An interesting general point.
The danger in this line of reasoning, is that you define “good design” as that which is successful. Then every example of success you see has been well designed, and every failure is an example of poor design.
I would argue that Google Wave, was very “well designed” and you could look at any number of criteria.
Your response to that might be: it failed to capture the market, and that is the ultimate test of good design.
Well, in that case you have defined market success as the ultimate arbiter of design.
I would want a theory of design that can distinguish between good and poor design in advance of the product’s release into the market.