Geordee Naliyath

Geek of All Trades

[Yann LeCun @ylecun]

If you are a student interested in building the next generation of AI systems, don't work on LLMs

[Elizabeth Laraki @elizlaraki]

15 years ago, I helped design Google Maps.

I still use it everyday.

Last week, the team dramatically changed the map’s visual design.

I don’t love it.

It feels colder, less accurate and less human.

But more importantly, they missed a key opportunity to simplify and scale.

–––

Google Maps has started to widely roll out updated map colors:

- All roads are now gray

- Water changed from blue to teal

- Parks and open spaces are now mint green

It seems the goal was to improve usability and make the maps more readable.

Admittedly, I do think major roads, traffic, and trails stand out more now.

But the colors of water and parks/open spaces blend together.

And to me, the palette feels colder and more computer generated.

But color choices aside…

If the goal was better usability, the team missed a big opportunity:

Google Maps should have cleaned up the crud overlaying the map.

–––

So much stuff has accumulated on top of the map.

Currently there are ~11 different elements obscuring it:

- Search box

- 8 pills overlayed in 4 rows

- A peeking card for “latest in the area”

- A bottom nav bar

(Personally, I would LOVE to see usage metrics for all these overlays.)

The map should be sacred real estate.

Only things that are highly useful to many people should obscure it.

There should be a very limited number of features that can cover the map view.

And there are multiple ways to add new features without overlaying them directly on the map.

–––

Here’s how it could look:

- Keep the search box

- Keep the bottom bar

- Remove everything else from the map

- Roll the most used features into the bottom bar

- Bury the less used features elsewhere in the app

I assume the search box and directions are top priority and should remain prominent.

My Location and map layers (satellite, traffic, etc.) could move to the bottom bar.

The explore overlays (restaurants, gas, etc.) could live in the bottom bar in “Explore” and open as cards.

The additional space in the bottom bar could be used for Saved, as a “More” option, or could be removed entirely.

There are many variations of how features could be arranged.

But the key points are:

- Dramatically simplify

- Strongly prioritize map visibility

- Bury legacy and low use features

–––

It’s normal for products to accumulate features over time.

But it’s also super important to stay vigilant and continually clean them up.

In many ways, it’s interesting to see history repeating itself.

In 2007, I was 1 of 2 designers on Google Maps.

At that time, Maps had already become a cluttered mess.

We were wedging new features into any space we could find in the UI.

The user experience was suffering and the product was growing increasingly complicated.

We had to rethink the app to be simple and scale for the future.

It seems like it’s time for Google Maps to do this again…

–––

For more on design + tips for early stage founders, follow me on X: @elizlaraki

[Geordee Naliyath @geordee]

Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away.

- Antoine de Saint-Exupéry

[Santiago @svpino]

Software estimates are one of the oldest lies we tell ourselves.

We all know they don't work, but pretend they mean something and later feel enraged when shit hits the fan.

I focused a big part of my undergrad on software estimation.

After graduating, I wrote plenty about the topic.

Then, I started working for a company where I spent years researching how to make better estimates. We sold multiple millions of dollars of software using the tools I built.

I read everything there's to read. I could recite Steve McConnel's "Software Estimation" book from top to bottom.

Here is the most important lesson I learned:

People can't estimate software. It doesn't matter who they are or how much experience they have.

Estimating software reliably is science fiction.

And the best part:

They will ask you to estimate something. They will tell you they understand it's not exact. They will promise they won't hold you accountable.

And then they will. They always do.

There are two solutions for this. Let's start with my recommendations for those who don't have a choice:

1. Remove "quick," "simple," "straightforward," "easy," and every similar word from your dictionary. Never use them. Don't let others use them when referring to your work.

2. Never volunteer an estimate. Everything you say will be used against you.

3. When forced, estimate work you know you can complete today. Always estimate with a range: "It will take me 2 - 4 hours."

4. Estimate anything you won't do today in days and weeks. Say, "I should finish that feature sometime this week." Do not estimate future work in hours.

But we all know your manager will force you to give an estimate. Here is what you should do:

1. Estimate how long you think it will take you to complete the task.

2. Multiply the number by 3. This will be the lower range of your estimate.

3. Double the lower range of the estimate. This will be the upper range.

Example: If you think something will take you 1 day of work, say "between 3 and 6 days."

Here is the funny part:

It won't take you between 3 - 6 days. This is as much bullshit as any other method you can think of.

The true solution for this problem:

Work for a company that doesn't care about estimates.

[Geordee Naliyath @geordee]

Hercules Bunny.

[Geordee Naliyath @geordee]

@agiljohn Yes

[Geordee Naliyath @geordee]

Do you remember when you joined Twitter? I do! #MyTwitterAnniversary