> > IMHO, the original Worse is Better presents a false dichotomy.  There
> > is never a 100% solution to a problem, and instead you can spend more
> > or less time designing before you start building.  No matter how much
> > time you spend designing, you are doomed to eventually have a design
> > assumption broken.
> 
> The second paper, "Worse Is Better Is Worse", says exactly the same 
> thing. But I didn't see this as really contradicting the conclusion.
> 

I was a tad too harsh.  Often one design decision is WAY better than
another, and it becomes tempting to say that they better one is "the
right way".  This bothers me, though: you can always do better!

It's true that this doesn't matter for the basic thrust of the paper. 
Certain bad decisions have a way of sticking around, no matter how many
iteration you do....



Lex