In Search of Organic Software An Article by Pirijan Ketheswaran pketh.org Two different kinds of farms can grow vegetables. One is a factory farm built for scale, and the other takes the time to grow more expensive but healthier plants without pesticides. Will everyone appreciate the difference? Of course not, but the latter plants are labelled ‘organic’ to give us the information and the choice, so that those of us who do care can make better decisions. So maybe we should have ‘organic’ software as well, made by companies that: Are not funded in such a way where the primary obligation of the company is to 🎡 chase funding rounds or get acquired (so bootstrapping, crowdfunding, grants, and angel investment are okay) Have a clear pricing page Disclose their sources of funding and sources of revenue softwarebusinessfarming
How I Build An Article by Pirijan Ketheswaran pketh.org In 2014, I wrote about my belief that design and engineering are best when tightly woven together. That’s truer now than ever. If I’m feeling confident, I’ll jump right into my text editor…From here, more functionality is added and the code is tweaked until the feature looks and feels right to me. Whether it’s something simple like this, or prototyping a new interaction like multi-connect, there’s no substitute for designing with real code. In rare cases when I have ideas or plans that I’m less confident about, it’s time to break out the paper, pens, and markers, Because the Kinopio interface elements and aesthetic are full-grown, I almost never use traditional design software anymore. makinginteractioninterfaces
Why Software is Slow and Shitty An Article by Pirijan Ketheswaran pketh.org Roman empire militaryBuilding is never a straight lineConversations, not commandments Planning doesn't make for better software softwareperformance
Form follows failure Imagining how the form of things as seemingly simple as eating utensils might have evolved demonstrates the inadequacy of a "form follows function" argument to serve as a guiding principle for understanding how artifacts have come to look the way they do. Reflecting on how the form of the knife and fork has developed, let alone how vastly divergent are the ways in which Eastern and Western cultures have solved the identical design problem of conveying food to mouth, really demolishes any overly deterministic argument, for clearly there is no unique solution to the elementary problem of eating. What form does follow is the real and perceived failure of things as they are used to do what they are supposed to do. Clever people in the past, whom today we might call inventors, designers, or engineers, observed the failure of existing things to function as well as might be imagined. By focusing on the shortcomings of things, innovators altered those items to remove the imperfections, thus producing new, improved objects. Different innovators in different places, starting with rudimentary solutions to the same basic problem, focused on different faults at different times, and so we have inherited culture-specific artifacts that are daily reminders that even so primitive a function as eating imposes no single form on the implements used to effect it. Henry Petroski, The Evolution of Useful Things Against form follows functionForm follows function evolution