Qualities of Design: It Works and It’s Durable

Published on Oct 13, 2007 (updated Sep 23, 2022), filed under design. (Share this post, e.g., on Mastodon.)

Attempting to improve my simplified definition of design—“design reveals”—I’d like to point out another important attribute beside functionality, namely durability (or robustness). This means that a design—be it physical or intangible—that works may nonetheless be bad if it breaks quickly or needs frequent updating.

We just need to think of an iPod, a product that is usually considered well-designed, and imagine it broke after a few weeks. Or something industrially designed, an excavator for instance, that doesn’t make 100 miles. Or a website that is communicating clearly and converting well but written so poorly that it needs to be refactored each time a new feature is added. Good design, and yet still not good because not robust.

The simplified definition appears to work, and this “extended definition” seems to complement it nicely. Although, almost any definition that filters out decoration may work better than popular readings of design.

About Me

I’m Jens (long: Jens Oliver Meiert), and I’m an engineering lead, guerrilla philosopher, and indie publisher. I’ve worked as a technical lead and manager at various companies (e.g., Google); I’m an active web and tool developer (code optimization, digital defense), a contributor to web standards (like HTML, CSS, WCAG), and a book author (O’Reilly, Frontend Dogma). Stay in touch.