Take the 2-minute tour ×
English Language & Usage Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I come from a software development background.

One of the goals is to make tools easy to use. On the other hand one must/should include certain features.

Now I want to argue that in order for our tool to work, we must include certain features necessarily for it to have additional value. I am looking for a idiomatic way to say it. To pep it up.

Yet "do not sacrifice features X on the altar of simplicity" sounds too melodramatic, and "if you design it to be fool-proof, only fools can use it" too crude.

Can you propose any other options?

share|improve this question

closed as not constructive by RegDwigнt Apr 25 '12 at 18:50

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

2  
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler" comes to mind. That being said, this is more of an invitation to open-ended brainstorming that a question with exactly one objectively correct answer, and thus has to be closed as not constructive. It might be a better fit for our sister site Writers (make sure to check their requirements before reposting there). –  RegDwigнt Apr 25 '12 at 18:56
    
How about do not sacrifice features for the sake of simplicity? –  cornbread ninja 麵包忍者 Apr 25 '12 at 19:06
    
@RegDwightΒВBẞ8 That Einstein quote fits perfectly. –  k0pernikus Apr 25 '12 at 22:03