> This is precisely the issue with UX-led processes. When you're dealing with very hard engineering problems, you really don't yet know enough to be designing a

> This is precisely the issue with UX-led processes. When you're dealing with very hard engineering problems, you really don't yet know enough to be designing a product. I suppose we can get into the weeds on how you define "designing a product," but under the right circumstances targeting a specific experience and working backwards to the technology has pretty clear benefits. Ignoring Apple - because this kind of over-the-top process is just how they're wired - look at something like a modern automatic defibrillator. Literally any human being can use one with zero training because the goal was "make a defibrillator that someone can operate with one button" from the beginning. If your goal is instead e.g. "make this existing defibrillator easier to use," you might still end up with a really good product but you probably don't have something that my mom could reasonably be expected to deploy if she runs across someone having a heart attack on the street.