Almost all designs offer a compromise between maximizing for the user and for the system. Constraints like materials, budget, time, practicality, needs, wants, etc… make concessions necessary. No one implementation can do everything for everyone. Hence, good designs typically plan the best for the most. It’s design by democracy.
As some point, a compromise in design has left you wondering, “What were they thinking?” The competing goals are what make design hard. Most product manufacturers simply choose the largest market and move on.
The struggle to maximize for either the user or the system is an opportunity when the system or user changes.
The classic example of such market disruption is in the early hard disk industry. As incumbent market leaders continued their focus on the status quo system (mainframes) and user needs (maximum storage), competitors noticed a different system emerging. The push towards personal PCs changed the user need from storage capacity (on a mainframe) to size (able to fit in a PC).
A similar shift of system is happening with cars in America. It made economical sense for years for us to drive around with 3 of 4 (or 9 of 10) seats empty in heavy cars with huge engines because gas was cheap. That system is quickly fading as a result of the same consumption patterns. Alternatives such as hybrids, bikes, and tennis shoes are taking market share.
Design is hard. A design is often narrowly focused and maximizing for a very specific system and user need. Detecting a shift in either means you have a business opportunity.
