Yup I’m always here, but often lurking!

Good explaination and good read all and all.

*re-cloaking*!

Rdgs
DT

Its good to see you back here again!

Ah Karim (that man–or at least his pubic persona–does irk me). I have no doubt he is very business savvy. But business acumen isn’t necessarily incompatible with being a stylist. He is without question a very successful stylist, but a stylist none-the-less.

Yes I admit to being just a little polemical with this post. And yes, like all generalizations, these certainly do not apply to all designers and/or stylists. In my defense though, i was following by analogy, the structure proposed in HackNot for the differences between programmers and developers.

And yes I agree that the designer has to wear both hats (plus a few others). This is part of what distinguished a designer from a stylists.

Personally, I would divide your column into 3, Stylist|Designer|Product or Marketing Manager. This is because your points though valid, seem a little extreme and to the poles. In reality not all designers nor stylists behave in this way. Not anyone of any repute that it. Thus I would plonk Designer as the person inbetween, and leave the business focus to that of a product manager.

In reality a designer has to wear both hats and often may have to juggle the requirements of both ends, often giving up or giving into conditions he may or may not want.

Paul Kirley

You seem to have taken offense… at least enough offense to take some rather cheap shots. The only people I could imagine taking offense would be image-over-substance stylists whose naked emperor has been called out. Thanks for identifying yourself.

One of the most basic distinctions between designers and stylists is that stylists have little capacity for critical thought. Their muddled thinking manifests itself in muddled communication. Their writing especially betrays this. Your writing especially betrays this.

“Designers of worth have style.” Perhaps from a narrow, ghettoized (you sound like an industrial designer—sorry, some of my favorite designers are IDs) perspective a sense of style is essential. But what use is style in information system design? Service design? The design of new processes?? Perhaps if you torture the word “style” enough you can make it relevant, but that would be entirely uncharitable. Design is not about looking cool, or one subjectivity’s expression. It is fundamentally about solving the problems people experience (something stylists forget, ignore and deny no matter how often you remind them).

“Products that inspire users become symbols, marking technological advances and innovations in time.” This is the kind of empty gibberish one finds on ID firm sales brochures. Its marketese. It says nothing. Inspire to what? Symbols of what? What does marking an innovation in time even mean??

“Design is a mix of innovative intellect and artistic intuition.” Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Design can often succeed simply by discovering mundane solutions from distant domains that can be easily adapted to the problems at hand. No innovation, not much intellect, and certainly no artistic intuition. Just some plain old pragmatic critical thought, genuine curiosity in the world and people, and a will to keep an open mind.

I won’t waste anymore space picking apart the meaninglessness of most of what you wrote. Sufice it to say, you don’t seem to be in control of your words. That’s telling.

It seems I’ll have to take you by the hand, and slowly explain what I said. Nowhere did I dismiss the relevance of style. I dismissed the primacy of style. Surely you grasp the difference between prioritization and exclusion? Indeed style is a large part of a product’s desirability–scroll down a couple of posts and you’ll see how important desirability is to design in an iNPD model.

Besides, just as the developer can do everything a programmer can so too can the designer do everything a stylist can do. What makes developers and designers more valuable is that they can do so much more, and put it all into proper context. I think I said that. Didn’t you read it?

You’ll have to explain what global awareness (I’ve lived in 8 cities, in 3 countries on 2 continents) and self-esteem have to do with this issue? Perhaps if i knew more about Nepal’s royal family history I would come to believe, like you seem to, that style trumps substance (I’m assuming that’s your position, since mine is the opposite and I’ve offended you by it)?

And “rant like a naive teenager.” Dude, please, if that were true i would have posted this to MySpace. I don’t even have a MySpace account so clearly I’m no teenager.

I’m not sure I’ve pleaded anyone, least of all for attention. Care to specify why you think this? Unless you’re just talking out of you ass. Which is okay too.

And lastly, does your judgment of my mediocrity (and the mediocrity of anyone and everyone who has, does and will agree with me) come from a recognition of a similar mediocrity in yourself, or from your superiority over us? Just curious.

Yes just as developers can program, so to designers can style. Apple is a good example of the power of style, not design. I’ve owned Apples and PCs. With the help of eBay I now only own PCs.

I’m not trying to justify anything. But i do think what is sadder are stylists who pretend to be designer. Its a pose and a fraud. And they damage the entire design profession.

Unfortuantely I agree with your last statement. And unfortunately ego seems to come first, with clients second and users bringing up the rear. My experience with design school is that it is an abysmal waste of time and money.

Jeff,

I don’t think you’ve gone far enough. For instance Dreyfuss was concerned primarily with a product’s usefulness. And his genius was to make beauty serve utility rather than ignore it or let it remain an end itself. I have one of his phones sitting next to a new Nortel phone–it holds up very well.