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

131–140 of 166 posts

Re: Material UI

#131

Post by guelo »

gohrt wrote: post #112
petilon wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

Awkwardly, the "design design" is past that -- the guidelines say to use shadows to create buttons. But the deployed design is using the older design design that didn't realize that.

The guideline has 3 types of buttons one of which is "flat", just text with no decoration.

http://www.google.com/design/spec/components/buttons.html

Re: Material UI

#132

Post by king_jester »

petilon wrote: post #94
orbifold wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

In Material design, you are still intended to make use of proper cues for useable components. Interactive components are supposed to exist as another logical layer on top of static content. This is the change from Holo, do not use flat things so often for interactive widgets.

Re: Material UI

#133

Post by azinman2 »

alexsopilot wrote: post #126
orbifold wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The "Folder" metaphor is something I've been considering a lot lately. It seems so ingrained in modern computing. Apple has started to move away from it tags and "All my Files." I struggle to think of a better way to solve organizing and collecting items than into nested groups.

We launch next month. Just wait :)

Re: Material UI

#135

Post by declan »

Sakes wrote: post #125
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…

Consistency / familiarity is a very important part of developing UIs/UXs that are intuitive. What you have with material design is a very well documented approach to promoting this. The wrong direction? As a developer I lack the expertise/talent to have an opinion one way or the other on the direction presented by material design. But if the designer community is unhappy with the approach, then they should probably g…

>Consistency / familiarity is a very important part of developing UIs/UXs that are intuitive.

This. My understanding is that Google's adoption of Material Design is in large part intended to make apps more intuitive so they'll be used more frequently and by more people. I've found out when testing Recent (http://recent.io/) that average, non-tech users would prefer something intuitive that uses standard UI toolkit features -- even if they're not that exciting -- over highly designed custom interfaces.

The interesting question to me is to what extent iOS apps beyond Google's own will adopt material design...

Re: Material UI

#136

Post by tadfisher »

petilon wrote: post #98
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?

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...

The example he uses is a bit contrived, since everything but the toolbar title is tappable. Does it need raised and colored affordances to signify such? Would this be more or less confusing than what was shipped?

And this gem: "In Android of old, you could swipe down from the top of the screen to open a panel of quick settings buttons (brightness, Airplane mode, and so on)." Which tells me the reviewer either has a poor memory or has confused Android with Samsung (which is an honest mistake to make).

Re: Material UI

#137

Post by AtTheLast »

smt88 wrote: post #110
petilon wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I wish I could up-vote this a thousand times. I often tap things that are just rectangles and fail to realize that other rectangles are buttons. I can't wait for "everything is flat, two-tone, and rectangular" to be replaced by whatever the next trend is. Hopefully something more useful. Ironic note: the flat trend was really made mainstream by Microsoft when it released Windows Phone 7.

With flat design, sometimes it's really hard to know what you are suppose to click on. I enjoy its simplicity, but it does have some usability problems that come with it.

I think we went way overboard with it and the pendulum swung to far to the side of flat design. Hopefully we start moving away from super trendy flat design, much like we moved away from those crazy web 2.0 design styles.

Re: Material UI

#139

Post by teacup50 »

azinman2 wrote: post #133
alexsopilot wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "Folder" metaphor is something I've been considering a lot lately. It seems so ingrained in modern computing. Apple has started to move away from it tags and "All my Files." I struggle to think of a better way to solve organizing and collecting items than into nested groups.

We launch next month. Just wait :)

Yet-another-software-as-a-service-dont-own-your-own-data-startup.

Great.

Post reply on HN