Live data from Hacker News

Convert Twitter Boostrap to a "flat" design

gist.github.com

21–30 of 50 posts

Re: Convert Twitter Boostrap to a "flat" design

#21

How long until this flat fad fades? It seems (to me at least) like very little thought goes into these designs apart from 'it must be flat.' There also seems to be very little variation in the final products. The examples linked in the OP are indistinguishable from say, Microsoft's Technet : http://social.technet.microsoft.com/wiki ...I dont want everything to look the same. It's confusing and boring... Am I alone in…

Well, there's flip side to this "fad" - with its simplicity, it is nudging us further towards content-oriented design. Or at least that's the general sentiment I'm perceiving. The flat design movement is kind of a Überdesign, in Nietzschean terms. Tear it up, and build it properly from ground up. Or, that is the positivist view on the "fad". Of course, I'm here ignoring hundreds of years of advancements in design, as…

How do you say 'content-oriented design' with a straight face? What's the alternative? 'Helpful interactive design'? 'Clearly indicate where things are clickable design'?

I get that flat is meant to strip away unnecessary ornamentation, but depth has a purpose. We aren't living in a 2 dimensional universe. Our screens may be 2 dimensional right now, but that doesn't invalidate the use of depth to provide helpful hints to the user. Abandoning a tool in your toolbox because of misguided principles. You'd rather hit your nail with a wrench than use a hammer, you don't want to be seen using a hammer, that's not fashionable. Flat design is what happens when designers over-think problems at the expense of usability. Flat design is frustratingly naive. It's a revolution of the unexperienced who through desire to leave a mark, only left the impression that they wanted to make one. All at the expense of unhappy users.

Re: Convert Twitter Boostrap to a "flat" design

#22

How long until this flat fad fades? It seems (to me at least) like very little thought goes into these designs apart from 'it must be flat.' There also seems to be very little variation in the final products. The examples linked in the OP are indistinguishable from say, Microsoft's Technet : http://social.technet.microsoft.com/wiki ...I dont want everything to look the same. It's confusing and boring... Am I alone in…

It's not a fad, it's a return to Swiss design: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Typographic_Style

it's a fad , like any other web design trend.

Re: Convert Twitter Boostrap to a "flat" design

#23

How long until this flat fad fades? It seems (to me at least) like very little thought goes into these designs apart from 'it must be flat.' There also seems to be very little variation in the final products. The examples linked in the OP are indistinguishable from say, Microsoft's Technet : http://social.technet.microsoft.com/wiki ...I dont want everything to look the same. It's confusing and boring... Am I alone in…

Until designers wake up and realize that the interactive portions of your design need affordance.

Re: Convert Twitter Boostrap to a "flat" design

#24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, there's flip side to this "fad" - with its simplicity, it is nudging us further towards content-oriented design. Or at least that's the general sentiment I'm perceiving. The flat design movement is kind of a Überdesign, in Nietzschean terms. Tear it up, and build it properly from ground up. Or, that is the positivist view on the "fad". Of course, I'm here ignoring hundreds of years of advancements in design, as…

How do you say 'content-oriented design' with a straight face? What's the alternative? 'Helpful interactive design'? 'Clearly indicate where things are clickable design'? I get that flat is meant to strip away unnecessary ornamentation, but depth has a purpose. We aren't living in a 2 dimensional universe. Our screens may be 2 dimensional right now, but that doesn't invalidate the use of depth to provide helpful hint…

I say it with a straight face because I've attended a fashion show or two.

To be clear, I just think flat is a solid stepping stone in right direction, nothing more.

Re: Convert Twitter Boostrap to a "flat" design

#25
post #20

"Sometimes a new project doesn't need rounded corners or gradients. So we decided to get rid of them. We http://www.littlesparkvt.com/flatstrap/

Flatstrap doesn't work for me (mainly, "download flatstrap" just.... downloads the website... with standard Bootstrap.)

Re: Convert Twitter Boostrap to a "flat" design

#27
post #12

How long until this flat fad fades? It seems (to me at least) like very little thought goes into these designs apart from 'it must be flat.' There also seems to be very little variation in the final products. The examples linked in the OP are indistinguishable from say, Microsoft's Technet : http://social.technet.microsoft.com/wiki ...I dont want everything to look the same. It's confusing and boring... Am I alone in…

I dont want everything to look the same. It's confusing and boring... Am I alone in this? Keep in mind that having all apps using Bootstrap or jQueriUI also make them all looks the same at some extent... So flat is not the reason the the similarity.

Bootstrap or jQueryUI make all apps looks the same, but within each app, it doesn't make header, button, link and non-clickable content look the same.

Re: Convert Twitter Boostrap to a "flat" design

#28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, there's flip side to this "fad" - with its simplicity, it is nudging us further towards content-oriented design. Or at least that's the general sentiment I'm perceiving. The flat design movement is kind of a Überdesign, in Nietzschean terms. Tear it up, and build it properly from ground up. Or, that is the positivist view on the "fad". Of course, I'm here ignoring hundreds of years of advancements in design, as…

How do you say 'content-oriented design' with a straight face? What's the alternative? 'Helpful interactive design'? 'Clearly indicate where things are clickable design'? I get that flat is meant to strip away unnecessary ornamentation, but depth has a purpose. We aren't living in a 2 dimensional universe. Our screens may be 2 dimensional right now, but that doesn't invalidate the use of depth to provide helpful hint…

> What's the alternative?

Design-oriented design.

Post reply on HN