4 ms·

As a developer, I have to admit that I feel a lot of ambivalence about this emerging discipline. It's taken a long time to convince the world of the benefits o

by geebee 15y ago

As a developer, I have to admit that I feel a lot of ambivalence about this emerging discipline. It's taken a long time to convince the world of the benefits of a "developer driven culture", but I think it's critical to avoid putting developers into a box where they are simply executing specs. I see a lot of that creeping back in through the new concept of a "UX Developer". Here are the three big quotes that are making me nervous: "It’s our job to help translate their vision to the development team in a way that they can understand and accept" "Similarly, we need to speak on behalf the developers to help reign in the designers, at times." "However, for the traditional developer the application works if it executes all of the items listed in the functional specs. The focus of the traditional developer is centered on tasks rather than goals." Oh man. So the role of a UX developer is to stand in between the developers and designers and represent the interests of each for us? All the while, assuming that the mindset of a "traditional" developer is to be myopically focused on tasks rather than goals? Everything I read about UX as a skill set I like. Developers and Designers should be focused on goals. We should strive to acquire the skills and mindset that are often associated with "UX" (good developers were doing this long before "UX" became a term or job category). Everything I read about UX as an actual job role, I don't like. I can't stand the idea of a worker in my organization deciding that developers are focused on tasks and need someone running interference between them and the users and designers. As I've pointed out in other discussions around UX on HN, one key question is to ask yourself: would this person be useful on a small team? A developer or designer with lots of "UX" skill would be even more useful on a small team. But the type of person described through this post? Not really, and could even do harm by mucking up the relationship between developers, designers, and the things that they actually need to be exposed to to write good software. In short, I believe that UX is a great addition to a developer or designer's skill set, but I'm not at all convinced that it would be a great job category.

matwood 15y ago
"It’s our job to help translate their vision to the development team in a way that they can understand and accept" "Similarly, we need to speak on behalf the developers to help reign in the designers, at times." "I deal with the god damn customers so the engineers don't have to. I have people skills; I am good at dealing with people. Can't you understand that? What the hell is wrong with you people?" :)
jqueryin 15y ago
I believe we'd be selling ourselves short if we didn't already take those three big quotes into consideration when developing applications. If you're in a startup environment and not writing one-off client applications, you're probably already well versed in this so-called "UDX" voodoo magic. The designer/developer relationship is one of give and take. Compromises must be made for the sake of completing tasks on time. My advise is to simply wear many hats; especially to keep clowns like these "UXD" types out of your company.
danilocampos 15y ago
I have to agree. I had UX as its own specific job role for a little while and it was absolutely miserable. Not satisfying in the least. It might have been different at another organization but overall, you're just an appendage that's not doing a lot to impact the final product. Much more gratifying for me, as someone with both taste and technical background, is my current role where I just do everything. Prototype, build, design and ship apps and the whole loop closes inside my own head. But I have very specific experience for this – I don't know how often this is really practical. Either way, I'd probably hate having a "UX guy" hovering around putting his dick into everything I'm working on. I suspect the only time "UX guy" can really, truly work as its own role is when you're CEO or some other autonomous leadership figure.
vlisivka 15y ago
Developer - How application will work? Designer - How application will look? UX - How application will feel?
- AltIvan 15y ago
  "Look & Feel" is part of the designer role; UX is more like "How much the user understands the app" i think.
  - jgmmo 15y ago
    how much the app understands the user
waterflame 15y ago
UX ripped off skills from different majors and combined them together to form a new job: usability from designers, planning and organizing and wireframing from project managers, testing from QA and test groups, and prototyping from developers. this leaves managers with traffic between sales/clients, designers, UX bullshitters and developers. It leaves designers with making the wireframes look better. It leaves developers with production work. UX developer: "we should do this and this and this." Developer: "yes master" To me UX is a set of skills that designers and developers should learn and earn. That what makes a Designer and a Developer: SENIOR. What is seniority then? Speed? CEO: "Yes this is our senior designer. He can design a website in 5 minutes. He's senior because he knows all Photoshop shortcuts and is fast with the tools. By the way, his designs look nice and he follows everything the UX Designer tells him to."
randomdata 15y ago
I always thought a UX designer was the one who worried about how the interface functioned. Like in iOS, for example, when it does that little bounce thing when you reach the end of a scroll view. That is something a UX designer would design. As opposed to a visual designer who would make it look pretty. As a designer and developer, I boggles my mind that not all programmers can do design work. Likewise, it seems strange that visual designers can't also do interaction design. However, in the real world most people in this space seem to be more specialized. A visual designer cannot necessarily make a good functioning interface, hence the need for someone else to fill that gap. I don't know what the middle-man between designers and developers is all about. We can communicate just fine and wouldn't be the job of a user experience person, by my definition, anyway.
- nathos 15y ago
  Your example isn't so much UX Designer vs. Visual Designer, but instead an example of a good designer. As Steve Jobs said, "Most people make the mistake of thinking design is what it looks like. That’s not what we think design is. It’s not just what it looks like and feels like. Design is how it works." Your visual designer that can't make an interface is someone I might describe as a [graphic] artist. Semantics, I know, but a differentiation that I (thankfully) helps to reduce the use of "UX" in job titles -- a trend I've come to dislike.
  - randomdata 15y ago
    I agree, and that is sort of what I was trying to get at. A really good developer should be able to create a wonderful user experience all the way down to writing stable and performing code. However, not all developers are really good. Sometimes you have to bring in someone to work on the design, allowing the programmer to focus on stable and performing code. That is why we have come to have designers and developers. Similarly, not all designers are really good. Sometimes you have to bring in someone who can focus on the experience while letting the other designer focus on the style. And that is why we're starting to see multiple people take on the different design roles. Becoming really good at your craft is hard. Some people haven't spent the time required to become really good, or don't have the interest, or in very rare cases are incapable. Because really good people are hard to find, businesses are forced to break up the jobs up to allow multiple people to fill their niche. I don't know if it is the right thing, but I'm not sure what else can be done. We can't all hire Apple's top talent, even if money was no object.
ZephyrP 15y ago
I'm inclined to believe the same thing. I'm not so much irked by "UX Designers", as they have a seemingly useful role if you consider what they claim. Many of their practices however are laughable at best and rarely accomplish their stated goals. Why should I trust your soft approach to UX? If I'm paying you 70,000 a year, that means you should be providing more than 70,000 a year worth of value - Otherwise theres not really much point in hiring you. Can any UX designer, even in principle, provide more than modest value for sites whose users don't number into the 10s of millions? Keep in mind that its not the difference between no design and a good design when you hire a UX designer, Its the difference between a design generated by someone who isn't a UX professional (but probably is willing to read up on the elements of successful design) and a UX professional who.... possesses no real qualifications or mechanism to distinguish him from the non-UX professional save his assertion that he "has an eye for design". You could hire a High school graduate with an interest in technology, offer to pay him 25k/yr to sit in a comfy chair and write out jquery + html and be absolutely stoked about it, how much more of a value proposition do you get out of a "UX designer"? I want to clarify this isn't a dig against people who truly provide value and make a difference for users - Theres some UX & UI people out there who are changing the face of their businesses by the work of their own hands and their untamable passion for the human enterprise. But those people would have likely kicked ass anyway. So I suppose lastly, I'd be distrustful as a rule of most people who claim to generate value through soft, rather than hard means. Historically you would not be unwise to bet on the success of Mathematics and the failure of subjective analysis in virtually every field ranging from analyzing human emotions to machine translation, even fields traditionally decried for being approached mathematically (Because surely a human can only understand what makes up being human?) have been absolutely revolutionized by using an approach that has been working for the past 10k years of human history - Application of cold logic and lots and lots of hard work. So whats someone who isn't a "science person" to do in an era that increasingly marginalizes those who cannot do hard mental labor? Well you do the only thing you can do with nothing but time on your hands - You market yourself. [P.S - If you want UX/UI people who aren't full of their own shit, a truly excellent ex-coworker of mine - Sam Asante @ http://samasante.com/ http://samasante.com/ is currently looking for a job in San Francisco]
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
brandnewlow 15y ago
http://hntrends.jerodsanto.net/?q=ux+developer http://hntrends.jerodsanto.net/?q=ux+developer

by geebee 15y ago

matwood 15y ago

"It’s our job to help translate their vision to the development team in a way that they can understand and accept" "Similarly, we need to speak on behalf the developers to help reign in the designers, at times." "I deal with the god damn customers so the engineers don't have to. I have people skills; I am good at dealing with people. Can't you understand that? What the hell is wrong with you people?" :)

jqueryin 15y ago

I believe we'd be selling ourselves short if we didn't already take those three big quotes into consideration when developing applications. If you're in a startup environment and not writing one-off client applications, you're probably already well versed in this so-called "UDX" voodoo magic. The designer/developer relationship is one of give and take. Compromises must be made for the sake of completing tasks on time. My advise is to simply wear many hats; especially to keep clowns like these "UXD" types out of your company.

danilocampos 15y ago

I have to agree. I had UX as its own specific job role for a little while and it was absolutely miserable. Not satisfying in the least. It might have been different at another organization but overall, you're just an appendage that's not doing a lot to impact the final product. Much more gratifying for me, as someone with both taste and technical background, is my current role where I just do everything. Prototype, build, design and ship apps and the whole loop closes inside my own head. But I have very specific experience for this – I don't know how often this is really practical. Either way, I'd probably hate having a "UX guy" hovering around putting his dick into everything I'm working on. I suspect the only time "UX guy" can really, truly work as its own role is when you're CEO or some other autonomous leadership figure.

vlisivka 15y ago

Developer - How application will work? Designer - How application will look? UX - How application will feel?

AltIvan 15y ago
"Look & Feel" is part of the designer role; UX is more like "How much the user understands the app" i think.
- jgmmo 15y ago
  how much the app understands the user

waterflame 15y ago

UX ripped off skills from different majors and combined them together to form a new job: usability from designers, planning and organizing and wireframing from project managers, testing from QA and test groups, and prototyping from developers. this leaves managers with traffic between sales/clients, designers, UX bullshitters and developers. It leaves designers with making the wireframes look better. It leaves developers with production work. UX developer: "we should do this and this and this." Developer: "yes master" To me UX is a set of skills that designers and developers should learn and earn. That what makes a Designer and a Developer: SENIOR. What is seniority then? Speed? CEO: "Yes this is our senior designer. He can design a website in 5 minutes. He's senior because he knows all Photoshop shortcuts and is fast with the tools. By the way, his designs look nice and he follows everything the UX Designer tells him to."

randomdata 15y ago

I always thought a UX designer was the one who worried about how the interface functioned. Like in iOS, for example, when it does that little bounce thing when you reach the end of a scroll view. That is something a UX designer would design. As opposed to a visual designer who would make it look pretty. As a designer and developer, I boggles my mind that not all programmers can do design work. Likewise, it seems strange that visual designers can't also do interaction design. However, in the real world most people in this space seem to be more specialized. A visual designer cannot necessarily make a good functioning interface, hence the need for someone else to fill that gap. I don't know what the middle-man between designers and developers is all about. We can communicate just fine and wouldn't be the job of a user experience person, by my definition, anyway.

nathos 15y ago
Your example isn't so much UX Designer vs. Visual Designer, but instead an example of a good designer. As Steve Jobs said, "Most people make the mistake of thinking design is what it looks like. That’s not what we think design is. It’s not just what it looks like and feels like. Design is how it works." Your visual designer that can't make an interface is someone I might describe as a [graphic] artist. Semantics, I know, but a differentiation that I (thankfully) helps to reduce the use of "UX" in job titles -- a trend I've come to dislike.
- randomdata 15y ago
  I agree, and that is sort of what I was trying to get at. A really good developer should be able to create a wonderful user experience all the way down to writing stable and performing code. However, not all developers are really good. Sometimes you have to bring in someone to work on the design, allowing the programmer to focus on stable and performing code. That is why we have come to have designers and developers. Similarly, not all designers are really good. Sometimes you have to bring in someone who can focus on the experience while letting the other designer focus on the style. And that is why we're starting to see multiple people take on the different design roles. Becoming really good at your craft is hard. Some people haven't spent the time required to become really good, or don't have the interest, or in very rare cases are incapable. Because really good people are hard to find, businesses are forced to break up the jobs up to allow multiple people to fill their niche. I don't know if it is the right thing, but I'm not sure what else can be done. We can't all hire Apple's top talent, even if money was no object.

ZephyrP 15y ago

I'm inclined to believe the same thing. I'm not so much irked by "UX Designers", as they have a seemingly useful role if you consider what they claim. Many of their practices however are laughable at best and rarely accomplish their stated goals. Why should I trust your soft approach to UX? If I'm paying you 70,000 a year, that means you should be providing more than 70,000 a year worth of value - Otherwise theres not really much point in hiring you. Can any UX designer, even in principle, provide more than modest value for sites whose users don't number into the 10s of millions? Keep in mind that its not the difference between no design and a good design when you hire a UX designer, Its the difference between a design generated by someone who isn't a UX professional (but probably is willing to read up on the elements of successful design) and a UX professional who.... possesses no real qualifications or mechanism to distinguish him from the non-UX professional save his assertion that he "has an eye for design". You could hire a High school graduate with an interest in technology, offer to pay him 25k/yr to sit in a comfy chair and write out jquery + html and be absolutely stoked about it, how much more of a value proposition do you get out of a "UX designer"? I want to clarify this isn't a dig against people who truly provide value and make a difference for users - Theres some UX & UI people out there who are changing the face of their businesses by the work of their own hands and their untamable passion for the human enterprise. But those people would have likely kicked ass anyway. So I suppose lastly, I'd be distrustful as a rule of most people who claim to generate value through soft, rather than hard means. Historically you would not be unwise to bet on the success of Mathematics and the failure of subjective analysis in virtually every field ranging from analyzing human emotions to machine translation, even fields traditionally decried for being approached mathematically (Because surely a human can only understand what makes up being human?) have been absolutely revolutionized by using an approach that has been working for the past 10k years of human history - Application of cold logic and lots and lots of hard work. So whats someone who isn't a "science person" to do in an era that increasingly marginalizes those who cannot do hard mental labor? Well you do the only thing you can do with nothing but time on your hands - You market yourself. [P.S - If you want UX/UI people who aren't full of their own shit, a truly excellent ex-coworker of mine - Sam Asante @ http://samasante.com/ http://samasante.com/ is currently looking for a job in San Francisco]

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]

brandnewlow 15y ago

http://hntrends.jerodsanto.net/?q=ux+developer http://hntrends.jerodsanto.net/?q=ux+developer