Developing Taste
Posted by cat-whisperer 2 days ago
Comments
Comment by fasterik 2 days ago
Comment by spencermacbeth 2 days ago
I hope we as a community can develop the new agile or some sane process to ground ourselves in sooner than later...
Comment by Animats 2 days ago
No more than N% of the time should a notification be pending. Probably under 5%. Otherwise a notification is the wrong tool for the job. You need an inbox.
Comment by socalgal2 2 days ago
Comment by kevinlanducci 2 days ago
Another point which may apply is to purposefully engage with work you don't like, because if you can figure out why it sucks, it'll help you make work that doesn't suck!
Comment by jmathai 2 days ago
Here's an example of rebranding Uhaul. https://www.youtube.com/shorts/cMU0G8h0pys
Comment by piro0919 2 days ago
Comment by joduplessis 2 days ago
> it’s a trained instinct. The ability to see beyond the obvious and recognize what elevates. It’s why some designs feel effortless.
This is not really what "taste" is.
Some designs feel effortless because someone practiced/trained so they could execute on their taste. Taste is extremely cheap - execution is still very hard.
Comment by timcobb 2 days ago
Comment by joduplessis 2 days ago
Comment by timcobb 2 days ago
Comment by inertiqa 2 days ago
Comment by ww520 2 days ago
Comment by theletterf 2 days ago
Comment by hypfer 2 days ago
Quality doesn't enforce itself and using soft language allows mediocrity to hide itself in it.
Comment by theletterf 2 days ago
Comment by hypfer 2 days ago
You've introduced a category that could be described as an alias for "bad", and then you threw in random stuff into that, based on unclear and handwavy criteria.
This can only end in a screaming match, so let's not do that.
Comment by theletterf 2 days ago
I'm curious, though: How would you picture protecting taste while at the same time adopting an inclusive (as in not putting people off) stance? Do you have examples of such a behavior?
Comment by hypfer 2 days ago
> How would you picture protecting taste while at the same time adopting an inclusive (as in not putting people off) stance?
I don't, because I reject the definition.
Being inclusive does not mean "not putting people off". For starters, because measuring there doesn't work. How people react is not a direct reproducible consequence of your actions. Your actions might influence it, but they have this ginormous internal state that has much more control over it.
But that is a side-track.
The actual problem with the definition is that putting people off isn't bad.
Putting people off for arbitrary reasons like race, gender, etc is, but that "arbitrary reasons" is a strong modifier that significantly limits the set, and was dropped in your framing.
Comment by paganel 2 days ago
This is AI-generated.
Comment by random3 2 days ago
Comment by xnx 2 days ago
Example: only someone who fetishized design would make a keyboard the didn't work just so it could be a mm thinner.
The best designs come from those who interview, research, and test with a broad and representative sample of real users.
Comment by gffrd 2 days ago
So … designers?
Comment by Defletter 2 days ago
Comment by lubujackson 2 days ago
Comment by ivell 2 days ago
Comment by heisenzombie 2 days ago
∀x ∀y [(P(x) ∧ D(y) ∧ C(x, y)) → R(x)]
The people who create the worst designs are designers
∀x ∀y [(P(x) ∧ D(y) ∧ W(y) ∧ C(x, y)) → R(x)]
Comment by kunkka19xx 2 days ago
Comment by JacobLeeCadLaw 1 day ago
2. IF x is a Person AND y is a Design AND y is Worst AND x Creates y THEN x is a Designer.
Comment by hackingonempty 2 days ago
I would bet that is what real users have been asking for, for decades now. They aren't asking for swappable batteries or headphone jacks.
Comment by majormajor 2 days ago
>I would bet that is what real users have been asking for, for decades now. They aren't asking for swappable batteries or headphone jacks.
Well isn't it telling that Apple hasn't focused on thinner and lighter than what is currently available for 5 years now?
Their actions seem to indicate that they heard this desire loud and clear, and that this caused a single-minded focus that lost the plot on the overall functionality part of the role of design. And then they heard lound and clear from users that "thinner than what came before" was not the end-all-and-be-all. They also rolled back other victims of the "as thin and liught as possible" chase, such as SD cards and HDMI ports.
The claim here is that they could have anticipated that if they weren't driven overly by the aesthetic bragging-rights side of the design team vs the functional side. It's not hard to anticipate everyday reliability causing more blowback than relatively-rare battery-replacement capabilities. They probably had a very good idea of how many replacement batteries were sold, after all. (And for the record: headphone jacks are still there.)
Comment by Swizec 2 days ago
Could it be that miniaturization has reached a local maximum of what current technology can support and we simply can't make devices that are thinner and lighter while preserving battery life and computing power?
Or maybe they got thin enough so other factors now outweigh thinness. Notice how laptop batteries used to last 2 hours and now they go 8h and more.
If you can make a device 1cm thinner and keep the same 2 hours of battery life, worth it. But if a 10mm device lasts 2 hours and a 12mm lasts 6 hours, obviously 12mm is the better choice.
Notice that phones continue to get thinner. Except around the camera because better photos outweigh smaller camera.
Comment by hdgvhicv 2 days ago
Comment by Swizec 1 day ago
Yep I'm sad about this too. Consumers want big screen. Especially when a phone is their primary, often only, computing device
Comment by cat-whisperer 1 day ago
Comment by inertiqa 2 days ago
Comment by samplatt 2 days ago
Not really. Jony Ive, chief designer at Apple for most of the iphone era, left in 2019. He and Jobs were the primary pushers behind the "thinner, lighter" drive. Once the chief pushers for "form > function" left, it predictably stagnated, and begun to fall in line with industry standards from other companies.
Comment by rramon 2 days ago
Comment by dist-epoch 2 days ago
Apple understands that deeply, everything they do is optimized for delivering that goal.
Comment by pazimzadeh 2 days ago
Comment by omnimus 2 days ago
Comment by voiper1 2 days ago
The practicalities of "how it works" always seemed important to me.
Comment by xtiansimon 2 days ago
Comment by pyrolistical 2 days ago
Comment by socalgal2 2 days ago
Comment by frabia 2 days ago
Comment by airstrike 2 days ago
taste without curation for the community, with an eye to what is culturally edifying, is just consumerism
Comment by benoq 2 days ago
Taste doesn’t matter when slop puts food on the table.
Write the article you’d rather write: how to make money. That’s the main slant here of wanting to have differentiation. “Taste” was a marketing tool by Jobs telling people what they wanted to hear. This is why it’s called people management. You calibrate output based on input. If someone is receptive to being complimented, you give them a compliment while taking their money.
Don’t beat around the bush.
Comment by andsoitis 2 days ago
Comment by defrost 2 days ago
Rough hewn "unfinished" fittings (tables, chairs, cabinets, etc) are the kinds of objects that bounce about the taste spectrum
Comment by cat-whisperer 2 days ago