4 ms·

I like that we are integrating more and more well designed products and utilities in our day to day life; beautiful, easy to use objects are no longer a luxury.

I like that we are integrating more and more well designed products and utilities in our day to day life; beautiful, easy to use objects are no longer a luxury. That by itself is a glorious win. People, however, tend to forget the old but gold adage: "Form follows Functionality". I mean, this talented designer ventured into poking fun of the work of other people without even taking the time to understand the problem, the proposed solution, and the constraints that were/are in place. Yes, his design is infinitely more good looking. But did the designer took into consideration how applicable is it in the real world, with real logistics and real business scenarios? No. Of course he didn't. The reason I'm saying this is because I suffer those atrocities every day in my work, were I'm tasked with the coordination between journalists and designers for a business magazine. Where I work, we believe that infographics' main mission is to help readers wrap their heads around things they wouldn't if we presented them as text or tables. That's the point of them being there in the first place. Making them pretty is just a way to make people look at them, and be happy while they learn something new. It is so satisfying to create such pieces. Designers, however, seem to discard all of that, caring only about how trendy the damn gradient is. I was even called ignorant and 'noob' by a designer, one that I fought to recruit a week earlier, because I suggested making numbers readable, something he deemed old-fashioned and would ruin his master-fucking-piece. I really hope that people will be more aware that design is not a goal by itself; it's a tool to make people care, learn and be more happy. Edit: OMGrammar!

et-al 9y ago
> Designers, however, seem to discard all of that, caring only about how trendy the damn gradient is. I was even called ignorant and 'noob' by a designer, one that I fought to recruit a week earlier, because I suggested making numbers readable, something he deemed old-fashioned and would ruin his master-fucking-piece. I suspect a lot of designers are really just designing for dribbble/Behance portfolios so they can finally climb the ladder to Art Director.
- ahmedfromtunis 9y ago
  Absolutely, and that somehow makes me sad. I hope that the designers who don't yet, understand the grandiosity of their mission and give a goal to their pieces, beyond the instant gratification of fast rotting eye candy.
- humanrebar 9y ago
  > I suspect a lot of designers are really just designing for dribbble/Behance portfolios so they can finally climb the ladder to Art Director. Well if it works, I wouldn't blame them. That seems like a flaw in hiring culture more than a personal failing.
- kevin_thibedeau 9y ago
  Now you have a scenario to screen the next designer you interview.
- kinkrtyavimoodh 9y ago
  Same unfortunate nonsense as propping up github profiles.
kevas 9y ago
To add on to what you said, I believe the designer forgot one more thing. From what I remember (haven't looked in awhile), these companies are on paper thin margins. They try to shave every last cent they can. By switching to the visuals that the designers came up with, it would add to an increased ink cost. This calculation won't even try to be accurate, but rather for argument purposes. The design that has the large black rectangle of black could add an extra 8in^2 of black printable ink. okay... I'm too lazy to look this up, but let's say they print 20m of these a year, the ink cost would add up for that redesign.
- ada1981 9y ago
  The printers are usually thermal printers, so no ink. However it would impact the lifetime of the thermal head, so basically the same thing.
mattmurdog 9y ago
"I mean, this talented designer ventured into poking fun of the work of other people without even taking the time to understand the problem, the proposed solution, and the constraints that were/are in place." Bingo.
jlg23 9y ago
> People, however, tend to forget the old but gold adage: "Form follows Functionality". I mean, this talented designer ventured into poking fun of the work of other people without even taking the time to understand the problem, the proposed solution, and the constraints that were/are in place. Can you list actual problems with the proposed solution? What is the function of a boarding pass? It has 3 users: * Computers - they don't care much about the layout as long as all the information is there. See the comment about "CUTE". * Humans who work at airports (security, boarding crew, flight attendants) - they too want to be able to parse them quickly. They'll easily adapt to every layout because after a single day they'll have seen a few hundred boarding passes with the same layout. * The passenger - they want to be able to parse it quickly. I don't know how often I was looking for a specific information on my boarding pass and actually had to read all of the damn thing to find it. I fly with various airlines and I am the only one who cannot be reprogrammed or trained by looking at a few hundred passes. So I'd say the most important/constraining function is to be understood by the passenger. The article spells out the problem the redesign tries to address: So I stared at it for a while. Rubbed my eyes, then stared at it some more. It was like someone put on a blindfold, drank a fifth of whiskey, spun around 100 times, got kicked in the face by a mule (the person who designed this definitely has a mule living with them inside their house) and then just started puking numbers and letters onto the boarding pass at random (yes, I realize that a human didn't lay this out, if a human had, judging by the train-wreck of design, they would have surely used papyrus). There was nothing given size or color importance over anything else, it was a mess. The only problem I have with most of the redesigns proposed is the amount of ink used - I'd prefer a design that takes environmental impact into account because those boarding passes have to be printed, then are used once and thrown away. > Yes, his design is infinitely more good looking. But did the designer took into consideration how applicable is it in the real world, with real logistics and real business scenarios? No. Of course he didn't. Again, can you list actual problems?
- Cyph0n 9y ago
  Let's have a look at the meat of that excerpt: > It was like someone put on a blindfold, drank a fifth of whiskey, spun around 100 times, got kicked in the face by a mule (the person who designed this definitely has a mule living with them inside their house) and then just started puking numbers and letters onto the boarding pass at random (yes, I realize that a human didn't lay this out, if a human had, judging by the train-wreck of design, they would have surely used papyrus). There was nothing given size or color importance over anything else, it was a mess. Notice that only the last sentence attempted to actually critique the current design. Every single word before that was absolutely useless. So no, if you actually read it properly, the excerpt doesn't even present a weak argument for why boarding passes should be redesigned. Small anecdote: in my 15 years of flying using 5+ international carriers, I have never once had trouble getting the most important information from my boarding pass (gate and seat numbers).

et-al 9y ago

> Designers, however, seem to discard all of that, caring only about how trendy the damn gradient is. I was even called ignorant and 'noob' by a designer, one that I fought to recruit a week earlier, because I suggested making numbers readable, something he deemed old-fashioned and would ruin his master-fucking-piece. I suspect a lot of designers are really just designing for dribbble/Behance portfolios so they can finally climb the ladder to Art Director.

ahmedfromtunis 9y ago
Absolutely, and that somehow makes me sad. I hope that the designers who don't yet, understand the grandiosity of their mission and give a goal to their pieces, beyond the instant gratification of fast rotting eye candy.
humanrebar 9y ago
> I suspect a lot of designers are really just designing for dribbble/Behance portfolios so they can finally climb the ladder to Art Director. Well if it works, I wouldn't blame them. That seems like a flaw in hiring culture more than a personal failing.
kevin_thibedeau 9y ago
Now you have a scenario to screen the next designer you interview.
kinkrtyavimoodh 9y ago
Same unfortunate nonsense as propping up github profiles.

kevas 9y ago

To add on to what you said, I believe the designer forgot one more thing. From what I remember (haven't looked in awhile), these companies are on paper thin margins. They try to shave every last cent they can. By switching to the visuals that the designers came up with, it would add to an increased ink cost. This calculation won't even try to be accurate, but rather for argument purposes. The design that has the large black rectangle of black could add an extra 8in^2 of black printable ink. okay... I'm too lazy to look this up, but let's say they print 20m of these a year, the ink cost would add up for that redesign.

ada1981 9y ago
The printers are usually thermal printers, so no ink. However it would impact the lifetime of the thermal head, so basically the same thing.

mattmurdog 9y ago

"I mean, this talented designer ventured into poking fun of the work of other people without even taking the time to understand the problem, the proposed solution, and the constraints that were/are in place." Bingo.

jlg23 9y ago

> People, however, tend to forget the old but gold adage: "Form follows Functionality". I mean, this talented designer ventured into poking fun of the work of other people without even taking the time to understand the problem, the proposed solution, and the constraints that were/are in place. Can you list actual problems with the proposed solution? What is the function of a boarding pass? It has 3 users: * Computers - they don't care much about the layout as long as all the information is there. See the comment about "CUTE". * Humans who work at airports (security, boarding crew, flight attendants) - they too want to be able to parse them quickly. They'll easily adapt to every layout because after a single day they'll have seen a few hundred boarding passes with the same layout. * The passenger - they want to be able to parse it quickly. I don't know how often I was looking for a specific information on my boarding pass and actually had to read all of the damn thing to find it. I fly with various airlines and I am the only one who cannot be reprogrammed or trained by looking at a few hundred passes. So I'd say the most important/constraining function is to be understood by the passenger. The article spells out the problem the redesign tries to address: So I stared at it for a while. Rubbed my eyes, then stared at it some more. It was like someone put on a blindfold, drank a fifth of whiskey, spun around 100 times, got kicked in the face by a mule (the person who designed this definitely has a mule living with them inside their house) and then just started puking numbers and letters onto the boarding pass at random (yes, I realize that a human didn't lay this out, if a human had, judging by the train-wreck of design, they would have surely used papyrus). There was nothing given size or color importance over anything else, it was a mess. The only problem I have with most of the redesigns proposed is the amount of ink used - I'd prefer a design that takes environmental impact into account because those boarding passes have to be printed, then are used once and thrown away. > Yes, his design is infinitely more good looking. But did the designer took into consideration how applicable is it in the real world, with real logistics and real business scenarios? No. Of course he didn't. Again, can you list actual problems?

Cyph0n 9y ago
Let's have a look at the meat of that excerpt: > It was like someone put on a blindfold, drank a fifth of whiskey, spun around 100 times, got kicked in the face by a mule (the person who designed this definitely has a mule living with them inside their house) and then just started puking numbers and letters onto the boarding pass at random (yes, I realize that a human didn't lay this out, if a human had, judging by the train-wreck of design, they would have surely used papyrus). There was nothing given size or color importance over anything else, it was a mess. Notice that only the last sentence attempted to actually critique the current design. Every single word before that was absolutely useless. So no, if you actually read it properly, the excerpt doesn't even present a weak argument for why boarding passes should be redesigned. Small anecdote: in my 15 years of flying using 5+ international carriers, I have never once had trouble getting the most important information from my boarding pass (gate and seat numbers).