A public forum for discussing the design of software, from the user interface to the code architecture. Now closed.
There is a compromise on cost I'm afraid -
We want to use good, resiliant materials and will stand up to battering by people, cars and the weather.
And we want it to be well designed and well made, by skillful people.
And we want quick turnaround,
limitation of liability for people who trip over it or when they blow off the curb or those fights you mentioned (thanks for reminding us),
excellent warranty provisions.
And we want it to be really, really cheap.
It should be designed by the best minds in the world and the design should by a timeless one, transcending form and style.
But if it's not free as in beer and open source, we won't accept it. We don't want none of that elitist nonsense like intellectual property ownership, copyrights, trademarks or patents.
Citizens! Until everything is free, we are being oppressed!
Thursday, January 26, 2006
Design (good, bad, or ugly) is a layered activity considering compromise at each step. Take building a sky-scraper as an (simplified) example. The architect’s input to the design is the outside appearance and its functionality for purpose. The structural engineer takes the design to a deeper level providing the physical ground rules to allow it to stay upright and support loads. Later, the construction crews bring the idea to reality and use compromise where the first two activities just can’t be realized.
I believe that these same activities (architecture, systems, and implementation) are represented in sound software design. And no, the output of each activity is not written in stone; you have to adapt to change (for the better).
Friday, January 27, 2006
This topic is archived. No further replies will be accepted.Other recent topics
Powered by FogBugz