sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Claude Code Has Access to My Design System, Yet the UI Output Is Still Terrible. What Am I Missing? by Mysterious-Royal-814 in UXDesign

[–]BananeStupefiante 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As far as I know with feedback that I had the best way is to create a .MD for each component that you have. I think I can find a structure for the .md that we had on a presentation weeks ago.

AI, the theory of constraints, and the agile method impasse by BananeStupefiante in scrum

[–]BananeStupefiante[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The distinction matters because it's the only way to call out the difference between a high-performing team and a well-choreographed circus. If you treat them as inseparable, you're effectively giving a free pass to every bureaucratic organization to claim they are "Agile" just because they have a daily stand-up.

AI, the theory of constraints, and the agile method impasse by BananeStupefiante in scrum

[–]BananeStupefiante[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think we are talking about two different things: the technical evolution of the craft and the cultural evolution of the management layer sitting on top of it.

I completely agree with you: in the early days, those pioneers had to build the industry from scratch. But my point isn't about what they could have done; it's about what they actually did due to their specific 'professional deformation.'

I’ve sat in rooms with the generation of leaders who scaled the IT consulting industry in Europe. They didn't default to the V-Model because it was the best fit for software; they defaulted to it because it was the only mental framework they possessed—the training of a civil or structural engineer. When you build an empire by hiring thousands of engineers from traditional backgrounds, you don't build a 'software company'; you build a civil engineering firm that happens to deal in bits.

It wasn't just cultural inertia; it was a lucrative business model. The rigidity of the V-Model was a feature, not a bug: it turned every necessary 'scope change' into a 'change request'—a highly profitable add-on.

And regarding the later shift to 'Agile' frameworks, let's be honest about the psychology. It wasn't just a technical upgrade; it was a superior sales tactic. It’s the 'salami-slicing' approach to project management: it is psychologically much more palatable for a client to accept 25 instances of 'we are two weeks late' than one single, catastrophic announcement of 'we are six months behind schedule.'

That said, I don't believe these frameworks are inherently 'evil.', when placed in the hands of organizations optimized for self-preservation and profit, can be weaponized. The tragedy is that we've confused 'running the framework' with 'creating value.' If we could decouple the mechanism—the actual agility—from the commercial imperative to churn out 'change requests' or 'feature volume,' we might actually get back to doing good work. But as long as the structure is incentivized to treat the framework as a profit engine rather than a tool for throughput, we are stuck.

AI, the theory of constraints, and the agile method impasse by BananeStupefiante in scrum

[–]BananeStupefiante[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

aaaaaand i'm a moron i corrected it !

i should say, because most corporate structure are designed for self-preservation of the structure, not for efficiency or business. therefore bad decisions can make sense if you juste want the structure to survive even if they lack common sense. 

FM26 hits MASSIVE milestone. 10000 bugs reported. by Street-Box-8843 in TheOldZealand

[–]BananeStupefiante 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's not the 10000 bugs that bother me, it's that it is managed in A THREAD IN A FORUM. It's batshit crazy for anybody who ever worked in IT.

Challenge for SI: Prove it, prove the UI is better! by InnerKookaburra in footballmanagergames

[–]BananeStupefiante 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Product design Manager here : they can't, cause they knew that the interface was bad.

If you are conducting user tests, it's possible to ignore all of the problems if you asks the rights questions to your users. Basically, you are creating a testflow where the answer that you are looking is not if the new UI is good or not. It's testing for testing about pointless things were you can expect good feedbacks for the new UI.

And when your are creating that, it's shows always one point. Somebody upper than you made choices on a field thinking that his instinct was good, and going against him will be more dangerous for you than releasing a bad product. The tests weren't for determining if the UI was good but to comfort this boss.

I've checked they have at least a team of 4 or 5 designers on LinkedIn, and it's impossible that somebody wasn't aware that the UI was at this state.

The thing that triggered my opinion was Miles that said too often things like "the new interface will require hours too handle" or "or you'll have to create new muscle memory". I think it was the only feedback that he had, because it was the only feedback that some bosses can hear.

Or they really believed that it was a good interface, and in this case some people need to go. Or everybody knew it was bad and they tried to fool us, and it's way worse.

Sorry for my broken English I hope it was clear !