Wouldn't the door design be completely dependent on the goal of the customer/user? Eg. this door represented in the article wouldn't be ideal as a high traffic entrance to a grocery store. Seems like this door tackles a specific problem just like other doors (at least well designed ones) tackle specific problems.
Not sure if it makes sense to generalize this to be the 'epitome' of UX design...
Yeah, we never know why this door exists in the first place. The job that this door is doing is pretty specific but we don't know a lot about it. Where is it? For who? Why? When is it used? How is it used? Do people even use their hands to open it? What if it's a warehouse door and people who use it always have stuff in their hands and they actually end up opening it with their back? What is it about the two rooms that makes a separation important? This article doesn't really get into that stuff. It's just a solution to a specific problem that we don't know about.
I'm convinced all Medium articles are an attempt to see how far the Silicon Valley culture can get away with. I tend to view most Medium articles as complete satire. That's how I stay sane.
Design is [ insert inanimate object here ]
why even have a door at all?
Firstly, it looks horrible. I'd never put it in my home/office.
Secondly, I have 20 doors to replace in my home. Your 'amazing' door costs $600 a pop (not including the electrician to install the wiring).
I can only afford $100 a door.
Reminds me of "The Design of Everyday Things" and "Norman Doors".
Door's are UI not UX.
The door is just one interactive element in the larger experience of the building.
The building is just an assemblage of interactive elements in the larger experience of the city, etc.
This is a sophism to justify the absence of applicable skills in a given field, and at the same time bullshit one's way into a leadership position with uninformed clients.
I had to look up 'sophism' and yet I still don't understand this comment.
I appreciate it's probably because you are smarter than I.
I thought the lightswitch was pretty much as good as UX gets.
What's up with the font rendering on chrome?
I understand the points the author is trying to make, but the metaphor just doesn't work. It actually makes it harder to understand.
The idea that everything digital has to be related back to a "real-world" concept for people to understand isn't really necessary anymore.