ux ● 625 words ● 3 minutes read

UX and a Problem Called Perfectionism in Design

Reinventing the wheel may sound too stupid or vain but have you ever thought some stuff may be so much better if we had our current knowledge and had a chance to invent them? To reinvent the wheel is to duplicate a basic method that has already previously been created or optimized by others.

In design, making new standards or exiting standards is becoming a taboo. no so many people dare to design out of trends or standards. 10 years ago, designing a mobile version of a website was usual, now? silly.

So many people believe that stuff invented, are the best possible but why do we have the update thing or to say it better, why do we create new standards?

A lot of UX designers are searching for methods to make perfection but they never have searched for imperfection. I don’t want to explain how brightness appears wherever darkness is, but I have my point.

After the big bang, raw energy was transformed into matter. If the energy of the early universe had cooled into equal amounts of matter and antimatter, these different forms of matter would have annihilated each other, leaving no matter in the universe. Instead, there was substantially more matter than antimatter, enough so that when all the antimatter had been annihilated by matter, enough matter was left to make up the visible universe. This early difference between matter and antimatter is called baryon asymmetry.

Asymmetry is one of the causes our universe is made, so it’s not hard to believe it can make other things. Symmetry is too important for a lot of designers and it is becoming a serious issue in the designing industry. For example about 10 months ago, in Oct 2017, people were posting pictures of mistakes of Google’s logo and they were upset about not being symmetrical but look at it, it’s exactly imperfection and asymmetry that made it this great.

### Google logo is triggering some perfectionists

“The final logotype was tested exhaustively at various sizes and weights for maximum legibility in all the new digital contexts.” It is set in a custom sans-serif typeface and maintains the multi-colored playfulness, a reminder that Google always tries to stay unconventional.

This explanation, however, will never satisfy true geometric perfectionists.

So they started fixing it.

### Google logo is triggering some perfectionists

But while people are questioning Google’s visual decisions

### Google logo is triggering some perfectionists

For example, the asymmetrical form of their logo

### Google logo is triggering some perfectionists

Its varying thickness

### Google logo is triggering some perfectionists

But in conclusion, is Google logo a disaster? Could it be better? Is it making people (consciously or unconsciously) uncomfortable? No! Google logo couldn’t be better cause it’s Google logo. Wherever we see it, we know it’s Google and we use the products even if we know product design is not perfect or asymmetrical, cause it’s not about the perfection, it’s about the feelings.

Are We Going to Make Imperfection a New Perfection?

Clearly, trends are made up like regulations. They’re not rules of nature, they’re made-up rules of humans. So, Are we going to make a new perfection named imperfection? Also no.

People, nowadays, are so much smarter than before. They now search about designs and want to know about them. A lot of people unconsciously have a slight obsessive compulsive disorder and the “symmetry factor” which is correlated highly with obsessions related to ordering, counting, and symmetry, as well as repeating compulsions. So be careful who do you perform your product for, cause perfection and imperfection and also symmetry and asymmetry are best possible duo together.