I think WinAmp was the worst skeuomorphic offender - could look cool but annoying to interact with. Apparent "WinAmp is back" is a thing...
They might literally mean WinAmp is back in the sense that Radionomy acquired it and restarted development.
Neumorphism in User Interfaces
21–30 of 65 posts
Re: Neumorphism in User Interfaces
#22Biomorphism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biomorphism
But yeah, why use an existing definition if you can reframe and score SEO points..
Re: Neumorphism in User Interfaces
#23> This shot by Dribbble user alexplyuto gained over 3000 likes and pushed the trend forward. [1] That mockup is aesthetically pleasing, but from a usability perspective it's terrible: every UI element looks like a button. The progress bar (?) looks like a slider. How do users know which elements they're supposed to interact with? Why do we make the same mistakes over and over? [1] https://miro.medium.com/max/3200/1*g…
Is there a good, up to date source on the relevant UI/UX research? I went looking for some the other day and found a combination of opinion, dogma and unreplicated research.
Re: Neumorphism in User Interfaces
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem with all these crazy textures, drop shadows, and chunky buttons, is that they get tacky very quickly. While plain simple layouts are timeless.
Nothing in nature is that flat or that simple. Millions of years of evolution have made our eyes adapted to look at things with texture. The idea of creating interfaces that only convey information that is needed does not mesh with human nature. A good analogy for this is exercise. You would think that the more you use a machine the more wear and tear it will gain. Counter intuitively our bodies are designed to be us…
> I call it Paleo design
Go for it. Come up with some rules + create some examples + market the hell out of it + charge for training classes = profit!
Re: Neumorphism in User Interfaces
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem with all these crazy textures, drop shadows, and chunky buttons, is that they get tacky very quickly. While plain simple layouts are timeless.
People are going to misuse any design guideline -- that doesn't say anything about the guidelines themselves. Plain, simple layouts lend themselves to abuse just like textures, shadows and chunky buttons. The results are equally silly -- your average super-flat, plain, simple layout with flat, simple icons is as annoying to interact with as the tackiest Winamp skin you can remember. Skeumomorphism has become this myt…
> People are going to misuse any design guideline -- that doesn't say anything about the guidelines themselves.
I think it says a lot. Just like with diet plans, compliance rates are important in design guidelines. It’s not good enough to say “my guidelines are great if followed strictly” when no one seems to follow them strictly.
Re: Neumorphism in User Interfaces
#26What about the older design flavors? Isomorphism use to be popular but was replaced by epimorphism and a flavor of monomorphism. Bimorphism was sort of a niche trend along with homomorphism and endomorphism. If you didn't notice all these words are borrowed from concepts that already exist in math that are over 3 decades old. Maybe I should just stop making up garbage vocabulary for my design ideas. Morphism is a wel…
The Greek word for "shape" has had a longer history than computer science. I'll grant you the use in mathematics, since it's difficult to talk about geometry without talking about shape, so it's highly likely that even people like Thales were using it back in the day.
This is the same thing as people insisting that "theory" as used in science has somehow been co-opted and misused by laypeople. The fact of the matter is that a word that has had a common meaning for a very long time has been narrowed and specialized in a specific field of endeavour, and that narrowed meaning doesn't somehow invalidate the older meaning outside of the field.
Re: Neumorphism in User Interfaces
#27> This shot by Dribbble user alexplyuto gained over 3000 likes and pushed the trend forward. [1] That mockup is aesthetically pleasing, but from a usability perspective it's terrible: every UI element looks like a button. The progress bar (?) looks like a slider. How do users know which elements they're supposed to interact with? Why do we make the same mistakes over and over? [1] https://miro.medium.com/max/3200/1*g…
Is there a good, up to date source on the relevant UI/UX research? I went looking for some the other day and found a combination of opinion, dogma and unreplicated research.
No because a few years ago it was shown to be emotional ideology.
Personally, I loath graphical UIs I am expected to interact with.
And it isn’t just because of bad designers. It’s the melding of data and functionality like Oop enables. It’s a straight up dumb paradigm.
There’s been so many cases, before we were building modern intelligent helpful UI, where GUI widgets functionality changes as the data changes. I have to undo and separate out an idea or rework something because the GUI wasn’t able to consider the nuance I had in mind.
Desktop computing software design influences of old need to die. Trying to make people productive by giving them buttons that are just wrappers to functions is a crap way to make office life more productive.
Programmers spend all day editing text. Just make nicely formatted text record standards for our users and show them how to combine those ideas, feed it into a machine that presents a nice result.
I did this once at a job years ago. Everyone loved it. Now I get to copy paste yaml and tell people there is fuck all I can do about Gmail bring shit
GUIs make people waste time trying to deal with problems the developer was never tasked with solving.
Re: Neumorphism in User Interfaces
#28This just in: people re-discover the emboss/bump map plugin in photoshop...
Re: Neumorphism in User Interfaces
#29> This shot by Dribbble user alexplyuto gained over 3000 likes and pushed the trend forward. [1] That mockup is aesthetically pleasing, but from a usability perspective it's terrible: every UI element looks like a button. The progress bar (?) looks like a slider. How do users know which elements they're supposed to interact with? Why do we make the same mistakes over and over? [1] https://miro.medium.com/max/3200/1*g…
Accessibility may be an issue as well. All those subtle shadows defining the ui elements are not clear to an older or limited vision audience.
Re: Neumorphism in User Interfaces
#30What about the older design flavors? Isomorphism use to be popular but was replaced by epimorphism and a flavor of monomorphism. Bimorphism was sort of a niche trend along with homomorphism and endomorphism. If you didn't notice all these words are borrowed from concepts that already exist in math that are over 3 decades old. Maybe I should just stop making up garbage vocabulary for my design ideas. Morphism is a wel…
The Greek word for "shape" has had a longer history than computer science. I'll grant you the use in mathematics, since it's difficult to talk about geometry without talking about shape, so it's highly likely that even people like Thales were using it back in the day. This is the same thing as people insisting that "theory" as used in science has somehow been co-opted and misused by laypeople. The fact of the matter…
Nobody uses the greek word anymore. It is therefore invalidated. Morphism is currently used in things more fundamental than geometry, specifically category theory. Look it up on wikipedia, it's official. This medium article is far away from official.
What gets me is that some designer out of nowhere can repurpose the word because it sounds cool. Seriously nuemorphism? This is the inception of a buzzword, created literally for the purpose of "buzz."
I have a new word, it's called "buzzology." The science of stealing legitimate words from academic fields and repurposing them to make your new "theory" or "design" sound much cooler than just a drop shadow behind a box.