Google’s look, evolved • Hacker News Board

Re: Google’s look, evolved

#21

Post by speik » Tue, Sep 01, 2015, 4:03 PM UTC

roymurdock wrote: post #10

Just when I thought we might be starting to pivot away from flat design - does anyone know of a different design paradigm that is being used by smaller/fringe designers who are tired of flat/minimal UX/UI?

Just curious, why did you think there was a pivot away from flat design?

I'm also interested in learning about some alternative designs though.

Re: Google’s look, evolved

#22

Post by ocdtrekkie » Tue, Sep 01, 2015, 4:04 PM UTC

I don't know why someone changing the font in their logo should ever be HN's top news item. There is definitely more interesting stuff going on in tech this week.

Re: Google’s look, evolved

#23

Post by bingobob » Tue, Sep 01, 2015, 4:04 PM UTC

they have a Doodle of the change its live now https://www.google.com.au/logos/doodles/2015/september-1st-d...

Re: Google’s look, evolved

#24

Post by johnchristopher » Tue, Sep 01, 2015, 4:06 PM UTC

The video reminds me of [EPIC 2014](http://idorosen.com/mirrors/robinsloan.com/epic/).

Re: Google’s look, evolved

#25

Post by artursapek » Tue, Sep 01, 2015, 4:06 PM UTC

The favicon still hasn't changed: https://www.google.com/favicon.ico

I can't imagine the nightmare it must updating the logo for a company like Google. There must be so many forgotten places that will be missed.

Re: Google’s look, evolved

#26

Post by smoyer » Tue, Sep 01, 2015, 4:07 PM UTC

spankalee wrote: post #19

roymurdock wrote: post #10

Just when I thought we might be starting to pivot away from flat design - does anyone know of a different design paradigm that is being used by smaller/fringe designers who are tired of flat/minimal UX/UI?

Throwback 90's? I'm so glad we're mostly rid of useless ornamentation: endless bevels, drop-shadows, gradients, and skeuomorphism... There are many different takes on flat design, so it's not a design mono-culture. Google, Microsoft and Apple all have unique, flat, design languages.

But perhaps a bit better than the '90s? It's uncluttered but everyone knows they shouldn't use and .

Re: Google’s look, evolved

#27

Post by munaf » Tue, Sep 01, 2015, 4:07 PM UTC

Here's a bit more info on the design process:

https://design.google.com/articles/evolving-the-google-ident...

Re: Google’s look, evolved

#28

Post by ocdtrekkie » Tue, Sep 01, 2015, 4:07 PM UTC

unicornporn wrote: post #5

Many tech companies seem to be rolling out new designs at an increasing rate rate. A bit of a side note, but I've recently been pondering for how long material design will stay with us. I'd guess when the developer for that last Jelly Beanish app in my phone has finally made the switch, Google releases their new design guidelines and the process begins again...

Holo was supposed to be the unified Android design for all time, and it barely lasted two years. Even after the "Material" thing, Google has inconsistently applied it's supposed golden standard, and some Material elements, like the FAB, have actually been REMOVED from Google Keep in favor of the more Holo-esque bottom action bar, for example.

Material Design will probably be suddenly replaced by something with an equally trendy name when Google needs more PR.

Re: Google’s look, evolved

#29

Post by bad_user » Tue, Sep 01, 2015, 4:08 PM UTC

27182818284 wrote: post #17

Wait, what. At roughly the 1:34 mark, the voice pulls up photos of her kid with a pumpkin. Do you have to tag your photos with "pumpkin" first or is the recent "Choose the picture of waffles" in Recaptcha fueling that?

No, they are automatically classifying photos. If you have photos in Google Photos, you can try it out with words such as "forest", or "dog", or "grill". It's pretty cool and scary at the same time :-)

Re: Google’s look, evolved

#30

Post by ocdtrekkie » Tue, Sep 01, 2015, 4:09 PM UTC

artursapek wrote: post #25

The favicon still hasn't changed: https://www.google.com/favicon.ico I can't imagine the nightmare it must updating the logo for a company like Google. There must be so many forgotten places that will be missed.

I think they just don't worry about it. Some Google sites still look like they did six years ago. They just make sure their big sellers that they're currently marketing look new.

EDIT: Can someone tell me how this comment is somehow objectionable? It's not like every app they publish on the Play Store or every site they have at *.google.com is using Material.