6 comments

  • Justin BarberJustin Barber, over 8 years ago

    Not trying to be a jerk here, but in the post you claim that your team "totally bought into the core concepts" and that you're not saying "Atomic Design is flawed," so I really wish you would've titled your post "How We Adapted Atomic Design" instead of making an inaccurate and provocative title.

    6 points
    • Jeff BoshersJeff Boshers, over 8 years ago

      I was gonna say the same thing, Justin. Spot on. I love atomic design, but I don't use the same nomenclature that Brad does... Mostly for the same reason as the author of this post. Does that mean it's flawed? Nope, but the title will sure get them clicks!

      2 points
    • Jaeson BrownJaeson Brown, over 8 years ago

      I totally agree. The title is real misleading. Atomic Design didn't fall short in any form. Rewording stuff is just applying your own style to it.

      1 point
    • Jono HerringtonJono Herrington, over 8 years ago (edited over 8 years ago )

      I totally agree with what you are saying and thinking back realize that something like "How We Adapted Atomic Design" would be a much better title. I tried to account for that in the content that you mentioned but that obviously didn't come across clearly.

      Thanks so much for the helpful feedback.

      1 point
    • Jono HerringtonJono Herrington, over 8 years ago

      I also want to add that I took your advice and retitled it. I also gave props to you. I hope that is ok!

      0 points