We see bad design around us all the time.  Often adequate design wins over great design .  In a ecosystem based on limited resources (time, money, component parts, etc.) at what point does a better design start giving diminishing returns?  Is this a good thing? – That problem has been solved we should move on to the next – or is it a bad thing?  – The solution to that problem causes adverse side effects but the cost of fixing it is too high.  In a world of limited resources it often takes a large catalyst or new markets to disrupt entrenched adequate design. I suspect there are good and bad sides to every decision here with some situations leaning further one way or the other.

That is a good leeway into my next thought about design in that decision making is a huge part of good design.  Decisions are hard.  Avoiding them has its cost.  My favourite is that collectively avoiding a decision makes it harder for other decisions to be made down the road.  You need to decide if it is worth the cost.

[read this post in: ar de es fr it ja ko pt ru zh-CN ]