Hacker News Reader

Comment by jenius | Hacker News Reader

I read this article and immediately jumped into the comments, praying that there would be a comment like this - thank you. Very well put -- details are what separate an amateur from a master.

To add what little I can to this, the reason that drives me to go to these lengths is the craft. Design, like code, is a craft. A good craftsman just does not leave mistakes in their work purposely. Whenever I do this it slowly drives me crazy until I either go back and fix it, or drop the project entirely (if there are a lot of mistakes and/or things I don't really like), usually citing some reason like 'it's too messy' or 'i lost interest'.

For me, design and programming are not all about a/b testing, 100% time efficiency, etc. A lot of it is about art -- making something you know is great and shipping it. When you know something is wrong with your work as an artist, it will bother you until it's fixed.

View on HN

Have you considered that not every piece of software needs to be a masterwork?

I am a lead designer, and I know that not every piece needs to be a masterwork, but ever piece of software does need to ship.

I don't understand where people are getting the idea that we are to ignore balance, constraints, and reality in deciding how to complete a project.

Absolutely not the case. We're talking about quality specifically, and why someone might choose to pay attention to finer details versus ignoring them.

Your reasons for ignoring details might be perfectly valid and entirely appropriate. The project may not call for artistry and mastery. All very good points for a different discussion.

Don't think for a moment that those who believe high quality is an important factor are implying that it is absolutely necessary. That is simply a false dilemma.

My answer to the parent comment is more or less exactly this. If you're just trying to ship a mediocre quality product, that's fine. I know there's a place for that and let's face it, sometimes it ends up happening at work because of contraints. But that is never, ever my goal.

"Details are what separate an amateur from a master." -- even more well put! Thanks.

I'd venture to say that it takes much more then just details to separate an amateur from a master. Knowledge of theory, an eye for errors big and small, etc. Maybe the details separate the good from the best?

Well, he didn't say "Details are necessary and sufficient to separate an amateur from a master," now did he?

Oh good, I am right...

My point was that the ONLY thing that was listed was details being the separating point, and that there is more to it then that. It wasn't meant as a quip just a clarification, if anything a question even, not requiring a snarky answer but maybe a genuine one. But, I forget, I'm on the internet and snarky is everyone's default for whatever reason.

No I'm pretty sure I'm snarky in real life. It's a problem.

Basically "I completely agree with you, but wish to do so in a humorous and sarcastic manner." Apologies.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com