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

Flat UI, mirrored

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 103 posts

Re: Flat UI, mirrored

#61

Post by bluekeybox »

ameen wrote: post #46
bluekeybox wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally I think this takedown notice is questionable to say the least (it looks to be a case of inspiration rather than blatant copying), but here is my devil's advocate opinion on design: When you say that designers seek "pointless exclusivity", it's a lot like saying that hackers spend their time doing "pointless tweaking". Exclusivity is the currency of design. When you design something, and ten million people…

It's funny that you actually say that "Exclusivity is the currency of design" , while living in a well designed non-inclusive world (Well designed Signs, Roads, Cars, Mobile devices, etc). Good Design will and always strives to be universal. It's funny that the recent Flat-design trend was triggered by Microsoft's Metro UI, which is inspired by Modern Cities' signage (universal design). Also, isn't the point of icons…

> Good Design will and always strives to be universal

Good Design doesn't sell. Great Design does. Great design will achieve exclusivity by iteratively attempting (and failing) to become universal.

> It's funny that the recent Flat-design trend was triggered by Microsoft's Metro UI, which is inspired by Modern Cities' signage

Which was probably inspired by Mondrian's experiments in exclusivity.

Re: Flat UI, mirrored

#62

Post by packetbeats »

resu_nimda wrote: post #56
packetbeats wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We developers get the credit when someone is using our code. The open source libraries usually require keeping the copyright notice at least in the source file. Anyone looking at the code will know who wrote it. Putting myself in the shoes of the Layervault people, I can understand that it's very hard to accept that someone is presenting as his own work something that it took me years to arrive to via iteration. Reme…

Yeah, except (almost) nobody looks at the code. In both cases (designer and developer), most people just see the end result. In other words, I don't think Layervault would feel any different if there was a comment in the HTML giving them attribution.

Usually the developers creating open source libraries benefit from the popularity of their projects. The more people using their code, the more well known they are. If nothing else, they feel proud when their software is downloaded N thousands times. In this case, Layervault can expect hundreds of sites to show up around the web looking just like their own.

Regarding the comment in the HTML, you are right, it won't make them feel better, because the design really is meant to look at. It doesn't matter how clever the source code is. That's the disadvantage the designers have, I was just saying I can understand them.

Re: Flat UI, mirrored

#63

Post by ameen »

bpatrianakos wrote: post #57
ameen wrote: post #38

This whole episode has underlined a few major differences among developers and (current) designers. Developers are more open, contribute code and discuss about bettering each other. While Designers seem secretive, ego-filled and seeking pointless exclusivity. Eg: Developers: HackerNews / Github, etc Designers: DesignerNews / Dribble, Forrst, etc. Any designer that has been open about his work and process has become a…

I think that's too broad of a generalization. I happen to walk the line between designer and developer and I know a lot of my fellow designers are very open about their process and work. Designers often share their tools and techniques openly. See the multitude of CSS frameworks, free fonts, PSDs, etc. I think the notion that they're more secretive less open comes from these cases where a designer does make a stink a…

I'm a designer/developer too, and this has been a long-time observation of mine. While there is openness in design (and a whole sub-culture which is dedicated to making life easier), there isn't much among Designers (afaik).

I've been inspired by many and have inspired a few designs as well, but rather than being bitter about it, I follow the thought process of my primal developer instinct - Did they make it better or worse? If they did make it better, what did they do differently, What can I learn from them, etc.

While I do get pissed off about blatant copying, I can't condone what LayerVault did in this instance - Block DesignModo's original designs which were allegedly[1] inspired by LayerVaults icons.

[1] - Various other entities (The Noun Project, Facebook, etc) have had similar icons (Settings Cog, Man Speech bubble, Newsfeed icon) a lot earlier than LV.

Re: Flat UI, mirrored

#64

Post by etchalon »

packetbeats wrote: post #53
ameen wrote: post #38

This whole episode has underlined a few major differences among developers and (current) designers. Developers are more open, contribute code and discuss about bettering each other. While Designers seem secretive, ego-filled and seeking pointless exclusivity. Eg: Developers: HackerNews / Github, etc Designers: DesignerNews / Dribble, Forrst, etc. Any designer that has been open about his work and process has become a…

We developers get the credit when someone is using our code. The open source libraries usually require keeping the copyright notice at least in the source file. Anyone looking at the code will know who wrote it. Putting myself in the shoes of the Layervault people, I can understand that it's very hard to accept that someone is presenting as his own work something that it took me years to arrive to via iteration. Reme…

Basically, this.

As a developer, I get to _chose_ how someone uses my code. I can release my code, and attach one of any number of licenses, which give another developer _permission_ to use my code, while laying out restrictions.

If that license is violated, there is a legal recourse for me (and one which is used quite often to enforce things like the GPL, etc.)

Within the development community, this is the accepted protocol for how you "borrow" code from another developer. Violating this protocol is pretty much universally reviled.

But the same universal revulsion doesn't exist for design.

Unless you literally copy and paste someone's actual file.

And I think that's where the disconnect comes from.

In development, the hard work is in the typing, not the idea, really. If I see an animation effect I like, or a feature from a competitor's product, there's still a massive effort I have to undertake to recreate it. The "work" in development is in the work itself, not in the idea.

Obviously there are cases where this isn't true. Novel design patterns, component compositions, etc. exist. But I'm going for an 80/20 discussion here.

In design, the work itself is generally secondary to all the upfront effort work of the "idea". A designer will throw away a dozen, if not more, failed attempts at an idea. Minor things like color, shape, typeface, will be iterated on over and over again, until something takes form that looks "correct". Once they've reached that climax though, the actually complexity of the end product might be minimal.

Recreating all of that designer's choices is beyond simple, so long as you have the software. Even if you don't literally trace their image, all of the "work" has been done for you.

Re: Flat UI, mirrored

#66

Post by WayneDB »

ameen wrote: post #38

This whole episode has underlined a few major differences among developers and (current) designers. Developers are more open, contribute code and discuss about bettering each other. While Designers seem secretive, ego-filled and seeking pointless exclusivity. Eg: Developers: HackerNews / Github, etc Designers: DesignerNews / Dribble, Forrst, etc. Any designer that has been open about his work and process has become a…

How has Jonathan Ive been open about his work?

Re: Flat UI, mirrored

#67

Post by ameen »

mnicole wrote: post #54
ameen wrote: post #38

This whole episode has underlined a few major differences among developers and (current) designers. Developers are more open, contribute code and discuss about bettering each other. While Designers seem secretive, ego-filled and seeking pointless exclusivity. Eg: Developers: HackerNews / Github, etc Designers: DesignerNews / Dribble, Forrst, etc. Any designer that has been open about his work and process has become a…

I think that this is part of a bigger problem; a lot of people find design to be "easy" in that it's subjective - Client A doesn't like your work but Client B does. Can't even get a job in the field? No worries, people flock to 99Designs and Fiverr for cheap, tacky work that validates the crummy designer. Working for someone with no morals? They'll show you some styles they like and tell you they want it "exactly" li…

I think the problem is people confuse design and aesthetics a lot. Design is inherently meant to be universal, and obviously if something is really well designed it does make the product compelling and attractive.

Design cannot be copied, while aesthetics can.

One can copy a single design - say an icon for example, but they cannot copy the original designer's workflow and thought-process in coming up with the final design, it is and always will be unique to each individual. A copy-cat can't come up with an entire icon-set after copying a single icon, whereas the original designer can. And I seriously doubt good designers not getting work due to scummy photocopiers grabbing up jobs.

In regards to 99Designs & Fiverr:

The only requirement of a client on there is that it needs to look good. And it's easy to make something look good, but does that work with their overall product? Does the product even have a design language of its own?

And usually the clients are low-budget shops which even if they wanted to can't afford a decent designer. The same problem exists for developers as well - Do we see top developers crying foul about their code being re-used?

Re: Flat UI, mirrored

#68

Post by mistercow »

dutchbrit wrote: post #65

Is this the correct thing to do? Wasn't it taken down for a reason?

Sort of. It was taken down because LayerVault filed a DMCA notice, but you don't have to prove anything to file a DMCA notice (and yes, this is a broken system).

Re: Flat UI, mirrored

#69

Post by mnicole »

ameen wrote: post #67
mnicole wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that this is part of a bigger problem; a lot of people find design to be "easy" in that it's subjective - Client A doesn't like your work but Client B does. Can't even get a job in the field? No worries, people flock to 99Designs and Fiverr for cheap, tacky work that validates the crummy designer. Working for someone with no morals? They'll show you some styles they like and tell you they want it "exactly" li…

I think the problem is people confuse design and aesthetics a lot. Design is inherently meant to be universal, and obviously if something is really well designed it does make the product compelling and attractive. Design cannot be copied, while aesthetics can. One can copy a single design - say an icon for example, but they cannot copy the original designer's workflow and thought-process in coming up with the final d…

I totally agree with you re: design vs. aesthetics (even went on a tangent about it some weeks ago).

> And I seriously doubt good designers not getting work due to scummy photocopiers grabbing up jobs.

Knowing some very well-known designers, I can assure you that they are losing work. Big companies reach out to these artists about their style and how much it would cost, and after not hearing anything for a few months, these companies magically show up with a new ad campaign or line of t-shirts that looks all-too-familiar. I know a good illustrator that works for a company where he is asked to copy works created by his own friends in the industry. Not all of them are bad at what they do, which is why they are hired instead. It's slimy work, but if you're good at it and can churn them out, it makes for easy income until you can break out on your own. I would wager that a lot of designers begin their careers this way. Some eventually make their way out of it to stand on their own two feet while others get comfortable with the fact that they are essentially paid to plagiarize based on what's hot right now.

> Do we see top developers crying foul about their code being re-used?

This is irrelevant, but when we're talking about front-end stuff, yes. We just saw a witch hunt here the other week. But as far as the rest it's not really comparable; developers are being paid to come up with solutions that work within a set of rules we all have to adhere to given the technologies available. Designers are being paid to come up with solutions that are intentionally unique. Code is on the web as-is, and outside of not giving credit where credit should be due, there's not really much you can do about someone copying a few lines that are part of languages that can only be written effectively so many different ways. With visuals, there really are no rules; how I created my illustration may have been an entirely different way than someone who copied it did, but it doesn't matter because the end product is the same. As we progress into using SVGs for artwork instead of images, it'll be interesting to see how these worlds collide and if we begin diffing code on a large scale to find copycats rather than use tools like TinEye.

While this means that remixing pieces will be easier and I hope that's the direction we go (and embrace), it still means the originals are a simple copy and paste away from being stolen in their full vector glory. Can't wait!

Re: Flat UI, mirrored

#70

Post by ratherbefuddled »

ameen wrote: post #38

This whole episode has underlined a few major differences among developers and (current) designers. Developers are more open, contribute code and discuss about bettering each other. While Designers seem secretive, ego-filled and seeking pointless exclusivity. Eg: Developers: HackerNews / Github, etc Designers: DesignerNews / Dribble, Forrst, etc. Any designer that has been open about his work and process has become a…

The distinction I think I've seen is that designers are often more inclined to assert ownership of an abstract idea, whereas developers tend to assert ownership of the concrete and often revile the notion of owning ideas.

I say this because (in general), whilst developers would not violate a license or steal code, they would often happily implement the same idea someone else had from scratch without any qualms. You can see this in how the notion of patents are despised in software far more than other industries.

Perhaps for developers, ideas are easy and implementations are hard, whilst for designers the reverse is true.

In any case, copyright is about the concrete. You can't - or at least shouldn't be able to - use the DMCA to prevent people expanding on your ideas or being inspired them. Unless an artifact has been copied, there is no copyright violation.

This seems counter-intuitive to some designers, but at the same time seems obvious to developers.

In this particular case, there is no copying and no copyright violation. That is obvious. There is also as much evidence that FlatUI was inspired by LayerVault's work, as there is that LayerVault was inspired by other work already created.

The DMCA takedown was wrong legally, and strategically, but despite the reaction LayerVault don't seem to realise this. Sadly for them their business will probably suffer for it, and they've probably made FlatUI a lot more popular.

Post reply on HN