I remember when I first started using the web a lot in the 1990s and I saw so many different types of sites before designers had restraint. The worst site, by far, was Microsoft's site. Too funny. I wish I had a link from the past. 🙂
After reading your comment here I thought about my art history class I'm currently in, Greek and Roman Art. Many of those statues that we consider great works of art were carved using a specific canon of proportions. That would also be considered "design constraints" eh?
So, the next question I propose is to everyone...are those not considered art because they were often commissioned and made following certain guidelines? I'm not trying to start an argument, just wondering where and how we draw the line.
Is art something that brings pleasure? Something you enjoy looking at? Perhaps something you admire and can see skill in? But then you'd be able to look at something you detest, but can see the idea and skill behind? Is that art?
Maybe it's just something visual than envokes an emotion? A lampost could be art if you enjoy looking at it.
It's funny because many fine-artists don't consider photography as a fine art. There are so many debates trying to define things it's pretty unproductive.
I would put graphic design into the same artistic category as marketing...It certainly takes an artistic mind (or group of minds) to come up with something that moves people enough to purchase an object or service.