To the casual observer the difference is a question of the use of logicI’m not the first person to state that programmers’ and designers’ minds work differently. However, I don’t believe the difference is what most people expect.
To the casual observer, the conflict between programmers and designers is a question of the use of logic. That is, programmers approach tasks logically and designers approach them creatively or expressively. This false dichotomy mistakes a programmer with the program he is writing and a designer with a fine artist or poet.
In truth, good programming requires design (efficiency, good planning etc.) as much as design itself. Also, designers must employ logical, proven techniques to solve such problems as usability and clear visual structure.
In my experience, the real difference is that – whilst good programmers approach tasks with design in mind – they have difficulty seeing beyond the internal design of the application to ask whether it is appropriate or apprehensible for the imagined user. This by no means applies to all programmers but it is a trend I have noticed.
If we continue to view programmers as unapproachable automatons, letting them get on with their work without taking interest, they will go on seeking out irrelevant challenges. And who can blame them?
At the same time, if we insist on designers being relegated to mindless, arty, poo-polishing tasks (keeping them at arm’s length from the programming), then our projects will continue to consist of functionally inept eye candy.
The Internet is not great because you can exchange digital sword blowsThe web now offers us a multitude of ways to interact with friends, colleagues and strangers. From posting comments and instant messaging to the more experiential Second Life and massively multiplayer games, the keyword is ‘social’.
To some this is revolutionary; to others it is rather sad. I fall into the second camp and prefer my social interactions to occur face-to-face and, preferably, in a pub. I don’t need to know what my friends or family are doing minute-by-minute (see Twitter) and I don’t expect to hear from my colleagues unless what they have to say is on topic and of rare import.
The Internet is not great because you can exchange digital sword blows or banal domestic details, nor is it great because you can write “amazing post, man” or “you fag” on someone’s blog. The Internet is great because you can easily access, search and sort information; everything from what’s on at the cinema to what the acronym TWAIN stands for.
In case you’re interested (which I was, so I looked it up on the web) TWAIN stands for Technology Without an Interesting Name. So now you know.