Re: OT design vs programming?

[Mark Sottilaro <sine@zerocrossing.net>]

Yeah, maybe software is really easy, and you're just not very good at it, 
so
it seems hard to you. ;)

lance glover wrote:

> Tom Ritchford wrote:
>
> > >this seems like a really silly statement. following your line of
> > >reasoning i suppose you could say that learning to play the violin
> > >really well is much easier than "getting it right" in hardware or
> > >software engineering.
> >
> > Er, no.
> >
> > The reason design is much easier than software is several-fold.
> >
> > 1. *Most* software projects fail to generate ANY software that actually
> >     functions at all (forget about whether it's GOOD software).
> >
> >     It's very rare for design to not function at all (ie, you forget
> >     the name of the book on your cover).
> >
> >     This is why it's hard -- because you might fail.
>
> there are many ways to define failure. most of the design i see fails in
> one aspect or another. i think we're all concerned with that. programmers
> aren't the only ones...
>
> > secondarily:
> >
> > 2. The amount of study and learning required just to keep up
> >     in engineering is daunting and vast.
> >
> >     If I stopped reading and researching for three years, I'd
> >     be unemployable.  I spend at least 10 hours a week, week in and
> >     week out, studying just to keep up with the field.
> >
> >     Now, I know a lot of designers, a heck of a lot of designers!
> >     and none of them have to swot like that.
>
> i know an awful lot myself, and most of 'em work really long hours. so
> maybe the sweat is applied differently. you're in a
> technologically-intensive field, and you need to keep up with the pace of
> technology. my brother is a neurobiologist, and he has to study more than
> you to keep up in his field, but i put in just as many hours a week as he
> does, and to learn to work in the various modalities that i've had the
> opportunity to work in requires a *heck* of a lot of learning! though no
> one is publishing textbooks or manuals on the subject...
>
> > Sure, they read
> >     design magazines and get books on the subject but generally
> >     they can keep plying their skills without any research.
>
> yeah, those skills are innate, and when designers aren't flexing them we
> just sip lattes and scan a few issues of domus :-)
>
> >
> >     Photoshop still has the same features it did three years ago.
> >     It wouldn't take you more than a day to learn what's changed.
>
> sure, though i think a *day* might leave you wanting; but the complexity
> of the tool has incredibly little to do with the quality of the end
> product.
>
> >
> >     Quark has barely changed at all.
>
> neither has the echoplex. but i still find new ways of using it. this is
> complexity on the human side.
>
> >     (And frankly, most of the top designers I've met have no
> >     particular mastery of their tools -- they have worked up
> >     a good design sense, is all...)
>
> what does it mean to "work up a good design sense"? as far as being "top
> designers" with no mastery of their tools, well, i doubt they'd be tops 
>in
> my book.
>
> >
> > I hasten to add:
> >
> > 1. Mastering the violin is hard by any definition.
>
> agreed. but to use your arguments as to why programming is harder than
> design, has the violin changed much lately? and how many publications and
> manuals are required reading to keep up one's practice on it? and what
> happens if you *fail*? i suppose you don't get the job at the
> philharmonic...so you end up waiting tables, or programming software, or
> doing graphic design...
>
> > 2. Just because one discipline is harder than another
> >     doesn't mean that there's any moral virtue attached
> >     to it.
>
> i agree. absolutely. but i don't think you can argue about the relative
> difficulty of a discipline unless you've actually done it (and i don't
> think your forays into web design qualify you any more than kim's working
> out the faceplate design of the edp qualifies him as a graphic designer-
> no dis to kim...i LIKE the way my edp stands out in the rack! even if the
> four plastic knobs on the function pots ARE a bit cheap (my only real
> quibble)...:-)
>
> >
> > 3. If I need something designed, I get a designer!
> >     Which was where I started in this long thread.
>
> any profession or craft has potential for mastery or mediocrity. if i 
>need
> something programmed i'll get a programmer, but i'll damn well look for a
> good one!
>
> lance g.