While I agree with the author's general points, the examples were very general and vague; for example, he uses the bike design seemingly to show a designer who

While I agree with the author's general points, the examples were very general and vague; for example, he uses the bike design seemingly to show a designer who was uncoupled from engineering, yet I would bet this bike design was created by engineers, as hubless wheels are an engineering fascination. Also, using Google circa 1999 as an example of great design through engineering is way behind the times. Look up what Douglas Bowman had to say about his tenure as Design Director at Google, and you will find quantification outrules design qualification at Google – if they can't measure it, it's worse by definition. Today, Google is a UI mess, as they haven't changed with the times, and keep adding content to their once clean design. (Even KISS sites need to be refreshed). Finally, he missed the opportunity to dispel another Engineers' myth about design, by lauding the addition of the Google logotype as exemplary design – as if slapping a new logo onto an engineer's layout somehow transforms a Plain Jane site into high design. We're not in 1999 anymore, and the bar is higher. Overall, the assertions are correct, however, I feel that the author could have taken the time to come up with better/deeper examples to help prove his points.