Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Material Design Color Tool

material.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 95 posts

Re: Material Design Color Tool

#71

Post by nkkollaw »

jacquesm wrote: post #69
nkkollaw wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope. This is (one of?) the cheapest wine in Italy: http://www.horecare.it/imagesvinobrik/full013.jpg This is a really good Italian wine: http://www.terredifirenze.it/sites/default/files/bottiglia%2...

http://www.wine-searcher.com/ Try to be serious. Wine that costs 1000's of $ per bottle is in exactly the same bottle as wine that costs next to nothing. The only difference is the label. Of course there are marketing whizzes that package crap wine in fancy bottles to sell it at inflated rates but that's nothing to do with what I was trying to illustrate. Winebottle: glass enclosure usually topped off with a cork, us…

Whatever you say.

Re: Material Design Color Tool

#72

Post by infogulch »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #18
nsebban wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure why your comment gets downvoted. It's a fair point, especially since non-geek people don't have a clue who produces the apps they have installed on their smartphone.

> non-geek people don't have a clue who produces the apps Funny, that sounds to me like a counterargument to the idea that this makes things look like they come from google.

In general people don't have a clue, but they obviously know the source of some Google apps like Gmail and search. But then they associate all apps with that design pattern with Google, since they​ do know Google apps.

Re: Material Design Color Tool

#73

Post by GBKS »

nkkollaw wrote: post #56

Really cool. The only problem I have with material design is that lots of apps just look the same, and some people _do_ confuse Google stuff with apps that use material design, thinking they're from Google. Much better than all apps looking like Bootstrap's default theme, though, which is a popular alternative to loading a material design theme with a palette you picked.

The other side of this is that it helps usability when things look and feel familiar. It's interesting how it's accepted that desktop applications generally look the same, but mobile apps are supposed to be more unique. Maybe just the nature of mobile being generally more consumer oriented?

Re: Material Design Color Tool

#74

Post by ocdtrekkie »

cyberferret wrote: post #5
julius_set wrote: post #2

Imo Googles new material design is not impressive. It does however help developers who are not good designers build a cookie cutter app.

You can look at it in much the same way that the early versions of Windows enabled programmers to build applications that looked exactly alike. In much the same vein, Material's "paper" concepts are designed to minimise confusion for lay users - i.e. "What does clicking the '+' button do?". Once you standardise the symbols and appearance of certain widgets, it removes the "have to think about it" barrier. You could a…

As someone who helps seniors use their computers, if Material is designed to minimize confusion for lay users, Material is a complete failure. I once tried to help someone through the new Material Google Contacts app, and eventually gave up and sent them back to Comcast.net.

Simple is not necessarily better when making UI. A '+' symbol will always be worse than 'Add contact'.

Re: Material Design Color Tool

#75

Post by nkkollaw »

GBKS wrote: post #73
nkkollaw wrote: post #56

Really cool. The only problem I have with material design is that lots of apps just look the same, and some people _do_ confuse Google stuff with apps that use material design, thinking they're from Google. Much better than all apps looking like Bootstrap's default theme, though, which is a popular alternative to loading a material design theme with a palette you picked.

The other side of this is that it helps usability when things look and feel familiar. It's interesting how it's accepted that desktop applications generally look the same, but mobile apps are supposed to be more unique. Maybe just the nature of mobile being generally more consumer oriented?

I don't agree that desktop apps look the same, but it depends on the platform I think.

Apps that use native controls will definitely look the same, but the apps I've been using in the past few months—and yes some are Electron-based—all look very different on macOS.

Not sure, though.

Re: Material Design Color Tool

#76

Post by numbsafari »

GBKS wrote: post #73
nkkollaw wrote: post #56

Really cool. The only problem I have with material design is that lots of apps just look the same, and some people _do_ confuse Google stuff with apps that use material design, thinking they're from Google. Much better than all apps looking like Bootstrap's default theme, though, which is a popular alternative to loading a material design theme with a palette you picked.

The other side of this is that it helps usability when things look and feel familiar. It's interesting how it's accepted that desktop applications generally look the same, but mobile apps are supposed to be more unique. Maybe just the nature of mobile being generally more consumer oriented?

I think it's that (consumer oriented), but also the more "personal" nature of mobile apps.

Re: Material Design Color Tool

#77

Post by sprafa »

nkkollaw wrote: post #53
jacquesm wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen the opposite as well: ugly looking terminal or DOS based but very productive software was replaced with spiffy looking windows or web based software that was slightly slower or unable to keep up with the type-ahead of the users and this led to huge disappointment. I'm firmly believe if it doesn't work it doesn't matter how good it looks and if it works but looks bad that's better than the reverse. Then once…

You're comparing apples with oranges. Terminal/DOS-based software isn't ugly, it's just a different interface (GUI vs. non-GUI). Of course some technical people that know what they're doing will enjoy using the command line because you don't have a GUI that gets in the way, but using this fact to "prove" that people like ugly software better doesn't make sense—it's just a bad example.

Most people would describe terminal software as hideous.

Happiness comes from visual variety.

Re: Material Design Color Tool

#78

Post by mhd »

julius_set wrote: post #2

Imo Googles new material design is not impressive. It does however help developers who are not good designers build a cookie cutter app.

I think that's the main issue: We're talking about"apps" here, where a unified HCI guide always was an important goal. Material design is basically using the Android's platform's UI in the browser.

This application POV clashes with "web pages" being more a domain of print designers gone digital.

Tschichold or Tognazzini...

Re: Material Design Color Tool

#79

Post by AJ007 »

sprafa wrote: post #77
nkkollaw wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're comparing apples with oranges. Terminal/DOS-based software isn't ugly, it's just a different interface (GUI vs. non-GUI). Of course some technical people that know what they're doing will enjoy using the command line because you don't have a GUI that gets in the way, but using this fact to "prove" that people like ugly software better doesn't make sense—it's just a bad example.

Most people would describe terminal software as hideous. Happiness comes from visual variety.

Are the blind happy?
Post reply on HN