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

Material UI

material-ui.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 166 posts

Re: Material UI

#91

Post by xorcist »

Mbvhfchffdsr wrote: post #82
xorcist wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not "negative comments" to point out to other people what works and what doesn't. Complain as much as you want about how I don't push fixes, but as long as I'm not paid those complaints are better kept to yourself. (I realize you are not one of the developers for this project. I only want to illustrate how negativity goes both ways. I'm a bit tired of "contribute or shut up". There's a big gray area inbetween.)

It's kind of strange how there's a whole generation of young developers who are supposedly «hurt» by perfectly valid criticism of objectively flawed or bad work. This wasn't always the case. Before the whole «social justice» movement infected the software development industry and hobby, it was expected that bad work would get publicly criticized. This was a good thing, because it fostered improvement, and high qualit…

It needn't be bad, even. Pointing out a bug in the comment field is somehow "negativity", while working through the bug tracker of github is "constructive".

In this case one could say thank you for the input and register the issue oneself, if the project was dear to ones heart.

I wonder if it is a product of young developers being told to build a public github profile, that they are increasingly careful about?

Re: Material UI

#92

Post by Touche »

Does React have something like web component's ? It's really unfortunately that the LeftNav component takes an array of objects to turn into links instead of allowing you to define arbitrary html as

Re: Material UI

#93

Post by EC1 »

MarkMc wrote: post #72
davedx wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't find this post snarky, but from a usability point of view I'd love to hear specifics about where you think these designs fail?

> I'd love to hear specifics about where you think these designs fail? I actually like the 'flat' look, but one thing I hate is the drop-down menu in Chrome for Android. Here's what I'm talking about: http://goo.gl/41iRZk When the menu is displayed it takes about half a second to display. Every menu item is...slowly...faded...in...one...after..the...other. Give me Windows 3.1 where you click and the menu displays ins…

I'd love if my iOS 8 worked buttery smooth. No animations. Just click -> open. I hate even a small delay. Every delay is time wasted. I wonder how much time I've cumulatively wasted on UI animations in my life.

Re: Material UI

#94

Post by petilon »

orbifold wrote: post #85
tomelders wrote: post #44

I had a talk with myself at the weekend about making a concerted effort to cut out the snark when I comment on the web.... And I'm about to fall at the first hurdle. Being "on trend" isn't good UI design. But I can see how we got here. Through OS X and iOS, Apple's UI ethos became the gold standard in UI design. It was so well designed that it was easy to imitate and by simply adopting the core elements of Apples UI…

The current trend is rooted in the fact that computer displays approach the visual fidelity of paper prints by now (> 300dpi). Consequently a more print like design language is adopted, which often features a small selection of colours and simple geometric shapes. The large variety in print design demonstrates that this is not an unreasonable restriction. In my eyes the translucency of windows in Yosemite is a much n…

Unlike print, computer user interfaces are interactive. When you adopt a print-like design language you remove cues that indicate how to interact with the interface.

For examples of how Apple's new UI is less usable than their old UI see: http://uxcritique.tumblr.com

Re: Material UI

#95

Post by coldpie »

dingaling wrote: post #30
franze wrote: post #24

http://material-ui.com/#/components/dropdown-menu really? how can this be good usability. it's text and an arrow far, far away. this could be anything and does not in any way imply any kind of select action. if this is really implemented after the material design spec of google, than oh man, google really has an issue.

> it's text and an arrow far, far away. That's an arrow? I just see a Unicode failure-box :( That's one of the problems with the trend of icons-as-fonts, when they fail there's no reversion mode for users to understand what the glyph is supposed to be. planefinder.net is a canonical example, without the correct font none of their on-screen controls make any sense.

Well, the font is usually provided by the website. Your client is being prevented from using the provided font for some reason.

Re: Material UI

#96

Post by programminggeek »

orbifold wrote: post #85
tomelders wrote: post #44

I had a talk with myself at the weekend about making a concerted effort to cut out the snark when I comment on the web.... And I'm about to fall at the first hurdle. Being "on trend" isn't good UI design. But I can see how we got here. Through OS X and iOS, Apple's UI ethos became the gold standard in UI design. It was so well designed that it was easy to imitate and by simply adopting the core elements of Apples UI…

The current trend is rooted in the fact that computer displays approach the visual fidelity of paper prints by now (> 300dpi). Consequently a more print like design language is adopted, which often features a small selection of colours and simple geometric shapes. The large variety in print design demonstrates that this is not an unreasonable restriction. In my eyes the translucency of windows in Yosemite is a much n…

Computer displays on average don't. Phone displays largely do, but there are millions of computers sold every quarter that aren't anywhere close to retina displays. Also, there are hundreds of millions of existing devices with non-retina screens.

Probably not wise to abandon those because of the new shiny thing.

Re: Material UI

#97

Post by vlucas »

Can anyone explain to me why having the dropdowns and other items in JavaScript is better than the DOM? Seems like we fixed this approach on the web 10 years ago.

Re: Material UI

#98

Post by petilon »

davedx wrote: post #54
tomelders wrote: post #44

I had a talk with myself at the weekend about making a concerted effort to cut out the snark when I comment on the web.... And I'm about to fall at the first hurdle. Being "on trend" isn't good UI design. But I can see how we got here. Through OS X and iOS, Apple's UI ethos became the gold standard in UI design. It was so well designed that it was easy to imitate and by simply adopting the core elements of Apples UI…

I don't find this post snarky, but from a usability point of view I'd love to hear specifics about where you think these designs fail?

Have you read Pogue's review of the new Android?

Here's an excerpt from the review:

"Unfortunately, there’s so little ornamentation that there are no cues left to tell you when something is tappable. What’s a button, what’s a label, what’s a heading? You won’t know till you try tapping."

Full review: https://www.yahoo.com/tech/android-5-0-lollipop-lighter-simp...

Re: Material UI

#99

Post by [deleted] »

tomelders wrote: post #44

I had a talk with myself at the weekend about making a concerted effort to cut out the snark when I comment on the web.... And I'm about to fall at the first hurdle. Being "on trend" isn't good UI design. But I can see how we got here. Through OS X and iOS, Apple's UI ethos became the gold standard in UI design. It was so well designed that it was easy to imitate and by simply adopting the core elements of Apples UI…

[deleted]

Re: Material UI

#100

Post by petilon »

igravious wrote: post #58
tomelders wrote: post #44

I had a talk with myself at the weekend about making a concerted effort to cut out the snark when I comment on the web.... And I'm about to fall at the first hurdle. Being "on trend" isn't good UI design. But I can see how we got here. Through OS X and iOS, Apple's UI ethos became the gold standard in UI design. It was so well designed that it was easy to imitate and by simply adopting the core elements of Apples UI…

I see no snark on display. I also see no arguments or reasons on display to support your position. That is to say: 1) I can see that you don't like Material but _why_ do you not like it? Because it's new is not a reason because it can be both new _and_ adhere to tried and tested design principles, put forward new ideas for consideration, and be aesthetically pleasing 2) Why don't you like iOS's new UI language?

Flat UI has fewer affordances (or "signifiers" as Donald Norman now refers to the concept.) For examples of issues caused by this see http://uxcritique.tumblr.com
Post reply on HN