The squiggle is meant to explore a particular design paradigm, where the mess is the research, and things start calming down as research is synthesized, constraints are applied, a design is created and tested, and finally an iterated version is delivered. It assumes surprises but suppresses the height of ups and downs in the middle 50%.
Yes, I know. I am saying refining an idea is done all the time. But you have to realize that designers are only dealing with an abstract idea. It is easy to cut a thing in half and reconfigure components of that thing into abstract perfection when that thing (aka Design) lives only in your imagination.
Such is not the case for an idea that has already been materialized. There are high costs to modifying an idea that is already implemented.
The cost is so high that often developers don't reconfigure the product from scratch, what they do is build patches, grafts and superficial additions on top of the core product so that the implementation of the idea looks like the actual idea.
Like patching up an old car, eventually the accumulated ugliness reaches an apex and the core product must be rebuilt from scratch. I would say for the vast majority of projects implemented in the real world, the squiggle is in the opposite direction.
Most Designers tend to not understand the realities of what happens to their designs in production. The design of a system should not end at implementation. Implementation is just the beginning of the journey.
The best designers are the ones that can create designs that account for the inevitable degradations that happen to an idea that has already been crystallized.
The best designers are ones that can modify a design to take into account current limitations of technology and flaws while the idea is being executed in production.
