[vijucat]

Designers are so out of touch. That whole criticism of Comic Sans is one example. Slowly, I'm coming to the conclusion that designers should never be employed, only consulted on a per-project basis. If they sit around 8 hours a day, they end up changing something or the other to justify their existence. But human beings are not used to change at such a rapid cadence. Humans take time to settle into a design and establish patterns of usage.

[levmiseri]

[flagged]

[tomhow]

Please don't dig up historical comments in order to criticize someone like this. We should be able to respond to the argument presented in a comment or subthread in its standalone context.

[floating-io]

Do you think that "being competent at design" is the only requirement for designers?

I would say that it's more important to be competent in determining how design is going to be understood and used by users in their individual workflows. Few are more competent to judge that than the users themselves.

I'm pretty sure most folks have seen and experienced the negative impacts of designers changing things for the sake of change (or to justify their paychecks).

[DiggyJohnson]

I'm not sure how that is relevant. Pulling up someone's unrelated comments because you disagree with the current discussion is discouraged at best.

[ho_schi]

You sound like someone purchasing a new ThinkPad and

    "Why they added a camera bump? Sticking out of display lid. A thing nobody ask for".

followed by

     "Why the made the base flat. But removed the rounded palm rest? Adding a sharp corner."

followed by

     "Why the removed the dent which allowed to open the display lid, which didn't protruded out of the device?"

I appreciate nice design. But if it doesn't follows function, it is harmful.

PS: I'm frustrated about the new ThinkPads with a camera bump sticking out of the display. Everybody hates camera bumps. The display lid is broad and provides much space for adding multiple cameras, microphones and sensors of all kind. I know...this topic is about software UI. The change for the sake of the change itself is not beneficial.

[tiborsaas]

Out of all the things, you brought up Comic Sans, which is really hard to defend other than ironic use cases and no, there's no proof either it helps dyslexia. Even if it does, there are also better alternatives in the accessibility space.

How many designer friends do you have? Do you know what they do daily? We know your preconception that regardless of company size and product they are just counting beans.

[vijucat]

> which is really hard to defend

Can you please tell me your thoughts on how it is "hard to defend"?

My thoughts: How can designers criticize the use of Comic Sans? If users use it where it's connotations (childlike, casual) are appropriate, such as birthday parties, and love it, who are designers to comment on it? I find this indefensible, as if design sensibilities have a foundation very much like mathematics or physics and there is a clearly Universal litmus test of good design and bad design. There isn't. In fact, arbitrary mores of fashion such as "Comic Sans is uncool" are the very tell that design has foundations as strong as a piece of string in the wind. The disdain for Comic Sans reeks of elitism, where designers gatekeep "good taste" based on arbitrary conventions.

[ehecatl42]

Comic Sans has an excellent, unironic, track record as an assistive tool for young kids struggling with dyslexia.

[immibis]

Comic Sans was proven to be objectively easier to read. That's why it was designed.

[seanmcdirmid]

Most designers don't do that, and are plenty overworked in most organizations that they don't have time to gratuitously fiddle with new UI trends anyways. In fact, these kind of things usually come from non-designer VPs or SVPs who are trying to "spice" up the product much to the chagrin of designers on staff (I'm married to a UXD and this comes up often).

[constantcrying]

Designer right now value aesthetics over usability. If your design starts out from the question "how do we make this more user friendly", you will arrive at a totally different answer than when you ask "how do we make this look like everything else, but also stand out".

Aesthetics are essentially worthless for a user interface and should always be a secondary concern. But clearly designers have elevated aesthetics over usability, hence the numerous and constant redesigns of everything.

If you care about usability you know that a redesign necessarily comes at a great cost, since you are breaking many of the mental connections of your users. It is only justifiable if there is some serious gain by doing that.

[mrweasel]

> Aesthetics are essentially worthless for a user interface and should always be a secondary concern.

That is one of my random thoughts: Windows could have kept the Windows 95 look and been perfectly usable. Sure there might have been a need for certain UI tweaks, but for most office/home use there was no reason to change it.

The whole "let's make it friendly" is annoying. If it's a tool make it practical. If you need to write a manual because of that, then please, go right a head and do that.

[floating-io]

The problem is that design tends to be driven by the marketing department...