Simple and great design

Category: Technology

Published: 04/28/2009 01:16 p.m.

I just finished reading some great articles my dad sent me on Google's design methods. Douglas Bowman's Goodbye Google, Kevin Fox's letter to Doug and others, Joe Clarks more aggressive Google Brain idea, and then I finished with the Google UX team company info.

Good stuff, all of it. I really like UX, and I actually think google does a good job for the most part. They tow the line on simplicity and while sometimes they make things too plain, most of their stuff works because it works.

The google search page is the perfect example. If you want to search for something, you don't need rolling flash graphics and a list of the ten top news stories. All you need is the place to search.

That said, I can really agree with the guy who was frustrated over wasting time discussing 3, 4, or 5 pixel margins. It is really a very good case of the 80/20 rule. 20% of the time (Monday) that is spent in design gets 80% of the design perfect. But then, they insist on spending another 80% of their time (Tuesday - Friday) to fix up the remaining 20%. Is it worth it? I would think that spending Tuesday designing 80% of something else might be better, but I don't work for/run a billion dollar web giant.

The whole other side of the fence is the "programmers who design" argument and their unwillingness to give in to proper designers. I can't speak for google, but I know there have been times when I as a programmer have discounted elaborate designs as a bit of a waste.

Craigslist is probably the most used example, but plentyoffishis another site where the design sucks, but it is 1) familiar every time you visit, and 2) fully functional. It does what you want it to do.

There is lots of design that is boring or crap, there is lots that is pretty but gets in your way. And there is a tiny bit that looks good, works good, and 'feels' good (see: iphone UI). Designers need the ability to recognize what is what, and transform theirs to that tiny bit.