Also, I think your comparison using programming languages as a reference is a bit misleading (disclaimer: I am not a programmer, I am a designer). There are disciplines involved in software development that are agnostic of the programming language of choice and that developers are usually knowledgeable of (programming logic, testing, deployment, application architecture, etc).
You don't need to hire a programmer that specializes in programming models and then find another one that creates a data access layer for persistence in a db for a small project. Only UX folks seems to be able to pull this kind of thing off thanks to over-floated design processes from the agency mindset.
This silo-ed paradigm is one of the bigger issues the UX community keeps embracing and promoting. By exception of some applications design (branding and corporate identity), I think this silo-ed approach that UX offers is hurting the product design/development process.
The more silos and "roles" you add to a any process, the more efforts need to go into coordination (meetings) and documentation to keep things consistent and flowing. This impacts time-to-market and increases overall project cost. Also, it doesn't allow to react to changes effectively (if at all).
A designer should be educated in all the different disciplines involved in digital product design. Look at Architecture, Fashion or Industrial Design: they spend years getting training across multiple disciplines (aesthetics, semiotics, ergonomics, design theory, research, history of arts, project management, budgeting, etc) including technical disciplines as it applies to their careers (structural analysis, materials, construction techniques, functional and tangible prototyping, technical drafting, and other).
I think you are right, we mostly agree on this. It is just the way you refer to visual design and usability evaluation what was confusing me. They both come with the design endeavor, but being able to evaluate its impact and to execute based on this is not exclusive to designers. Thanks for the clarification.
Design evaluation and quantitative analysis based on analytics are part of what designers do to validate design decisions (identifying bottlenecks in task-driven applications, optimizing Ui and user flows to increase conversion rates, etc). These techniques are part of a beta or post-launch iterative design process.
Your point about Hurley having entrepreneurial skills above his particular profession applies to technical founders as well (or any founder for that matter), not just designers. Unless you think that just by having the skills to do programming at early stages of a startup can alone make for a good founder in the long run.
Even for products that don't have an UI at all there are many aspects of the customer experience that will require conscious design efforts to give you a competitive edge. A designer perspective can bring creative and fresh solutions to many types of business challenges due to overlaps with Marketing and business strategy. Integrating behavioral economics principles to your business through design can have a huge impact on marketing and sales regardless of what your product or service is about.
Design DOES mean business, and the fact that it is recognized more every day is a prove of that. I would have Ives as my cofounder and not just because he can design great products, but because he can design a great company. He also has an amazing networking, I bet.
This myope perspective about design is probably the main reason why companies and startups can't get experienced designers to join.
You don't need to hire a programmer that specializes in programming models and then find another one that creates a data access layer for persistence in a db for a small project. Only UX folks seems to be able to pull this kind of thing off thanks to over-floated design processes from the agency mindset.