My understanding of writing and design has not changed in the slightest from this conversation. There is a very small difference between the two and trying to separate them is an exercise in rhetoric in and of itself. An example proposed in the discussion had to do with the difference between programming and writing and the freedom of expression giving way to an unlimited design.
Unlimited design doesn't really have as much worth as a meaningful design, which is perfectly obtainable with limits, possibly more so. Limits on creativity provoke creativity. I like to think of it as if I was writing poetry. If I'm writing freeform, I am putting in emotion in a way that that doesn't have to apply to the rules of writing but I'm not really pushing the limits of expression. When you're writing something closed however, like a haiku or even something that rhymes, you have to think about every single word, not only in relation to the emotion, message and design of the piece as a whole, but how it pushes against the rules to make a more densely impactful piece.
Another point brought up was the difference between Steve Jobs' vision of the computer and the traditional MS-DOS. Steve Jobs' ideas are design ideas. Marketing ideas. His point is to sell things, not design them. As I understand it, Jobs was the kind of person to say "I think this would appeal to people" and have others get him there. The ones who should be applauded for their creativity are the people who have to then invent the process to get from Point A to Point B. Who have to live within the limits of the goal and truly express writing in a new and unique way.
PS. Unicode is an encoding for multiple languages, not a font. Most people hiring I've asked are looking for passion first and foremost.