无关紧要的诗句_意见设计窃对您的用户无关紧要

无关紧要的诗句

It’s been said that everything is a remix. Product design is no different. In her article “Following Trends: Homage vs. Design Plagiarism” author Cameron Chapman says, “Every designer in the world is working with roughly the same basic tools: the same range of colors, the same interfaces, the same alphabets, the same shapes. How they put them together varies widely, of course. But regardless of the end result, are any of them really original?”

据说一切都是混音 。 产品设计无异。 卡梅伦·查普曼(Cameron Chapman)在她的文章《跟随趋势：敬意与设计抄袭》中说：“世界上每个设计师都使用大致相同的基本工具：相同的颜色范围，相同的界面，相同的字母，相同的形状。 当然，他们如何将它们组合在一起。 但是，不管最终结果如何，它们中的任何一个都是真的吗？”

The boundary between creative inspiration and creative theft has been defined and discussed at length by many groups more qualified than I. But what I find most interesting is the role design plagiarism plays in the user experience of a software product. The answer appears to be…none. That is to say, design plagiarism doesn’t matter to your user.

创意灵感和创意盗窃之间的界限已经由比我更胜任的许多小组进行了详细定义和讨论。但是，我发现最有趣的是设计design窃在软件产品的用户体验中扮演的角色。 答案似乎是……无。 也就是说， 设计窃对您的用户无关紧要 。

Granted, there is a difference between copying feature functionality and user experience vs. copying the brand or visual design of another product. Corporate wars have been fought over this throughout time, and it’s definitely a large discussion. Here, I’ll try to briefly distinguish the two and provide some insight.

当然，复制功能和用户体验与复制其他产品的品牌或视觉设计之间存在差异。 公司战争一直以来都在为此而战，这无疑是一个很大的讨论。 在这里，我将尝试简要区分两者并提供一些见解。

视觉设计 (Visual Design)

Decades ago, websites seemed to operate more as canvases for the individual expression, whether it be of a brand or a person. There was little thought to giving the user predictability, recognizable patterns, or clear calls to action. I’m looking at you, Space Jam Website.

几十年前，网站似乎更多地充当个人表达的画布，无论是品牌还是个人。 几乎没有想到给用户可预测性，可识别的模式或明确的行动号召。 我在看着你， 太空果酱网站 。

Recently, the aesthetic of apps, devices, and the web has become more homogenized. It’s obvious now which visual styles and interaction patterns we favor most to help communicate ideas and functionality to users. White space, drop shadows, careful use of color, flat illustration with abstract human form, card navigation, mobile-first views, and gentle easing in animations, are all prolific. If websites were the fashion industry in the 90s, the aforementioned list would all be an acid wash denim jacket.

最近，应用程序，设备和网络的美感变得更加同质化。 现在显而易见，我们最喜欢哪种视觉样式和交互模式来帮助向用户传达想法和功能。 白色空间，阴影，谨慎使用颜色，带有抽象人形的平面插图，卡片导航，移动优先视图以及动画的缓和效果都非常丰富。 如果网站是90年代的时装行业，则上述列表都将是防酸洗牛仔夹克。

The visual design of brands is becoming increasingly similar as successful tech and lifestyle products set a certain tone that designers wish to replicate to signal that their website, app, or service is in the same quality realm.

随着成功的技术和生活方式产品设定了设计师希望复制的某种语气，以表明其网站，应用程序或服务处于相同的质量境界，品牌的视觉设计变得越来越相似。

Your users are humans like you who respect artistic integrity, good intentions, and pure origins. They’re not soulless jackals who reward thievery or prefer cold pizza. But what they are consuming is often simply a tool. Perhaps it’s a tool designed to broadcast art and beauty or knowledge and wisdom, but still a tool. And a tool’s most important function is to be usable and to get a job done. Ultimately, the user only cares about how well the tool they’re using does the job. Thus, it falls to the designer to care about copying someone else’s visual design. While the possibility of visual similarity will always exist in similar products, true visual design plagiarism is uncreative and should be avoided.

您的用户是像您一样尊重艺术完整性，良好意图和纯正血统的人类。 他们不是无情的jack狼，他们会奖励或喜欢冷比萨饼。 但是他们所消费的通常只是一种工具。 也许这是一个旨在传播艺术与美丽或知识与智慧的工具，但仍然是一种工具。 工具最重要的功能是可用性和完成工作。 最终，用户只关心他们使用的工具完成工作的程度。 因此，设计师可以考虑复制他人的视觉设计。 尽管相似产品中总是存在视觉相似性的可能性，但真正的视觉设计窃是无创的，应避免。

用户体验设计 (UX Design)

User experiences are also becoming more standardized. On the one hand, industry leaders have established a template for success that is easily replicable. On the other hand, the platforms on which we navigate the internet have matured as tools and therefore developed recognizable patterns. Tools need to be easily identified, operated, and maintained. Tools are a means to an end. Creative liberties now exist more in the content produced online rather than in how you present the content to the user.

用户体验也越来越标准化。 一方面，行业领导者已经建立了易于复制的成功模板。 另一方面，我们在互联网上浏览的平台已经成为一种工具，因此发展了可识别的模式。 工具必须易于识别，操作和维护。 工具是达​​到目的的手段。 现在，自由创作更多地存在于在线制作的内容中，而不是您向用户展示内容的方式中。

In many cases, a brilliant product team comes up with a new feature, a new interaction, a new style, a new technology, a new something. Then, other product teams in the same or similar industries may use that new something as inspiration, or simply adopt it verbatim as a new standard to be practiced by all. It’s hard to know where the plagiarism line is, especially when implementing something that is perceived to benefit technology work in general. From hamburger menus to swipe interactions, it’s difficult to assign ownership in perpetuity for the best new way of doing something.

在许多情况下，出色的产品团队会提供新功能，新交互，新样式，新技术和新功能。 然后，相同或相似行业中的其他产品团队可能会使用该新东西作为灵感，或者只是逐字采用它作为所有人都将实践的新标准。 很难知道the窃线在哪里，尤其是当实施某些被认为有益于总体技术工作的东西时。 从汉堡菜单到滑动交互，要永久地分配所有权以寻求最佳的新工作方式是很困难的。

When a user sees the same interaction pattern inside two different apps, they may notice it, it may even become a talking point, but it will not be truly interruptive to their experience. It certainly won’t keep them from deriving value from whichever product incorporates the best implementation of said pattern for the best overall experience. This is because users have a job to be done when they engage with a product, and their primary motivation is getting that job done as effectively as possible. They don’t care who does it.

当用户在两个不同的应用程序中看到相同的交互模式时，他们可能会注意到它，甚至可能成为话题 ，但这并不会真正打断他们的体验。 当然，无论哪种产品结合了上述模式的最佳实现方式以及最佳的整体体验，都不会阻止他们从中获取价值。 这是因为用户在使用产品时有一项工作要做，而他们的主要动机是尽可能有效地完成这项工作。 他们不在乎是谁做的。

Snapchat vs Instagram (Snapchat vs Instagram)

One of the best modern examples of this phenomenon is Snapchat Stories. These are brief photos or videos, sometimes chained together to create a longer narrative, that can be shared with a user’s network of friends with little thought to curation or timing because they only exist in the audience’s view for a period of a few hours or days. The “Stories” feature is just another application of Snapchat’s brilliant idea to create an interaction pattern centered around sharing disposable content. This proves very effective at three things:

Snapchat Stories是这种现象的最好的现代例子之一。 这些是简短的照片或视频，有时链接在一起以创建更长的叙述，可以与用户的朋友网络共享，而很少考虑策展或时间安排，因为它们仅在观众的视野中存在数小时或数天。 “故事”功能只是Snapchat出色创意的另一种应用，它创建了一个以共享一次性内容为中心的交互模式。 事实证明这在三件事上非常有效：

1. Increasing user engagement by increasing the presence of variable reward

   通过增加可变奖励的存在来增加用户参与度

2. Catering to short attention spans and low device storage
   满足较短的关注时间和较低的设备存储空间
3. Matching the stream-of-consciousness style of social media consumption
   匹配社交媒体消费的意识流风格

Smash cut to 2016 when Instagram releases its own version of a story feature, built using almost identical interaction patterns (and similar visual design) as Snapchat stories. At the time, there was widespread criticism and commentary in the media. But, users of both platforms didn’t protest Instagram as a copycat. Instead, they quietly experimented with the Instagram version of stories, and soon abandoned Snapchat in droves. They realized that the “job” of connecting with friends and peers by sharing visual snippets of their life via social media could more effectively be done with Instagram. Often, we confuse barriers to exit as consumer loyalty. If switching costs are low (as in the example of a Snapchat user who has also built out a network of friends on Instagram) users are only as loyal as the value they derive from the product.

当Instagram发布自己版本的故事功能时，Smash截止到2016年，该功能使用与Snapchat故事几乎相同的交互模式(和类似的视觉设计)构建。 当时，媒体上普遍存在批评和评论。 但是，两个平台的用户都没有抗议Instagram是模仿者。 相反，他们悄悄地尝试了Instagram版本的故事，并很快将Snapchat抛弃了。 他们意识到，通过社交媒体分享生活中的视觉片段，与朋友和同伴建立联系的“工作”可以更有效地通过Instagram完成。 通常，我们将壁垒与消费者忠诚度混为一谈。 如果转换成本很低(例如Snapchat用户也已在Instagram上建立了朋友网络的示例)，则用户的忠诚度与其从产品中获得的价值一样忠诚。

Instagram Stories (Left) and Snapchat Stories (right)

Instagram故事(左)和Snapchat故事(右)

When seeking inspiration on how to solve a user problem, there’s no shame in looking to who has done it best. I’ve spoken to product professionals from renowned companies like Facebook, Lyft, and Google, who have admitted that in some cases, the best patterns for a particular use case already exist. The case against UX plagiarism is far weaker than against copying the visual design or brand identity. Without recognizable and repeatable elements, the internet would be a much tougher place to navigate.

当寻求有关如何解决用户问题的灵感时，寻找谁做得最好就不会感到羞耻。 我已经与来自Facebook，Lyft和Google等知名公司的产品专业人士进行了交谈，他们承认在某些情况下，特定用例的最佳模式已经存在。 反对UX pla窃的理由远不及复制视觉设计或品牌标识的理由。 如果没有可识别且可重复的元素，互联网将是一个更加艰难的导航场所。

采取正确的心态 (Adopt the right mindset)

Some might lament a supposed loss of creativity in the modern age of web and product design, but perhaps it’s just the internet getting better at one of its most important attributes: accessibility. Digital interfaces today are more homogenous but also more useful.

在现代的Web和产品设计时代，有些人可能会为自己的创造性丧失感到遗憾，但也许只是互联网在其最重要的特性之一上变得越来越好：可访问性。 今天的数字接口更加同质，但也更加有用。

If users don’t care about design plagiarism, should you as the designer? The answer is yes, to a reasonable extent. An understanding of what constitutes plagiarism in design is a start. In my research, a few core guidelines have emerged that will help anyone stay on the right side of the conversation:

如果用户不关心设计窃，您应该作为设计师吗？ 答案是肯定的。 了解设计中抄袭的构成是一个开始。 在我的研究中，出现了一些核心准则，这些准则将帮助任何人保持对话的正确性：

• Research the subject matter and the experts.
  研究主题和专家。
• Make improvements or add something new to the original.
  进行改进或在原始文档中添加新内容。
• Don’t rely on one source of inspiration.
  不要依靠一种灵感来源。

These are great rules of engagement for product designers looking outward for creative assistance. But, the true secret sauce of any good product can also be found in places other than the finished result. What’s your relationship with and understanding of your customers? What’s your team dynamic and culture? What’s your development and testing process? These are aspects of your product output that are far more difficult to imitate. These can be things your team takes pride and joy in defining for themselves, as every company’s needs are unique.

这些是产品设计师向外寻求创意帮助的重要参与规则。 但是，任何优质产品的真正秘诀也可以在最终结果之外的其他地方找到。 您与客户之间的关系和了解是什么？ 您的团队动力和文化是什么？ 您的开发和测试流程是什么？ 这些是产品输出中很难模仿的方面。 这些都是您的团队为自己定义而感到自豪和喜悦的事情，因为每个公司的需求都是独特的。

不要重新发明轮子 (Don’t reinvent the wheel)

At Weave, I’ve struggled as a designer to distinguish the experiences I create from other leaders in our product space. Weave incorporates many features like messaging, chat, phone service, and scheduling that combine to make a complete business toolbox. It’s easy to find examples of features like these whose UX has already been optimized in adjacent products. At times, I’ve found myself wasting time attempting to reinvent the wheel purely to avoid comparisons or accusations of copying.

在Weave时 ，我一直努力以设计师的身份将自己创造的体验与产品领域的其他领导者区分开。 Weave整合了许多功能，例如消息传递，聊天，电话服务和计划，这些功能结合在一起构成了一个完整的业务工具箱。 容易找到类似功能的示例，这些功能的UX已经在相邻产品中进行了优化。 有时，我发现自己是在浪费时间尝试纯粹是在重新发明轮子，以避免比较或指责复制。

A product thought leader, founder, and author (who will remain anonymous) once told me, “I don’t care whether I’m chasing or copying my competition as long as the outcome is what my customer needs.” This seems like a radical perspective, especially when considering popular adages like “race to the bottom” that warn against matching features or mirroring your competitors. We often extol being “different” and “innovative” because there is much pride attached to the act of invention. However, in the context of product development, attempting to innovate just to remain distinguished can limit our focus on the user's needs. In the end, our greatest obligation is to solve their problem.

产品思想领袖，创始人和作者(将保持匿名)曾经告诉我：“只要结果是客户所需的，我就不在乎是追还是抄我的竞争对手。” 这似乎是一种激进的观点，尤其是在考虑流行的格言时，例如“竞相竞争”，警告不要匹配功能或镜像竞争对手。 我们经常称赞自己“与众不同”和“创新”，因为发明行为具有很多自豪感。 但是，在产品开发的背景下，尝试创新以保持卓越性可能会限制我们对用户需求的关注。 最后，我们最大的义务是解决他们的问题。

You may not have noticed, but Netflix recently adopted a new interaction pattern for navigating in a video player. Originally found on Youtube, the interaction allows you to tap the screen twice (independent of the fast forward or pause buttons) to skip ahead in increments of 10 or more seconds. I have loved this interaction pattern as implemented by Youtube. So, when I saw Netflix do it, I wasn’t upset (*crying* “But me and Youtube used to do that…it was our special thing!”). I saw it as the functionality I wanted and expected. It was pleasing.

您可能没有注意到，但是Netflix最近采用了一种新的交互模式来在视频播放器中导航。 最初在Youtube上发现，这种互动使您可以轻按两次屏幕(与快进或暂停按钮无关)，以10或更多秒的增量向前跳。 我喜欢YouTube实施的这种互动模式。 因此，当我看到Netflix做到这一点时，我并不感到沮丧(*哭泣*“但是我和Youtube曾经这样做过……这是我们的特别！”)。 我将其视为我想要和期望的功能。 太好了

诚信行事，但最重要的是，解决问题 (Act with integrity, but above all, solve the problem)

Visual design plagiarism is an issue and should be avoided. UX plagiarism is trickier, and probably admissible in benefit to the user. To maintain a clear code of ethics in both cases, ask yourself a few questions:

视觉设计窃是一个问题，应避免。 UX窃更为棘手，可能对用户有利。 为了在两种情况下都保持清晰的道德规范，请问自己几个问题：

• “Have I researched the subject matter and seen the expert's solutions?
  “我是否研究了主题并看到了专家的解决方案？
• Am I adding something new to the solution I’m taking inspiration from?
  我是在从中汲取灵感的解决方案中添加新的东西吗？
• Am I relying on more than one inspiration source?
  我是否依赖多个灵感来源？
• Is the finished design the best possible solution to the original problem?
  完成的设计是对原始问题的最佳解决方案吗？

When it comes to product design, if someone else already thought of the best way to solve a problem, then lean on their solution. In some cases, the margin for potential improvement is razor-thin, and the cost of innovation cannot be justified and shouldn’t be attempted. If your product is the one that yields inspiration or even pure imitation from others, be flattered. Above all, solve the problem.

在产品设计方面，如果其他人已经想到了解决问题的最佳方法，那么请依靠他们的解决方案。 在某些情况下，潜在改进的余地太小了，创新的成本无法辩解，也不应尝试。 如果您的产品是从他人那里获得灵感甚至纯粹模仿的产品，那就受宠若惊。 首先，解决问题。

翻译自: https://medium.com/weave-lab/opinion-design-plagiarism-doesnt-matter-to-your-user-8ed6129d68f

无关紧要的诗句