upvote

points

by bfbf5 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby zahlman2 hours ago|
next
[-]
> “But why can’t you just do it?”

The answer should be "because users will hate it and use a competing product that's better designed".

A shame that it isn't actually true any more.

reply
upvoteby suzzer9925 minutes ago|
prev|
next
[-]
An underrated senior engineer skill it saving stakeholders from their own worst impulses.
reply
upvoteby jstanley4 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
There's a time and a place for it. If you already know exactly what the program needs to do, then sure, design a user interface. If you are still exploring the design space then it's better to try things out as quickly as possible even if the ui is rough.
reply
upvoteby Enginerrrd4 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
The latter is an interesting mindset to advocate for. In almost every other engineering discipline, this would be frowned upon. I suspect wisdom could be gained by not discounting better forethought to be honest.

However, I really wonder how formula 1 teams manage their engineering concepts and driver UI/UX. They do some crazy experimental things, and they have high budgets, but they're often pulling off high-risk ideas on the very edge of feasibility. Every subtle iteration requires driver testing and feedback. I really wonder what processes they use to tie it all together. I suspect that they think about this quite diligently and dare I say even somewhat rigidly. I think it quite likely that the culture that led to the intense and detailed way they look at process for pit-stops and stuff carries over to the rest of their design processes, versioning, and iteration/testing.

reply
upvoteby gmueckl1 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Racing like in Formula 1 is extremely different from normal product design: each Formula 1 car has a user base of exactly 1: the driver that is going to use it. Not even the cars from the same team are identical for that reason. The driver can basically dictate the UX design because there is never any friction with other users.

Also, turnaround times from idea to final product can be insane at that level. These teams often have to accomplish in days what normally takes months. But they can pull it off by having every step of the design and manufacturing process in house.

reply
upvoteby ivan_gammel4 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
There exist other ways to do the research. „Try things out“ is often not just a signal of „we don‘t know what to do“, but also a signal of „we have no idea how to properly measure the outcomes of things we try“.
reply
upvoteby bfbf3 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
But that’s the point, no? Prototyping is useful but beyond a proof of concept, you still need a suitable user interface. I have no problems if there’s a rationale behind UI changes, but often we have stakeholders telling us to do something inconsistent just so their pet project can be presented to the user. That’s not design.
reply