Beauty is more important in computing than anywhere else in technology because software is so complicated. Beauty is the ultimate defense against complexity.
—
David Gelernter, Machine Beauty: Elegance and the Heart of Technology
David Gelernter, Machine Beauty: Elegance and the Heart of Technology
Jeremy
on 05 Jan 09Well said. But you have to be careful about user interfaces that appear elegant and beautiful, only to hide all their complexity in a Settings or Preferences menu.
Kester
on 05 Jan 09Jeffrey – book looks quite an interesting read; can you offer any feedback on this? Worth picking up a second hand copy?
Justin D-Z
on 05 Jan 09Tell that to my wife!
Tomas
on 05 Jan 09It seems poetic, but I don’t think it’s true. Can’t there be beauty in something complex? Maybe he means that the real beauty is making something incredibly complex seem simple…
ZuBsPaCe
on 05 Jan 09Define beauty.
Striving for Beauty is like fighting a holy war you can not win. There will always be someone detesting your sense of beauty.
Joran
on 05 Jan 09And if you want to state that more beautifully, one could reduce still further by substituting the word “beauty” for “simplicity”. In other words:
“Simplicity is more important in computing than anywhere else in technology because software is so complicated. Simplicity is the ultimate defense against complexity.”
Michael
on 05 Jan 09Thrice false. Beauty is more important in things people encounter really. Software is not so complicated as other things. And simplicity is the ultimate defense against complexity.
Nicholas
on 05 Jan 09I think he’s saying that beauty is the best indicator and enforcer of simplicity. Despite our best efforts, maintaining simplicity using an inherently complex tool is difficult, and can become a subjective question. Semantic and technical simplicity, for instance, can compete, creating a place of opinion. Sometimes the best canary in that coalmine is a feeling of beauty. When simplicity has become as subjective as beauty constantly is, beauty is the more familiar subjective decision to make.
GeeIWonder
on 05 Jan 09Beauty is more important in computing than anywhere else in technology because software is so complicated.
Seems like an awfully sweeping statement without much support. Also reeks of self-aggrandizement.
Beauty is the ultimate defense against complexity.
Not quite how I’d put it, but I share the sentiment. I think beauty both reduces and supports complexity.
This is why it’s use to confirm, deny, or intuit structure is ubiquitous throughout science and technology, from particle physics on up.
Peter
on 05 Jan 09I really wish people would stop conflating “simplicity vs complexity” and “order vs. chaos”.
It’s really quite simple:
simplicity + chaos = ugly simplicity + order = boring
complexity + chaos = incomprehensible complexity + order = beautiful
This isn’t rocket science. The human brain is hard wired to avoid simple things that are overly regimented in favour of complex ideas/things/situations that have a certain pattern to them.
Simplicity is the default for lazy and shallow artists. Chances are you’ve just set your sites too low and/or given up too quickly.
GcH
on 05 Jan 09Well, let’s consider human nature for a moment. I would venture to say some of us are willing to put up with the “baggage” as we might call it (when she is not listening, of course) that comes with a beautiful woman. Others appreciate the inner beauty of a woman, one that provides us with the respect and humility we all feel like we deserve. To each his own, but beauty is definitely in the eye of the beholder.
Msbgp
on 05 Jan 09Um. Nooo.
Beauty is not the opposite of complexity. This quote is completely wrong. 37s, if you added some more gloss, gradients, rounded corners, and color, do you thing any of your apps would look better? no. They would look 10x worse. Beauty is often the enemy in any web app.
37signals interfaces are UGLY – from a ‘beauty’ standpoint – but they are good at being simple, and functional.
Case in point – Microsoft Vista. They added so much graphic stuff to vista in the hope to make it better – but it just made it much much worse.
Here are my brief thoughts:
Beauty IS complexity. Pure functional IS simplicity. Functional can be beautiful, but then it loses simplicity.
(read those 3 lines a few more times, and I’m sure it will make sense)
Software is not meant to be art – it is meant to be FUNCTIONAL and SIMPLE.
Beauty WORSENS complexity.
just my 2 cents :)
CJ Curtis
on 05 Jan 09“Beauty” is a big word, but I agree that “beautiful design” makes complex software easier to work with.
But no amount of design or style can make a bad system good.
gvb
on 06 Jan 09I thought this was insightful: Memo to Vendors: Here’s How to Build a Winner
It discusses true simplicity vs. false simplicity (hiding the complexity).
It states that “[t]he real issue is always the user’s physiological feeling of being in control” and discusses how complexity (and other issues) rob the user of his feeling of empowerment.
This discussion is closed.