Just a little anecdotal evidence

[Travis Newbury]

The crux of the analogy is that THE PRETTY PICTURES ARE NOT THE ONLY
IMPORTANT CONSIDERATION. There is THAT clear enough? Good friggin' grief.

Hmmmm.... I believe that is what I have been saying all along.

 

[Travis Newbury]

. (I thought your analogy quite good btw)

suck up....

 

[Toby A Inkster]

You seem to be equating design with engineering.

Engineering is often an important part of the design process, depending
on what it is being designed. It is, for example, more important when
designing a bridge than when designing a cuddly toy.

It can be argued that the 2 are separate disciplines and design is
primarily a province of aesthetics.

Yes that can be argued. But only by dolts.

--
Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
[Geek of HTML/SQL/Perl/PHP/Python/Apache/Linux]
[OS: Linux 2.6.17.14-mm-desktop-9mdvsmp, up 24 days, 20:21.]

CSS to HTML Compiler
http://tobyinkster.co.uk/blog/2008/01/22/css-compile/

 

[mrcakey]

Hmmmm.... I believe that is what I have been saying all along.

Me too.

+mrcakey

 

[mrcakey]

Thank you. Then there was the sleek can opener I bought, only to have it
pinch the flesh between two of my fingers the first time I used it, after
which it went into the trash can. And then there are the chairs
exemplifying the height of 20th century design at the Museum of Modern Art
in New York--the ones that nobody would ever want to sit on because they
wouldn't be the remotest bit comfortable.

If some of the others weren't so desperate to pretend my analogy was
inapplicable, they would have noticed that I didn't only mention
catastrophes. I mentioned factors that would make the building unusable.
These could include defects like an inability to keep the building within
tolerable temperatures during the height of the winter or summer months;
ceilings too short to allow the taller employees to stand up straight;
lack of a loading dock; lack off access for employees in wheelchairs; and
acoustics like those in a restaurant where people have to shout over the
din to be heard by the person facing them.

But this is why I think your analogy was irrelevant. You lead from the
assumption that fixed-width layouts are inherently "broken". They're not -
for a start, CSS provides for distinct stylesheets for different media.
Neither are fluid layouts inherently "intuitive". Both have their place.
It's this fingers-in-the-ears-la-la-la-la attitude to anything that is not
in the current vogue that I object to most, nevermind this idea that
aesthetics are a "nice to have" on top of the usability of the site.
Aesthetics and element placement can be integral to this goal. I hope you
enjoy your magic hot/cold, tall/short building and I hope its users enjoy
trying to find the bathrooms when they're squeezed into a totally
non-intuitive corridor.

+mrcakey

 

[mrcakey]

Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Wed, 23 Jan 2008 18:43:11
GMT Harlan Messinger scribed:


They haven't taken enough analgesic beforehand.

Reminds me of that line in Scrubs - "no sir, it's pronounced
Ann-el-jeez-ic".

+mrcakey

 

[mrcakey]

Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Wed, 23 Jan 2008 20:31:04
GMT Toby A Inkster scribed:


You seem to be equating design with engineering. It can be argued that
the 2 are separate disciplines and design is primarily a province of
aesthetics.

Disagree strongly. See HM's *good* analogy of a pretty mug with a badly
designed handle / nearly everything Apple has ever done.

+mrcakey

 

[mrcakey]

Why do people respond to analogies this way?

Because they are don't understand them, they don't understand
their scope. (I thought your analogy quite good btw)[/QUOTE]

Again, not true. It was clearly understood, I just don't agree with its
underlying assumptions.

+mrcakey

 

[Neredbojias]

Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Thu, 24 Jan 2008 09:12:08
GMT Toby A Inkster scribed:

Engineering is often an important part of the design process,
depending on what it is being designed. It is, for example, more
important when designing a bridge than when designing a cuddly toy.

Designing an automobile and engineering it so it operates useably and
safely are 2 different things

Yes that can be argued. But only by dolts.

Well, design may include more than simple aesthetics, true, but it isn't
engineering, either. Web-page design encompasses techniques of
functionality regarding the page as a whole, but the detail of _how_
those techniques work is beyond the scope of mere design.

 

[mrcakey]

Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Thu, 24 Jan 2008 09:12:08
GMT Toby A Inkster scribed:


Designing an automobile and engineering it so it operates useably and
safely are 2 different things

I'll sell you my box-shaped, crumple-zone free car with my patented 2-foot
spike sticking out the front then.

+mrcakey

 

[Neredbojias]

Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Thu, 24 Jan 2008 10:27:35
GMT mrcakey scribed:

Disagree strongly. See HM's *good* analogy of a pretty mug with a
badly designed handle / nearly everything Apple has ever done.

Ya mean the HM who's known for his inappropriate comparisons?

Anyway, the designer designs the mug with a handle in such a manner that
it's appealing. It has to work, too, so he makes it large enough so
that little Arne doesn't burn his pinky on the cup and strong enough so
that it doesn't break, etc. But _how_ it does these thing in the
designed form is engineering and the engineer is the one who must make
the already-designed product work.

I design a web page and I want it to work a certain way. I have to know
enough to know it basically can work that way and should if correctly
marked up. I then engineer the html and css (plus optionally other
things) to make it work the way it was planned to work. There may be
problems. Ie: FF does something wierd, non-standard with a certain bit
of markup or the designer didn't understand the exact nature of
"relative" or whatever. I, as the page engineer, must resolve this or
go back to the designer and tell him his design sucks. Maybe my
explanation is colloquial, but there are definitely 2 different concepts
here, something which is often unrealized and the cause of many
arguments.

 

[Kevin Scholl]

Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Wed, 23 Jan 2008 20:31:04
GMT Toby A Inkster scribed:



You seem to be equating design with engineering. It can be argued that
the 2 are separate disciplines and design is primarily a province of
aesthetics.

"Design is not just what it looks like and feels like. Design is how
it works." - Steve Jobs, 2003

 

[Travis Newbury]

"Design is not just what it looks like and feels like. Design is how
it works." - Steve Jobs, 2003

This from a man who's company would not survive if it were not
subsidized by Microsoft....

 

[Toby A Inkster]

This from a man who's company would not survive if it were not
subsidized by Microsoft....

From a man whose company would not *have* survived if it had not been
subsidised by Microsoft during the 90s, having been run into the ground by
his two immediate predecessors as CEO.

--
Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
[Geek of HTML/SQL/Perl/PHP/Python/Apache/Linux]
[OS: Linux 2.6.17.14-mm-desktop-9mdvsmp, up 25 days, 4:11.]

CSS to HTML Compiler
http://tobyinkster.co.uk/blog/2008/01/22/css-compile/

 

[Kevin Scholl]

This from a man who's company would not survive if it were not
subsidized by Microsoft....

Who said it, and company dynamics notwithstanding, the statement
itself contains a great deal of logical truth.

 

[Ed Jensen]

This from a man who's company would not survive if it were not
subsidized by Microsoft....

Nonsense.

Microsoft invested peanuts ($150 million IIRC) in Apple. At the time,
Apple still had *billions* in the bank to fall back on.

 

[dorayme]

Again, not true. It was clearly understood, I just don't agree with its
underlying assumptions.

With respect, it does not seem to me you understand the point of
the analogy at all.

Harlan: "... factors that would make the building unusable.
These could include defects like an inability to keep the
building within tolerable temperatures during the height of the
winter or summer months; ceilings too short to allow the taller
employees to stand up straight; ..."

You: "But this is why I think your analogy was irrelevant. You
lead from the assumption that fixed-width layouts are inherently
"broken". They're not - for a start, CSS provides for distinct
stylesheets for different media."

The "assumption" is not some condition you need in order to
understand or agree with the analogy. The analogy was a way of
showing how a fixed width layout has inherent faults. It is not
lurking surreptitiously in the background. It is its point! Which
you are missing. That you don't agree with the point is an
entirely different question.

Your point about the css sheets is scrambling to fix the damage
which in your heart of hearts you know <g> - if you provide
enough stylesheet alternatives somehow, what is left of the fixed
width concept?

 

[dorayme]

Web-page design encompasses techniques of
functionality regarding the page as a whole, but the detail of _how_
those techniques work is beyond the scope of mere design.

What a load of fence-sitting-codswallop is this?

 

[Neredbojias]

Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Thu, 24 Jan 2008 11:35:31
GMT mrcakey scribed:

I'll sell you my box-shaped, crumple-zone free car with my patented
2-foot spike sticking out the front then.

I might be interested if it's a steel spike. Lots of times I get mad at
the guy in front of me...

Seriously, however, I'm not particularly attracted to a well-engineered
vehicle with an uninspired design and neither are most consumers.

 

[Neredbojias]

Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Thu, 24 Jan 2008 15:12:38 GMT
Kevin Scholl scribed:

"Design is not just what it looks like and feels like. Design is how
it works." - Steve Jobs, 2003

He's a better businessman than slogan-maker. That bullshit aside, design
is how it should work, engineering is how it does work.