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

The Flat Sink

sachagreif.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 153 posts

Re: The Flat Sink

#71

Post by mturmon »

zefhous wrote: post #17
sudonim wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Minor point, but he's talking about a bathroom in his parent's house in Paris, not where he lives in Osaka, Japan. Hadn't seen the lebanese style sinks before, but a quick google image search brought up this pic: http://www.lebanon-hotels.com/book/images/accom/Faraya-villa... . Is that what you mean? Interesting to hear another perspective.

Thanks, skimmed over that I suppose. Yes, that's exactly it. I find them pretty annoying because water and food debris builds up in the corners and it's hard to get it all down. Could actually be a feature and not a bug, — I've never seen a garbage disposal there, so you don't want all the food going right down the drain.

Seems more like a result of the flat materials used to make the sink.

Re: The Flat Sink

#72

Post by zem »

sudonim wrote: post #4
zefhous wrote: post #2

I don't know about the rest of the world, but in the Middle East flat kitchen sinks are standard and ubiquitous. I wouldn't be so quick to assume that it's an aesthetic design decision — I bet it's more of a cultural preference. I don't like flat sinks, but I can see how some people do. In Lebanon they generally build large flat sinks right into the countertop with the same marble. They are much larger than most Amer…

Minor point, but he's talking about a bathroom in his parent's house in Paris, not where he lives in Osaka, Japan. Hadn't seen the lebanese style sinks before, but a quick google image search brought up this pic: http://www.lebanon-hotels.com/book/images/accom/Faraya-villa... . Is that what you mean? Interesting to hear another perspective.

you see those in india too, especially in older houses and rural areas.

Re: The Flat Sink

#73

Post by _pra »

pablasso wrote: post #59
oh_sigh wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never understood why people put soap on their hands before turning the water on. Why do you do this? Am I missing something here?

You can use liquid soap. And for dry soap I tend to just open the water a couple of seconds, close it, soap my hands and then wash it away again. There's really no need to let the water run all the time, that's a waste.

If your goal is to actually clean your hands, then it's not a waste. Proper hand-washing requires not touching anything dirty after you've cleaned up. And how did you turn the faucet on? With your dirty hands. So, wash, dry with a paper towel, turn faucet off with paper towel.

Re: The Flat Sink

#74

Post by pazimzadeh »

arscan wrote: post #9

I'm not going to comment on the message as a whole, since this whole flat aesthetic thing has been argued up and down on HN over the last few months. But there was one line that stuck out to me as being a little off: > Get rid of all texture, and you might end up with cold, sterile designs that scare users away. I'm on board with the usability argument, but I don't think that removing gradients and drop shadows neces…

He said might end up.

Re: The Flat Sink

#75

Post by brandoncarl »

My wife and I have encountered these at many hotels over the past few years.

The reason is environmental: the sink is supposed to splash if you turn the water too high. It's intended to keep you from wasting water.

Re: The Flat Sink

#76

Post by RivieraKid »

ebf wrote: post #22

>Put everything on the same plane, and you make it harder to focus on a specific section of the page. Citation needed. Edit: Since I'm getting downvoted, tell me that https://svbtle.com/ content isn't on the same plane and still readable? You can have everything on the same plane and with proper use of whitespace and good typography, it can be very readable. Other examples: http://daringfireball.net/ https://medium.c…

Google Reader's top-level hierarchy is: 1) black menu bar 2) Google bar 3) options bar 4) left panel 5) list of items. The first problem is, that the logical structure is unnecessarily complicated, but that's not the point.

The second problem is, that there's almost no visual distinction / contrast between the main segments of the page, which makes it harder to process mentally. It's like a file manager that shows the filesystem as a flat list of files instead of as a hierarchy of folders. My first impression of the new Reader or Gmail design was - messy bunch of black texts on white or almost-white background plus some almost invisible gray lines and a weird red button. It just seems messy and structureless.

Svbtle or HN are different, they have much simpler top level structure - just a menu and a list of items. BTW, svbtle's design is superior to Reader's on multiple level's.

Re: The Flat Sink

#77

Post by progrock »

HeyLaughingBoy wrote: post #57
progrock wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't people just use wash buckets inside their kitchen sinks anyway? It would cost me too much otherwise on a water metre in the UK.

Not in the US. I have never seen such a thing.In any case, most people who own homes have dishwashers.

I didn't even think about dishwashers. I've only lived in one house with a dishwasher out of the ten that I've lived in. Are they that common place?

I have two Belfast sinks in my house.

Re: The Flat Sink

#78

Post by progrock »

crazygringo wrote: post #32

I stayed with a friend in a then-new building designed by Philippe Starck, in New York. The bathroom sink faucet handles were very cool -- just smooth steel cylinders sticking out, that you rotated. Until I tried turning them with my now-soapy hands... and discovered that they were impossible to turn, because there was nothing to grab onto! His stylish cylinders turned out to be completely useless. Turns out knobby h…

I'm a fan of foot controlled faucets. I'll talk to my plumber about the possibility of getting some tomorrow.

Re: The Flat Sink

#79

Post by uxwtf »

arscan wrote: post #9

I'm not going to comment on the message as a whole, since this whole flat aesthetic thing has been argued up and down on HN over the last few months. But there was one line that stuck out to me as being a little off: > Get rid of all texture, and you might end up with cold, sterile designs that scare users away. I'm on board with the usability argument, but I don't think that removing gradients and drop shadows neces…

You can for sure create a nice design without using any texture, but still from UX point of view, depending on the complexity of the user interface, buttons with shadows will be more visible and easy to recognize for a user than flat rectangles. It is especially important when designing UI for buying things and making payments.

Re: The Flat Sink

#80

Post by baddox »

thaumaturgy wrote: post #68
baddox wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Citation needed" is absolutely snarky, in the sense that it is highly critical. And it should be used consistently and unapologetically. Would you be snarky in your response to someone accusing you of being a witch? I hope so, and I hope you would point out that some evidence would be nice. Snarkily requesting evidence is not a bad quality in an online community—it's a vital one. Stating things as facts and refusing…

"Citation needed" is intellectually lazy. It is middlebrow dismissal's slightly more popular cousin. "Citation needed" is never a counter-argument, but often stands in place of one. It is the rhetorical equivalent of burying your opponent in discovery: it is a challenge that consists solely of expecting someone else to do more work than they would like to. If you have a question about something, ask. If you disagree…

If you're a skeptic (i.e. scientific skeptic), then you default to not believing a claim until evidence is introduced to support it. Is it intellectually lazy to say "citation needed" to someone that is accusing someone else of being a witch? I firmly believe that I have no obligation to prove that I am not a witch, and moreover that such attempts would be impossible. The person who makes a claim that has not been widely observed empirically is the person who needs to present evidence.

In the case of user interface analysis, I thought most of us agreed that real data is much more important than a single user's anecdote. If someone makes the anecdotal claim that since they dislike a certain UI feature it must perform worse in general, that person needs to present actual evidence. Unless I have done my own research, the only thing I can do is request evidence and remain skeptical until I see some. It is equally fallacious for me to counter with my own anecdotal evidence. Saying "citation needed" is precisely the appropriate response to baseless claims.

Post reply on HN