> Literally, I could do this, and I suck at design.

Are you sure about that? I've seen plenty of imitation XP interfaces in my day, and there are virtually always elements that are jarringly wrong. While I won't claim that MitchIvin XP is a faithful reproduction of XP, in the sense that one could compile a long list of inconsistencies with Windows XP, the experience is pleasant enough.

This was my concern too - as a little project, it's interesting but if it's a replica of XP it has been done before and much more accurately.

As a portfolio, I think it doesn't work at all and is detrimental to what you're trying to do. I think now in design, it is more important than ever for your work to cut through the noise and show at least some attempt to create something original.

I think sometimes graphic design is seen as competence with certain programs, which I guess includes genAI now, or making something cool - but really it is visual communication that responds to a set of constraints - e.g. a brief, tailored to a target audience, communicating a product or emotion. There are no shortcuts - study what has been done, work on communicating what you want to say with colour, layout, typography and images. Draw and paint; avoid genAI until you are competent without it. Currently as a graphic design portfolio, I'm sorry to say it is memorably bad and there is a lot of work to do.

That said, well done on finishing something, and making it to the top of HN. I hope the attention leads somewhere and that you continue making things.

I disagree with you, as it seems you tend to prioritize graphic design while overlooking other important aspects.

Personally, I find this idea alone to be very creative. Isn't a great designer someone who weaves together countless mediocre ideas to form a truly creative concept?

> Yes, I would, simply because I can see you’ve put a lot of effort in and created something high quality. But I’d have some reservations because of the concerns I’ve raised above and, in particular, I’d want to dig in to how user-centred your approach is, because that isn’t really demonstrated here.

Then the site satisfied its purpose. A portfolio site should get you an interview with someone who is curious to know more. Its purpose is to be a foot in the door, not to get you the job.

I would hire this guy he stands out from the competition! He has tenacity, grit and more creativity then the majority. So much more creativity that multi thousands of HN(ers) have enjoyed his creation, their friends and tech journalists who some will write about it showing his work to many more thousands to millions. Getting a job isnt easy now but being like this guy will no doubt make it easy to get many offers!

Ive been needing to update my portfolio site as in August an out of nowhere opportunity knocked on my door. Seeing this makes me want to innovate my portfolio for said opportunity(thanks for the inspiration).

Hey, copying someone's design is a talent itself. And this was quite a beautiful copy of a design. The "concerns" are mostly unanswered questions, or presumed limitations.

Well, not really. Graphic design isn’t art— it’s a communication strategy using text, images and layout to convey information to people — often purely visually with visual hierarchy, gestalt, color, etc. Lacking originality only really matters with branding, avoiding copyright infringement, or if existing cultural norms interfere with the message— like you’re obviously re-using something without deliberately making a reference to it as part of the message.

The much more important question for a graphic designer is: what exactly are you trying you communicate about yourself and your portfolio by invoking windows XP? Because right now, technical competence is about the closest I can get and I really don’t see the association. I think what they’re probably trying to do is evoke nostalgia among potential tech industry clients as a freelancer, and to be fair, the intended audience is always a big part of the equation.

If I was art directing, I probably wouldn’t bring them in for an interview — but I’ll bet they aren’t advertising themselves to art directors.

> Literally, I could do this

The classic refrain. Implementation is the easiest part of design work. It looks better than XP did, and it should— that’s one key skill that a designer should have. Nobody hiring a designer will care if they can accurately recreate the wonkiness of XP’s interface. And nobody is impressed that a developer can implement this because that’s a developer’s job. I’m genuinely impressed when a developer’s website has solid type design and a thoughtful informational hierarchy, but that’s not even the bare minimum required fora designer. Having done both, I think deciding exactly what goes on the screen/paper is the harder part. It takes longer and you’ve got a much more nebulous path to success.

nice gatekeeping

as if everything isn't just a copy of something else

[dead]