[ID Discuss] Convention versus innovation

[Andrei Herasimchuk]

On Apr 23, 2004, at 2:27 PM, Sandeep Jain wrote:

> Now big buttons isn't exactly an innovation, but it
> does violate a graphic design convention in Windows.

Exactly. That gets at your definition of "innovation." I don't consider 
changing the size of icons or buttons innovative to be honest. 
Innovative is a *very* strong word, so use it sparingly.

If you find yourself debating design issues like this with product 
managers, it tells me you haven't earned their trust or respect yet, 
and need to re-examine what you do and how you have done it in order to 
find a way to get that trust and respect. Designers that have the 
respect and trust of their co-workers rarely find themselves having to 
justify issues like icon size in a design.

So, don't take this the wrong way, but it sounds like you have some 
work to do either to build a reputation as a designer who excels and 
can be trusted with the overall design of the product for the business 
with little interference, or you need to re-examine how you interact 
with your co-workers so they begin to trust you more with this sort of 
decision.

And then you have to pick your battles. Only go to the matt for things 
that really are going to make a difference in a design. Ask yourself, 
is the size of the icons really that big of a deal? When I look back at 
this project five years from now, will it be one of those things I'm 
glad I fought for because it really mattered?

> Now, how can I argue my case? How did the Netscape
> designer argue for big, unconventional toolbar
> buttons?

She didn't to my knowledge. She just made them bigger because they 
looked better at a bigger size (and had more resolution for detail) and 
everyone at Netscape was fine with it. But I honestly don't know. I 
could always ask her. My wife is visiting her this weekend. Would be 
good little bit of history to know anyway.

Andrei