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

Convert Twitter Boostrap to a "flat" design

gist.github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 50 posts

Re: Convert Twitter Boostrap to a "flat" design

#31

Post by adamauckland »

btipling wrote: post #21
dsirijus wrote: post #11

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…

> How do you say 'content-oriented design' with a straight face? What's the alternative?

Many graphic designers who have become 'web designers' will simply colour in wireframes rather than working with actual content. Therefore you end up with a design full of gradients, curved corners and shadows because that's all they have to work with.

Which is odd considering the core of graphic design relies on understanding the content and message, in essence the form follows the function.

Re: Convert Twitter Boostrap to a "flat" design

#32

Post by alan_cx »

mark_integerdsv wrote: post #7

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 agree.

My feeling is that flat works for small touch screens, but not so well on big screen computers. I think you need the simplicity on a small screen so that navigation is clear in a small space, but it looks just dumb and silly on a big screen. Might be why people hate Windows 8.

Re: Convert Twitter Boostrap to a "flat" design

#33

Post by alan_cx »

anthonyb wrote: post #18
mark_integerdsv wrote: post #7

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

You have sort of defined "fad".

Re: Convert Twitter Boostrap to a "flat" design

#34

Post by josefresco »

mark_integerdsv wrote: post #7

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…

First of all, we're talking about a design alteration to a framework! If you're tired of everything looking the same, cry foul on the use of frameworks not mods to frameworks.

I know your criticism is about flat design but really, I think the widespread use of of any boilerplate/framework contributes more to stale design than concepts like "flat".

Re: Convert Twitter Boostrap to a "flat" design

#38

Post by mark_integerdsv »

crdoconnor wrote: post #23
mark_integerdsv wrote: post #7

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.

Yea, this is a large part of the issue for me.

It really is not clear what is content and what is interface.

I like to imagine that we'll see a time when there is a tighter integration, that the future of interface is essentially data visualisation but intil that time it remains a challenge to explain to users (and even sometimes technical folk) the distinction between data and interface and flat design really feels like a step backwards in this regard.

Re: Convert Twitter Boostrap to a "flat" design

#39

Post by tagliala »

parkrrr wrote: post #3
rpicard wrote: post #2

I think the next iteration of Bootstrap (3.0) is largely flat. I could be mistaken though.

The previews were all flat but I seem to recall that it was a temporary thing: https://github.com/twitter/bootstrap/pull/6342#issuecomment-...

may be permanent: https://github.com/twitter/bootstrap/issues/8199#issuecommen...

Re: Convert Twitter Boostrap to a "flat" design

#40

Post by tmzt »

mark_integerdsv wrote: post #38
crdoconnor wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Yea, this is a large part of the issue for me. It really is not clear what is content and what is interface. I like to imagine that we'll see a time when there is a tighter integration, that the future of interface is essentially data visualisation but intil that time it remains a challenge to explain to users (and even sometimes technical folk) the distinction between data and interface and flat design really feels…

> that the future of interface is essentially data visualisation

Does that imply that ideal framework would be a data visualization layer? Something that transforms a generic representation of data into markup with style? Could we build an interface out a descriptive layout of domains with associated actions? (Here's some photos, here's an action to create a new one, now build an interface. These actions apply to a user account.)

Post reply on HN