If you haven’t heard of the Jio-Zoom plagiarism clash, you’re probably living under a rock (which may not be a bad idea given the state of the world right now). The turf war between Jio Meet and Zoom began when the Indian telecom giant ripped off the Chinese company’s design pixel by pixel. What followed was users all over the country bashing Jio for publicly admitting to plagiarism. I guess Zara stealing designs from the runway is too menial for us to be outraged at, but user interface design is where everyone draws the line.

如果您還沒有聽說過Jio-Zoom gi竊沖突，那么您可能生活在一塊巖石下(考慮到當前的世界狀況，這可能不是一個壞主意)。 印度電信巨J Jio Meet和Zoom之間的爭奪戰始于這家印度電信公司逐像素撕下這家中國公司的設計。 隨之而來的是全國各地的用戶抨擊Jio公開承認抄襲。 我想Zara從跑道上竊取設計對我們來說實在是太小氣了，不值得我們為之憤怒，但是用戶界面設計才是每個人劃清界限的地方。

As a designer, I am naturally drawn to hating Jio for taking someone’s hard work and passing it off as their own with no remorse. Responsible netizens, such as I, threw enough shade on Jio to last a lifetime, but when you’re owned by the 4th richest man in the world, it’s all background noise. This got me thinking — when you’re that wealthy, hiring a team of designers that knows how to make a design look original, even though, it’s a direct copy should be the easiest thing to do. Why then, did the company think it was wise to rip off even the smallest details such as hex codes and icon dimensions? There’s more to this than meets the eye and that’s the discussion we should be having.

作為一名設計師，我自然會討厭Jio，因為他要承擔某人的辛勤工作并將其作為自己的工作轉嫁給自己，而不會re悔。 負責任的網民(例如I)對Jio施加了足夠的陰影，使其無法維持一生，但是當您被世界第四大首富所擁有時，全都是背景噪音。 這讓我開始思考-當您如此有錢時，雇用一支知道如何使設計看起來新穎的設計師團隊，即使是直接復制也應該是最簡單的事情。 為什么然后，公司認為剔除最小的細節(例如十六進制代碼和圖標尺寸)是明智的？ 這不僅是吸引眼球，而且這是我們應該進行的討論。

Besides the integrity argument, Jio haters had nothing more to say about the issue. The supporters, on the other hand, claim that Jio offers features that Zoom doesn’t and that’s why it is better. But let’s be real for a second — how many apps on your phone can you say are TRULY unique? As much as I hate to admit it, user experience plagiarism simply does not matter to the user. In many ways, it might be welcome because it requires lesser cognitive effort on the users’ part. So why do designers slog all day to come up with fresh ideas, when it’s easier to just rip someone off? Simple — some of us have a conscience.

除了正直論外，Jio仇恨者對此事無話可說。 另一方面，支持者聲稱Jio提供了Zoom所沒有的功能，這就是為什么它更好的原因。 但是，讓我們成為現實吧-您可以說您的手機上有多少個應用程序真正獨一無二？ 盡管我不愿承認，但用戶體驗抄襲對用戶而言并不重要。 在許多方面，它可能是受歡迎的，因為它需要用戶較少的認知工作。 那么，當將某人搶走更容易時，為什么設計師會整天想出新主意呢？ 很簡單-我們中有些人有良心。

At present, there is little redressal for issues pertaining to UI design plagiarism and surprisingly, this has been hotly debated. There is a surge of “aesthetic” culture with companies like Instagram and Snapchat putting graphic design tools in the hands of every customer. Anyone with a smartphone can make a conventionally good looking graphic and pass it off as their creative work. It is widely known that programs like Sketch provide readymade UI templates that just require the designer to update the text and publish the app for development. Would you classify such designs as original? And is there really a way to identify how much of the UX has been mimicked?

目前，與UI設計抄襲有關的問題很少得到補救，令人驚訝的是，這已經引起了激烈的爭論。 隨著Instagram和Snapchat等公司將圖形設計工具交到每位客戶的手中，“審美”文化激增。 擁有智能手機的任何人都可以制作出通常看起來不錯的圖形，并將其作為創意工作進行傳播。 眾所周知，諸如Sketch之類的程序提供了現成的UI模板，這些模板僅需要設計者更新文本并發布應用程序進行開發。 您會將這類設計歸類為原始設計嗎？ 真的有辦法確定模仿了多少UX嗎？

User experience, today, has matured to levels where the process is largely standardized. If you wish to design a customer feedback form, you don’t have to reinvent the wheel — you have a body of past work by other firms that has proven results. Thus, companies rely on visual elements such as colours, icons and layouts to differentiate themselves. And this where Jio faltered. But had they simply changed the colours of the buttons and moved the graphics around a little, would their design magically become original? Would you even KNOW whether it has been copied?

今天，用戶體驗已經成熟到可以在很大程度上標準化流程的水平。 如果您希望設計一個客戶反饋表，則不必重新發明輪子-您擁有其他公司過去的工作成果，這些工作已經證明是行之有效的。 因此，公司依靠視覺元素(例如顏色，圖標和布局)來與眾不同。 這讓Jio步履蹣跚。 但是他們是否只是簡單地改變了按鈕的顏色并稍微移動了圖形，他們的設計會神奇地變成原始的嗎？ 您甚至不知道它是否已被復制？

So, before you jump to Zoom’s defense, ask yourself — Do you like it when you’re in a familiar digital environment and know what button to click on? Would you rather use an app that you’ve interacted with before or learn how to use an entirely new solution? If you’re a regular user that fits the average persona, I’m guessing you would pick familiarity over novelty. And that’s what Jio took advantage of. Does that mean every Zoom user in India will move to JioMeet? Not really, but it helps push the latter’s agenda. By creating a familiar environment and offering better features such as 24-hour calls that Zoom did not provide, JioMeet has proven that, in 2020, ethics can go take a hike.

因此，在您開始使用Zoom進行防御之前，請問自己-在熟悉的數字環境中，您喜歡它嗎？您知道該單擊哪個按鈕嗎？ 您是愿意使用以前與之互動過的應用程序，還是要學習如何使用全新的解決方案？ 如果您是適合一般角色的普通用戶，那么我想您會比新事物更熟悉。 這就是Jio所利用的。 這是否意味著印度的每個Zoom用戶都將遷移到JioMeet？ 并非如此，但這有助于推動后者的議程。 通過創建一個熟悉的環境并提供更好的功能(例如Zoom并未提供的24小時通話)，JioMeet已證明，在2020年，道德可以得到提高。

In grey areas like these, I like to believe that the user always emerges the winner. When two designs LOOK quite the same, the competition comes down to better product design and a glitch-free experience. The solution with better features triggers competitors to offer similar elements and at the end of day, the user wins. So while the world fights over what’s ethical and what’s not, I’ll be busy uploading a story on Instagram. Or maybe, Snapchat. Or Facebook. Doesn’t matter — they’re all the same anyway.

在這樣的灰色地帶，我想相信用戶總是會成為贏家。 當兩種設計看起來完全相同時，競爭就歸結為更好的產品設計和無故障的體驗。 具有更好功能的解決方案促使競爭對手提供類似的要素，最終，用戶獲勝。 因此，盡管世界在為道德與非道德作斗爭，但我將忙于在Instagram上傳故事。 也許是Snapchat。 或Facebook。 沒關系-無論如何它們都是一樣的。

Liked what you read? Head to www.trystwithdesign.com for more.

喜歡您閱讀的內容嗎？ 請訪問www.trystwithdesign.com了解更多信息。

翻譯自: https://medium.com/@akshaytarao/imitation-is-no-longer-flattery-d7fe962b4cdb

總結

以上是生活随笔為你收集整理的模仿不再受宠若惊的全部內容，希望文章能夠幫你解決所遇到的問題。

如果覺得生活随笔網站內容還不錯，歡迎將生活随笔推薦給好友。