Cliff Notes版本:

设计:根据所需产品的规格实现解决方案。

架构:支持设计的基础/工具/基础设施/组件。

这是一个相当宽泛的问题，会引起很多人的回应。

这个问题没有明确的答案，因为“软件架构”和“软件设计”有相当多的定义，而且都没有一个规范的定义。

一个很好的思考方法是Len Bass, Paul Clements和Rick Kazman的声明，“所有的架构都是设计，但并不是所有的设计都是架构”[软件架构实践]。我不确定我是否完全同意这一点(因为架构可以包括其他活动)，但它抓住了架构是处理设计的关键子集的设计活动的本质。

我的稍微轻率的定义(在SEI定义页面上找到)是，它是一组决策，如果做出错误的决定，将导致项目被取消。

A useful attempt at separating architecture, design and implementation as concepts was done by Amnon Eden and Rick Kazman some years ago in a research paper entitled "Architecture, Design, Implementation" which can be found here: http://www.sei.cmu.edu/library/assets/ICSE03-1.pdf. Their language is quite abstract but simplistically they say that architecture is design that can be used in many contexts and is meant to be applied across the system, design is (err) design that can be used in many contexts but is applied in a specific part of the system, and implementation is design specific to a context and applied in that context.

So an architectural decision could be a decision to integrate the system via messaging rather than RPC (so it's a general principle that could be applied in many places and is intended to apply to the whole system), a design decision might be to use a master/slave thread structure in the input request handling module of the system (a general principle that could be used anywhere but in this case is just used in one module) and finally, an implementation decision might be to move responsibilities for security from the Request Router to the Request Handler in the Request Manager module (a decision relevant only to that context, used in that context).

我希望这能有所帮助!

Good question... Although the line between them is hardly a bright sharp line, imho, if you are using both terms, then Architecture encompasses more technical or structural decisions about how to build or construct something, especially those decisions that will be hard (or harder) to change once implemeneted, whereas Design encompasses those decisions that either are easy to change later (like method names, class <-> file organizational structure, design patterns, whether to use a singleton or a static class to solve some specific problem, etc. ) and/or those that effect the appearance or esthetic aspects of a system or application (Human Interface, ease of use, look and feel, etc.)

我像Patrick Karcher一样看待建筑——从大局出发。例如，您可以为建筑物提供架构，查看其结构支撑、窗户、入口和出口、排水等。但你并没有“设计”楼层布局、隔间位置等。

所以当你设计了大楼的时候，你并没有设计每个办公室的布局。 我认为这同样适用于软件。

你可以把设计布局看作是“设计布局”……

建筑与设计密切相关;它们之间的主要区别在于我们面对的方向。 建筑面向战略、结构和目的，面向抽象。 设计面向实现与实践，面向具体。

设计:了解模块，模块之间的关系，每个模块的功能，类及其成员函数，每个模块之间通信的接口。

体系结构:体系结构是软件系统的整个结构。所有模块、类和组件执行不同的任务，并将给出唯一的结果。

例如:有一个有5个房间的房子。还有附属浴室。厨房也在家里。所以家里有不同的东西这些东西之间有不同的关系。所以这一切都是关于一个家的“设计”。

而当你从房子外面看的时候，你看到的整个结构都是关于建筑的。