4 ms·

It’s not the developers fault it’s the god damned designers who insist we need custom fonts for everything. These people have no technical sense.

by xwdv 4y ago

caymanjim 4y ago
If developers can't efficiently deliver what designers want, within reason, that's most definitely the the fault of developers collectively, even if it might be a big ask of a single developer without sufficient experience or resources.
- nonrandomstring 4y ago
  > If developers can't efficiently deliver what designers want, within reason, that's most definitely the the fault of developers collectively, even if it might be a big ask of a single developer without sufficient experience or resources. An interesting take on which part of the dog wags. In your model, developers seem positioned to serve designers. Having written a book on design, and practised it, I have to say that web is very unusual in allowing designers such rein. In other disciplines, like sound design or product design, the constraints and requirements of the project come first, and designers need to fit their work to that. A very great many web projects I have seen fail went south the moment "designers" got involved. Designers seems to wield an inappropriate level of power and influence, and operate without proper technical supervision, often breaking things or creating unreasonable demands. I think this misalignment comes from the early days of the web, when anyone who could write HTML called themself a web designer and took on an entire site development. Even though post-CGI/database the server-side roles were better differentiated, the legacy of "aesthetic driven design" lingers. I do not want to denigrate web designers, but times have changed and in my opinion, having a website that "looks great" just isn't that important these days. I'd much rather use simpler, accessible, secure, private, content-centred sites.
  - robin_reala 4y ago
    Sorry, who do you think designs the simpler, accessible, secure, private, content-centred sites?
    - nonrandomstring 4y ago
      > who do you think designs the simpler, accessible, secure, private, content-centred sites That would be the role of a designer who is doing their job properly and paying attention to the specification for a simple, accessible, secure, private, and content-centred site.
  - marc_io 4y ago
    > (...) having a website that "looks great" just isn't that important these days. I'd much rather use simpler, accessible, secure, private, content-centred sites.. Why exclude aesthetics? There is no need for it. It positively affects usability, just like the other qualities you described.
    - nonrandomstring 4y ago
      > It positively affects usability, just like the other qualities you described. It does indeed. "Aesthetics" in the most accurate sense of the word, as opposed to orderliness or just "looking right", is about how it makes us feel. Some people seem particularly sensitive to it and say they can't use a site or application that feels wrong. I respect that nuanced choosyness. Indeed I'm sure there's a biological thing going on, as in the way we select berries to eat or choose partners to mate with. Hard to introspect parts of our brain say "that's okay" or "that's off, don't touch". Aesthetics is very real. But (there's always a but :) ... it should never be put ahead of functionality. As I see it that's what makes "Design" design, and not Art. It's blending aesthetics and elegance within a practical value set. And very often that "requirements set" is given to us designers by another... a film director, a product manager, an information architect etc. They say - "Here's what it has to do, (functional requirement) now go design it (non-functional)". And what I am saying is that, in Web Design at least, the designers have gotten the upper hand, and that's partly the fault of developers, system architects, or project managers for letting themselves get pushed around like that.
ilikehurdles 4y ago
I’ve worked in high-trust environments (read: where public CDNs are noncompliant) and that’s never been an issue. All of these fonts are downloadable and self-hostable.
DocTomoe 4y ago
It is, though. Designers receiving no pushback will just get more 'creative' and make the world a worse place for everyone involved.
robin_reala 4y ago
If you have bad designers then yes, that makes your life harder. But insisting on a custom font doesn’t make that person a bad designer if there’s a valid reason why including it would improve the users’ experiences.
- xigoi 4y ago
  In what context would a custom font improve the user's experience?
  - robin_reala 4y ago
    - If the font is part of a brand identity that the user trusts (there’s a reason Times New Roman has Times in it). - If the font has associations with a particular place or time that you want to imbue your system with. - If you give the user themselves the ability to select a font that works best for them (for example a font focused on the dyslexia reading experience in an ereader).
- kwhitefoot 4y ago
  > if there’s a valid reason why including it would improve the users’ experiences. Such as?
  - marc_io 4y ago
    Displaying math equations or specific language characters.
    - kwhitefoot 4y ago
      Which is really quite rare when the page is non-technical and in English so why do so many pages insist on downloading fonts?
      - marc_io 4y ago
        Mostly marketing and branding: the desire for self-expression, to establish a visual identity and a feeling tone in the message.

It’s not the developers fault it’s the god damned designers who insist we need custom fonts for everything. These people have no technical sense.

by xwdv 4y ago

It’s not the developers fault it’s the god damned designers who insist we need custom fonts for everything. These people have no technical sense.

caymanjim 4y ago

If developers can't efficiently deliver what designers want, within reason, that's most definitely the the fault of developers collectively, even if it might be a big ask of a single developer without sufficient experience or resources.

nonrandomstring 4y ago
> If developers can't efficiently deliver what designers want, within reason, that's most definitely the the fault of developers collectively, even if it might be a big ask of a single developer without sufficient experience or resources. An interesting take on which part of the dog wags. In your model, developers seem positioned to serve designers. Having written a book on design, and practised it, I have to say that web is very unusual in allowing designers such rein. In other disciplines, like sound design or product design, the constraints and requirements of the project come first, and designers need to fit their work to that. A very great many web projects I have seen fail went south the moment "designers" got involved. Designers seems to wield an inappropriate level of power and influence, and operate without proper technical supervision, often breaking things or creating unreasonable demands. I think this misalignment comes from the early days of the web, when anyone who could write HTML called themself a web designer and took on an entire site development. Even though post-CGI/database the server-side roles were better differentiated, the legacy of "aesthetic driven design" lingers. I do not want to denigrate web designers, but times have changed and in my opinion, having a website that "looks great" just isn't that important these days. I'd much rather use simpler, accessible, secure, private, content-centred sites.
- robin_reala 4y ago
  Sorry, who do you think designs the simpler, accessible, secure, private, content-centred sites?
  - nonrandomstring 4y ago
    > who do you think designs the simpler, accessible, secure, private, content-centred sites That would be the role of a designer who is doing their job properly and paying attention to the specification for a simple, accessible, secure, private, and content-centred site.
- marc_io 4y ago
  > (...) having a website that "looks great" just isn't that important these days. I'd much rather use simpler, accessible, secure, private, content-centred sites.. Why exclude aesthetics? There is no need for it. It positively affects usability, just like the other qualities you described.
  - nonrandomstring 4y ago
    > It positively affects usability, just like the other qualities you described. It does indeed. "Aesthetics" in the most accurate sense of the word, as opposed to orderliness or just "looking right", is about how it makes us feel. Some people seem particularly sensitive to it and say they can't use a site or application that feels wrong. I respect that nuanced choosyness. Indeed I'm sure there's a biological thing going on, as in the way we select berries to eat or choose partners to mate with. Hard to introspect parts of our brain say "that's okay" or "that's off, don't touch". Aesthetics is very real. But (there's always a but :) ... it should never be put ahead of functionality. As I see it that's what makes "Design" design, and not Art. It's blending aesthetics and elegance within a practical value set. And very often that "requirements set" is given to us designers by another... a film director, a product manager, an information architect etc. They say - "Here's what it has to do, (functional requirement) now go design it (non-functional)". And what I am saying is that, in Web Design at least, the designers have gotten the upper hand, and that's partly the fault of developers, system architects, or project managers for letting themselves get pushed around like that.

ilikehurdles 4y ago

I’ve worked in high-trust environments (read: where public CDNs are noncompliant) and that’s never been an issue. All of these fonts are downloadable and self-hostable.

DocTomoe 4y ago

It is, though. Designers receiving no pushback will just get more 'creative' and make the world a worse place for everyone involved.

robin_reala 4y ago

If you have bad designers then yes, that makes your life harder. But insisting on a custom font doesn’t make that person a bad designer if there’s a valid reason why including it would improve the users’ experiences.

xigoi 4y ago
In what context would a custom font improve the user's experience?
- robin_reala 4y ago
  - If the font is part of a brand identity that the user trusts (there’s a reason Times New Roman has Times in it). - If the font has associations with a particular place or time that you want to imbue your system with. - If you give the user themselves the ability to select a font that works best for them (for example a font focused on the dyslexia reading experience in an ereader).
kwhitefoot 4y ago
> if there’s a valid reason why including it would improve the users’ experiences. Such as?
- marc_io 4y ago
  Displaying math equations or specific language characters.
  - kwhitefoot 4y ago
    Which is really quite rare when the page is non-technical and in English so why do so many pages insist on downloading fonts?
    - marc_io 4y ago
      Mostly marketing and branding: the desire for self-expression, to establish a visual identity and a feeling tone in the message.