

Minimalism - ihumanable
http://ihumanable.com/blog/2009/12/minimalism/

======
stcredzero
The "minimalist" staircase in the picture accompanying the article is a
horrible design, IMO. Each step is a very thin pure cantilever. In order to
prevent the step from sagging and sloping unsafely towards the edge, it would
have to be extraordinarily stiff and strong as compared to readily available
building materials. This problem is compounded by the lack of guard rails.
This is not a matter of form following function. This is form _defying_ the
primary function, while leaving out secondary ones, like safety.

A better design with almost the same effect: use a transparent panel,
diagonally following the free edges of the steps, perhaps 1 foot wide, with
cable support form the ceiling at the top. (Or a column from below.) This
preserves the stark effect of the thin cantilevered steps jutting out from the
wall, but gives us a more favorable geometry for structural support. The
transparent material doesn't have to be extremely strong, since the geometry
is favorable. Most of the force can still be borne by the step, but we can
prevent sagging and discourage people from sitting on the edge.

Alternatively, cables can be used to transfer load to the step above and
eventually to the landing, which can be supported by a single column or a
cable to the ceiling. Since the steps will be much stronger cantilevers in the
horizontal direction than in the vertical, due to their geometry, we can take
advantage of this by converting part of their load into the horizontal
direction. The cables will be inexpensive, very strong, and will also
discourage foolish people from sitting on the edge.

    
    
              /
          <--*
            /
        <--*

~~~
Goladus
You describe a more efficient design. If sufficiently strong material is
affordable and used, and safety is not a concern, yours is not necessarily a
"better" design. A transparent panel wouldn't be entirely invisible, and the
visual effect of the staircase would not be the same (or as striking).

~~~
stcredzero
IMO, both the cable supported and transparent beam versions would be nearly as
striking.

Of course, this is all down to aesthetics and judgment about what the design
should prioritize. The designs I describe can be just as strong, or stronger,
and cheaper at the same time, with additional safety features.

EDIT: To clarify, in my designs, there would be only one cable running to the
ceiling, attached to the landing. Alternatively, one could use a transparent
column.

------
spxdcz
I don't think Jeff Atwood was asking for additional features, merely fixing
some of the _obvious_ issues with the original specification: anyone who has
used it a couple of times will have run into the weird_filename_italics_thing.

If the down button on the Apple Remote didn't work, that wouldn't be
'minimalism', it would be broken.

~~~
spxdcz
And a case in point: I reckon that the word 'simply' in the first sentence of
the blog article should be 'simple' (ok, so it could make sense with either
word, but 'simple' would be more readable).

Now, should the author correct the mistake? Or would that not respect the
'minimalism' with which it was written? We wouldn't want to have to produce a
feature-bloated version 2 of the article, would we?

~~~
ihumanable
You are correct, I should have typed simple, it is fixed now, thanks for the
correction.

------
jimmybot
This confuses a minimalist result with a minimalist process.

Minimalism doesn't necessarily mean it takes a minimum amount of time to
arrive at a good solution. It is an aesthetic ideal for the end product where
what can be eliminated is eliminated. It might take quite of bit of trial and
error to get there though.

~~~
danh
Favorite quote time: "I didn't have time to write a short letter, so I wrote a
long one instead" wrote Blaise Pascal (or possibly Mark Twain, or Churchill).

~~~
btilly
Pascal wrote it first, though not very shortly. He actually wrote _Mes
Révérends Pères, mes lettres n'avaient pas accoutumé de se suivre de si près,
ni d'être si étendues. Le peu de temps que j'ai eu a été cause de l'un et de
l'autre. Je n'ai fait celle-ci plus longue que parce que je n'ai pas eu le
loisir de la faire plus courte._ which in English is _My Reverend Fathers, my
letters have not usually followed so closely, nor been so long. The small
amount of time that I have is the cause of both. I would not have made this so
long except that I do not have the leisure to make it shorter._ (Source:
<http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=177502>)

------
btilly
The best example demonstrating that I've seen for how easy it is to just not
"get" minimalism is the famous "what if Microsoft designed the iPod box" video
at <http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=36099539665548298>.

The whole goal of Markdown is to be a simple, easy and stable piece of syntax
that lots of websites can converge on. The _last_ thing you need is to have
multiple versions of it and users having to think about which markup rules a
given site is using.

~~~
apu
You do know that that video was done by MS as an intentional self-parody,
right?

[http://www.ipodobserver.com/ipo/article/Microsoft_Confirms_i...](http://www.ipodobserver.com/ipo/article/Microsoft_Confirms_it_Originated_iPod_Box_Parody_Video/)

~~~
grinich
How can publishing something like that help their efforts?

Likewise, were they responsible for the "Windows 7 Launch Party" video?

~~~
btilly
The idea is obviously to communicate to the people who are part of a broken
marketing process exactly how their well-intentioned efforts to improve
Microsoft's marketing are failing to work.

With the hope, obviously, of reforming the process.

------
jcdreads
In four lines of code he's hidden a ton of complexity and can now completely
avoid thinking about all the low-level garbage.

Markdown similarly hides (automates) all the details of how it generates HTML
from source, and in exchange you give up control over (many) aspects of what
the target HTML looks like.

My car abstracts away from me the details of fuel-air mixtures, gear shifting,
battery recharging, and so forth.

In all of these cases if I want more control I can go get it. The point is
that I don't _have_ to: I can drive the kids to school, document something in
reasonably nice HTML, and get a damn window on the screen without having to
think (as much) about it.

~~~
NathanKP
Sometimes I like to have more fine-tuned control of what is going on in my
code without having to rely on a wrapper between me and the code.

I feel that if everyone uses markdown it will lead over time to less
understanding of what goes on behind the scenes. You have to understand the
low level access before you can properly use a high level library.

------
grgbrn
Am I the only one irked by the use of the non-word 'minimalistic', when the
shorter 'minimal' or 'minimalist' is what is really meant?

It seems like a serious blow to one's minimalist cred. :)

~~~
ihumanable
Minimalistic is a word meaning: of or pertaining to someone or something
advocating smallness

"minimalistic." Dictionary.com's 21st Century Lexicon. Dictionary.com, LLC. 30
Dec. 2009. <Dictionary.com
[http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/minimalistic>](http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/minimalistic>).

~~~
grgbrn
Interesting, that's the first dictionary i've ever seen that lists it -
Merriam-Webster, Cambridge and Websters all claim it's not a word. (As well as
google - "Did you mean: minimalist")

In any case, all three are adjectives with what appear to be interchangeable
meanings, so using the shortest suitable word seems most in the spirit of
minimalism.

------
SlyShy
I've noticed a trend in people calling themselves minimalists. Well, there's
nothing in the minimalist movement that dictates making block quotes obnoxious
to read.

~~~
mdg
This trend also extends to any new framework or library someone writes. The
code is always "fast and lightweight".

------
richcollins
"am a minimalist at heart, I like simple things with clean lines and no
clutter."

Judging from the design of his blog, this must be a guest post.

------
olegk
It's stupid. He's comparing low-level Win32 API to a high-level wrapper called
Qt.

Notice how in his Qt example he lost control of the window style, icon, brush,
cursor, styling of the message box, and a dozen of other little things that
you can do with low level win32 api.

~~~
sp332
You _can_ do all those things with QT, the point is that you don't _have_ to.

~~~
hhjj
I hope QT do error checking for you too then.

------
runjake
Comparing a low-level API like Win32 with a high-level toolkit like Qt FTW.

HelloWorld using C# and Windows Forms is about 10 lines if you do it by hand.

------
0_o
The author didn't know how to use it's/its correctly.

------
mdg
The lesson I am taking from all this is to promise less and deliver more.

