Android Design
developer.android.com
Android Design
1–10 of 143 posts
Re: Android Design
#2I know it is silly and offtopic but that gorgeous website's navigation does not work without Javascript for no good reason.
Re: Android Design
#3I like the density-independent pixel concept...
Re: Android Design
#4The website felt odd to me. It's clearly aimed at developers, given the subject material, but it felt like it was written as an ad for prospective buyers.
It listed a bunch of features and user interface methods that apps should have, but I couldn't find any resource for actually implementing what they suggested, apart from the link to the android developer page at the end.
Re: Android Design
#5The website felt odd to me. It's clearly aimed at developers, given the subject material, but it felt like it was written as an ad for prospective buyers. It listed a bunch of features and user interface methods that apps should have , but I couldn't find any resource for actually implementing what they suggested, apart from the link to the android developer page at the end.
Isn't it for Designers, rather than Developers?
Re: Android Design
#6Do they have a schedule for when Google's apps will follow these guidelines?
Re: Android Design
#7As an Android developer for many years I was excited when I read the blog post about the site. When I went to the site, I was very disappointed. I've spent the better part of 10 minutes on the site so far and haven't seen anything other than marketing text and screenshots of what my phone looks like.
How do I make these "beautiful designs" work across all Android phones? How do I use an Actionbar on a non 3.0+ device without external libraries? How can I supply a consistent look and behavior for my application when some android OEM keyboards don't even offer the same modules as other ones?
How am I supposed to follow these guidelines when every Google application has a different implementation of the Actionbar itself?
Re: Android Design
#8The website felt odd to me. It's clearly aimed at developers, given the subject material, but it felt like it was written as an ad for prospective buyers. It listed a bunch of features and user interface methods that apps should have , but I couldn't find any resource for actually implementing what they suggested, apart from the link to the android developer page at the end.
I completely agree. The wording is so basic and kind of insulting as seen here for instance, "Text fields allow the user to type text into your app. They can be either single line or multi-line." Very elementary for either a developer or a designer to read.
Re: Android Design
#9This is a long overdue but very well put-together UI and Usability Guide for Android Developers. My only qualm from reading it thus far is the very last section under Navigation [1] regarding System-to-app navigation:
"For the Back key, you should make navigation more predictably [sic] by inserting into the task's back stack the complete upward navigation path to the app's topmost screen."
No. This piece of advice is the sole reason why the back button is confusing to users. Injecting activities artificially onto a user's Back Stack based on some arbitrary and imaginary path that they might have taken to get there is horrible. If I'm in the middle of reading a book and get an email notification, and I touch that notification to quickly read the email, that Back button better damn well take me BACK to what I was doing. Don't take me UP to the list of emails in my inbox. This is where the average user will become lost and not understand why they aren't taken back to reading their book, and will just end up touching Home out of frustration.
Bad Google!
[1] http://developer.android.com/design/patterns/navigation.html
Re: Android Design
#10Utterly worthless. This looks like a web designer on crack had too much time to promote the beauty of the new Android.
However, from a developer's point of view this is almost unusable. By not providing the according XML/Java code, we are forced to reimplement everything from scratch, making smaller and larger errors, introducing inconsistency and making the look and feel not quite the same between apps.
Then again, it fits well with the current way Google is doing UX design (http://minming.posterous.com/google-currents-yet-another-con...).