#30

Design never had a seat at the table to begin with. The very idea of having design goals is largely anathema to most companies, they could never imagine actually letting a product dictate organizational proceedings. The goal is to make money, not make a product. To make money, you figure out where to jam a lever in, then pry as much cash flow as you can from it. This is why people are worried about SEO rather than UX…

"It has to be the only voice"... what? I'm a product manager at a tech company, and the job is listening to that cacophony & prioritizing. Sometimes that's design, sometimes not. It's not black and white

Program managers* make poor designers, at least in my large company. They often have no training in UX, and all their UX experience is mixed with other stuff that tends to cloud it. Having real UXDs doing the product design is much much better than "design by PM" (its like, do you want your PM to write code for the product also? of course not!)

* I know there is a difference between program and product mangers, the latter being more focused on marketing.

Edit: keeping it classy with the downvotes, clearly I struck a nerve (more citations in child post).

Post reply on HN