Comments on: Getting Ready to Wag the Dog http://third-bit.com/blog/archives/2343.html Data is ones and zeroes | Software is ones and zeroes and hard work. Fri, 03 Feb 2012 17:07:30 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Greg Wilson http://third-bit.com/blog/archives/2343.html#comment-2645 Greg Wilson Wed, 15 Apr 2009 22:39:29 +0000 http://pyre.third-bit.com/blog/?p=2343#comment-2645 @Abe Ironic, isn't it, that you gave a fake email address so that I have no way to contact you... :-) @Abe Ironic, isn’t it, that you gave a fake email address so that I have no way to contact you… :-)

]]> By: Abe http://third-bit.com/blog/archives/2343.html#comment-2644 Abe Wed, 15 Apr 2009 22:09:33 +0000 http://pyre.third-bit.com/blog/?p=2343#comment-2644 I agree that "real" engineering is likely going to go the route of software engineering. PS. Who are you? Your post does not state the author name. Nor does your About Me page, or your CV state your name. I agree that “real” engineering is likely going to go the route of software engineering.

PS. Who are you? Your post does not state the author name. Nor does your About Me page, or your CV state your name.

]]> By: Steve Easterbrook http://third-bit.com/blog/archives/2343.html#comment-2643 Steve Easterbrook Wed, 15 Apr 2009 20:49:29 +0000 http://pyre.third-bit.com/blog/?p=2343#comment-2643 Wait, what? We're doing citations in blog comments now? I didn't get that memo :-) Wait, what? We’re doing citations in blog comments now? I didn’t get that memo :-)

]]> By: Greg Wilson http://third-bit.com/blog/archives/2343.html#comment-2642 Greg Wilson Wed, 15 Apr 2009 19:51:27 +0000 http://pyre.third-bit.com/blog/?p=2343#comment-2642 Regarding your first claim, bah --- plenty of examples of beautifully-designed products that failed. If you know of a study correlating good design with market success, please cite it. I agree with the second (though again, I'd like a citation for your "must be"). Regarding the claim that software is crap because it's designed by techies, see bah #1: those same techies design game interfaces (John Carmack comes to mind), so I think you're cherry-picking supportive examples. Finally, yes, lots of plastic products are made in China, but they're all the same. 3D printers make customization and personalization possible at mass-production prices---physical objects become as malleable as MySpace pages, with all that entails. Bah, I say---bah. Regarding your first claim, bah — plenty of examples of beautifully-designed products that failed. If you know of a study correlating good design with market success, please cite it. I agree with the second (though again, I’d like a citation for your “must be”). Regarding the claim that software is crap because it’s designed by techies, see bah #1: those same techies design game interfaces (John Carmack comes to mind), so I think you’re cherry-picking supportive examples. Finally, yes, lots of plastic products are made in China, but they’re all the same. 3D printers make customization and personalization possible at mass-production prices—physical objects become as malleable as MySpace pages, with all that entails.

Bah, I say—bah.

]]> By: Steve Easterbrook http://third-bit.com/blog/archives/2343.html#comment-2641 Steve Easterbrook Wed, 15 Apr 2009 19:35:05 +0000 http://pyre.third-bit.com/blog/?p=2343#comment-2641 It's true that companies that take design seriously have not necessarily done better in the computer market, but you've only got to look at Apple's dominance of the mp3 player market to see that sometimes it does matter in a big way. I think the two things (UXD and agile development) are orthogonal. What matters for good design is developers with an intrinsic understanding of what makes users tick. That's not necessarily big upfront design, nor details requirements analysis. It's just a basic sense of simplicity and elegance, and an understanding of the users' point of view. That fits just fine with chaotic agile approaches - if not better, since good design must be iterative and evolutionary (see Petroski). Let's face it, most software is crap. It's crap because it's designed for techies by techies. And because the software industry can get away with it by locking everyone into crap technology. I don't think 3D printing will make a difference to the world of industrial design because you can already buy shiploads of crap plastic products made in China on the cheap. It might just bankrupt China though. It’s true that companies that take design seriously have not necessarily done better in the computer market, but you’ve only got to look at Apple’s dominance of the mp3 player market to see that sometimes it does matter in a big way.

I think the two things (UXD and agile development) are orthogonal. What matters for good design is developers with an intrinsic understanding of what makes users tick. That’s not necessarily big upfront design, nor details requirements analysis. It’s just a basic sense of simplicity and elegance, and an understanding of the users’ point of view. That fits just fine with chaotic agile approaches – if not better, since good design must be iterative and evolutionary (see Petroski).

Let’s face it, most software is crap. It’s crap because it’s designed for techies by techies. And because the software industry can get away with it by locking everyone into crap technology. I don’t think 3D printing will make a difference to the world of industrial design because you can already buy shiploads of crap plastic products made in China on the cheap. It might just bankrupt China though.

]]>