Reader Comments                                                                                                                Report an offensive comment

return to story

On Engineering and Design: An Open Letter

All Reader Comments

page 3 of 3

Sam Apr 30, 2009 8:49 PM GMT A fundamental difference between engineering and design is the human factor. Engineering follows the laws of math and physics, therefore engineering expertise can be tested objectively. You can't get away with a buggy software. On the other hand, design is subjective and context sensitive. That is why most users hate the famous MS paperclip designed by experts and Microsoft still got away with it for many years.
Link to this comment

Jonathan Brill Apr 30, 2009 1:20 PM GMT Bill,How does one make the case for the institutional value of design in a channel sales-driven company?It's one thing to budget for design. It's quite another to successfully incorporate it into process and politics. At MS, design groups are frequently relegated to off campus buildings (swing spaces) and some planning groups aren't involving design teams in their processes. You are such an engaging figure. Could you talk about your approach to building institutional openness to design?Always Inspired.Jonathanwww.pointanddo.com
Link to this comment

Ron Apr 30, 2009 1:13 PM GMT Bill,I could not include the full MS policy statement as it exceeded the max. comments length allowed by BW.So a short question: on what MS link can I actually submit ideas regarding usability or product ideas?
Link to this comment

Ron Apr 30, 2009 1:10 PM GMT Bill,2 related issues illustrating you have your homework cut out for you:1. Quote from the 'Windows Washer' article elsewhere in BW: "downright revolutionary: Build an operating system that doesn't require people to take computer classes or master thick manuals." I beg you pardon: didn't Apple do this already more than a decade ago? What's revolutionary?2. I tried to submit a usability suggestion regarding Vista Speech Recognition to MS just this week, and got back following convoluted reply, not really stimulating customers to submit ideas. In fact, I got the same reply after I had raise it with the manager of the support employee... " While Microsoft does accept suggestions for existing products and services, we do not accept suggestions for new products, technologies, processes. We hope that you will understand our intention to avoid any potential misunderstandings or disputes that may arise from submissions of information not related to current Microsoft products. Thus, we are returning your information without review.Information on Microsoft's unsolicited submission policy can be found on the following Web site: linketc. etc. etc."
Link to this comment

Bill Buxton Apr 30, 2009 12:50 PM GMT Jonathan, regarding your comment, I believe that you mis-read what I wrote, and certainly what I intended. I did not compare cognitive science with design. Rather, I pointed out that the cognitive styles of engineers and designers are different. From my perspective, Cognitive Science, Design, and Engineering all have a legitimate foundation, and I hope that is clear in what I wrote. I hope this helps clarify any unintended misunderstanding.
Link to this comment

Jonathan Hung Apr 30, 2009 8:13 AM GMT Bill, Claiming that cognitive science and design "are different" is not really helping those fields create a legitimate foundation. Psychological and aesthetic methodology will always carry an air of cynicism and mysticism (especially to people in the hard-sciences like engineering). User Experience Designers have to overcome negative associations towards psychology as wishy-washy, touchy-feely, subjective, "different", or any number of descriptors. As a UX enthusiast with a cognitive science background, I get blank stares all the time explaining what I'm good for; a blanket statement like "we think differently" leaves our audience no closer to understanding what we do and may estrange them to our values even more.Furthermore, other equally-useless mantras "understand your user" "test early and often" have reached the level of common knowledge and hide the amount of resources required to act upon these mantras. Let's work together to make it clear and visible that which is so "different" about our work.
Link to this comment

Phillip Apr 30, 2009 2:42 AM GMT Thank you, thank you. Let's hope we learn this finally, on both sides. Too bad this wasn't built-in as computer tech was born. We could have learned from Dreyfuss: "We (industrial designers) enter into close co-operation with the engineers. Our offices become as one. Our common denominators are the same..." - Designing for People, 1955
Link to this comment

Tim McCoy Apr 30, 2009 12:11 AM GMT Yes yes yes. And appreciation is just the beginning, a baseline. What follows is the ability for designers and engineers to work in closer collaboration, each magnifying the othersâ?? strengths to create higher quality experiences and bring them to market faster.Now I want to see your hypothetical reply to â??why doesnâ??t the final product ever look like what I designed?â??
Link to this comment

Dustin DiTommaso Apr 29, 2009 11:31 PM GMT Perfectly put. I'd expect no less.
Link to this comment

BW Mall - Sponsored Links

Buy a link now!