"People ignore design that ignores people"

"People ignore design that ignores people"

I almost autonomously clicked and saved some wall paper bearing the above wordage whilst sifting through and digitally gorging minimally designed themed wallpapers if it wasn't for the fact that what it was saying wasn't quite working as some kind of seemingly broad hipster statement about design but Really? Are you sure?! since much of the elite premium design that wasn't initially intended for or designed with the "the people" in mind does often inspire "the people". Often it becomes an aspirational materialistic desire of "the people" despite the fact the majority won't actually attain it. Then you get folk with much more frilly ostentatious tastes that take the piss out of places such as IKEA who try to make clean aspirational design for peoples surroundings much more affordable then their preliminary exclusively priced variants that weren't intended for "the people". 

As for good design, some of the most poorly designed commercial products for specific purpose to have had market wide adoption and commercial success for all the wrong reasons could hardly be seen as something that was exactly ignored.

There are even poorly designed products that get huge notoriety to maybe also become an object of desire purely because a celebrity might use one out of some notion of sentimentality. Take digital audio equipment for example, some of the biggest artists on today's scene might refer to how they did it "back in the day" and what they were able to do on the stuff they used despite the limitations against other better options at the time. Some of the most visually stunning design to make it into reality has no functional purpose at all.

I guess its a case of striking the balance as some the most strange and at the time maybe seemingly avant guard also helps toward encouraging change in design for the better when it does actually work. But there are also many stark examples of where it can go horribly wrong too which makes me even more thankful for CAD and modern day techniques of realistic 3D model computer rendering. Sometimes if what is popular by the people in terms of design is followed in its entirety the progress of it could also be somewhat stifled too within a different context, as often it is the case that people within their respective collective don't like change to then create a situation for themselves where they then have to constantly play catch up.

Then there are things that are specifically designed for specialist none generic applications for very small cross sections of society. There's also design that isn't initially designed for people at all but are designed perfectly to work for its intended purposes and may co-incidentally have an extended benefit for certain people of not people in general without people even realizing it.  

I suppose if the statement had a frame of context in relation to what kind of design it might not be interpreted with such a seemingly broad application to design in general especially when its blatantly not true as a generic statement about design although maybe an ideal in certain disciplines, especially against the reality.