Related: human-oriented design in general. Every interface nowadays seems to be defined by the designer's whims and pure aesthetics, not what would actually be functional for users.
Related: human-oriented design in general. Every interface nowadays seems to be defined by the designer's whims and pure aesthetics, not what would actually be functional for users.
> not what would actually be functional for users
Functional is ugly and ugly doesn't sell. This has been a problem with product design for decades: durability, usability, safety is all ignored in favor of whatever visual flair maximizes impulse buying. How the product performs when the owner actually uses it is irrelevant. Even worse dynamics are at play when it comes to advertising-supported software services. We've gone from a race to the bottom to a race to hell.
My friend is an Industrial Designer, and works on Faucets, probably one of the last interfaces replaceable by a touch screen. Their design pipeline is years long. They build multiple prototypes and mock them with real humans, and get the space to actually watch people use them. I have very rarely seen a UX designer get more space to experiment than a InVision mockup. So of course what they design is disconnected.
"at most weeks".
I've seen MVP's take far longer than that and still be considered minimal. Minimal is contextual.