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

Google Images Restored

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 175 posts

Re: Google Images Restored

#151

Post by mackrevinack »

gkoberger wrote: post #16
errantspark wrote: post #11

Fuck Getty Images. Fuck IP law. Fuck copyright. All that shit needs a massive refactor. I can't bear to think about how much harm has been done to software and human reality in general by lawyers and MBAs seeking to extract the maximum amount of value from things. I'm glad things like this exist, but so sad that they need to. EDIT: and as one commenter astutely pointed out, fuck Pintrest too, a perfect example of the…

What's wrong with Getty? They spend a lot of money to take pictures, and other people pay money to use them. How would you change their business model? EDIT: I hadn't realized that Getty is the reason for the removal of the view image button! I stand by my comment in general, however I do think removing that button is crappy.

duckduckgo lets you view images no problem

Re: Google Images Restored

#152

Post by p49k »

userbinator wrote: post #73
neilpanchal wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are so many things that bother me about contemporary UI in general, I ranted on here the other day: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24965293 I sincerely feel that the discipline of building user interfaces is long lost and perhaps never to come back. From car dashboards to loud typography, the whole field is regressing. Minimalism, too much white space, infantilization of users, design trends, loss of pred…

Minimalism, too much white space Those two tend to be related. It really angers me every time I see a huge amount of whitespace for no good reason, but then most of the functionality is hidden behind a dropdown menu whose equally stupid '...' indicator only shows up when you happen to hover over it. WTF. Back when UIs were still good, things would usually be hidden only if there wasn't enough space. You could see alm…

This is all personal preference, but personally I strongly disagree with you. I find that diskprices site to be poorly organized, difficult to use, and the majority of the site is the full (non-normalized) text descriptions of the individual items, which is not only a giant mess of text, but also unnecessarily replicates data. The data columns are misaligned, too much repetition of certain words that could be abbreviated ("External/ Internal"), etc.

I think it's good design to hide certain functions behind "..." - For example, I can't tell you the number of times I've accidentally flagged a post on HN just because my finger accidentally touched my phone or because I was trying to click the comments link a few pixels away (which is the feature that people want to access on 95% of clicks that occur in that region). If I had to hit "..." first, it would never happen because I would have just accidentally opened a menu. (And if you flag something, you may never be able to unflag it because it loses ranking and appears at another position somewhere on the site or disappears entirely).

Re: Google Images Restored

#153

Post by cosmodisk »

gchokov wrote: post #5

Someone in Google’s UX and Design department, really needs go out and breathe some fresh air. Is it only me, who dislikes 95% of the design decision of Google products in the recent years?

From what I remember reading some comments from ex googlers some years ago is that if you can't quantity something nobody will be listening too serious. So designer have difficult times there:)

Re: Google Images Restored

#154

Post by pdimitar »

zkmon wrote: post #35

Forget UX, the image search itself _doesn't_ work. Search for some known person's name. 90% of the image results will be from the side bars on LinkedIn page of that person, which have no relation to the search key words.

I started using Yandex image searching. It's objectively better than Google for many queries. So is Bing/DuckDuckGo.

Re: Google Images Restored

#155

Post by Havoc »

gchokov wrote: post #5

Someone in Google’s UX and Design department, really needs go out and breathe some fresh air. Is it only me, who dislikes 95% of the design decision of Google products in the recent years?

Not just google. e.g. Reddits new interface is in the same league

Re: Google Images Restored

#156

Post by ramoz »

BlahGod420 wrote: post #149
_underfl0w_ wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not the parent poster but I see where they're coming from - form used to purely _follow_ function in computer UI/UX (as in most engineering fields) but now it's been delegated to "creatives" who, by virtue of their skill set, put form first. Overall "betterness" is subjective, but speaking as someone who uses a computer as a tool I can honestly say I'd prefer it to function pragmatically than look pretty, if the…

Given two functionally equivalent pieces of software, customers will choose the prettier of the two. That's all I want to contribute to the conversation.

Yes, same: If your solution users aren't satisfied, then your solution is naively unpragmatic.

Re: Google Images Restored

#157

Post by nicbou »

Green_man wrote: post #125
0xfffafaCrash wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a "flat design" vector art style inspired by the work of the Memphis Group that's called "Corporate Memphis" primarily by critics. While Hacker News is apparently too sophisticated to be condescended to with simplistic animations that look good at very different resolutions, I think a lot of people like it. If everyone hated this and considered it "corporate," it wouldn't be the one used by some of the animation…

I'm pretty ignorant of design styles, but what always bothered me about "Corporate Memphis", and styles like it, was the very weirdly caricatured humans depicted within it. The people usually look incredibly weird, and while it's not quite "uncanny valley" or whatever, it feels like a very cheap and ineffective attempt at implying diversity. Maybe this isn't the intent at all, but it's most noticeable when there are…

They represent an urbanite 20-something's version of diversity. I appreciate the effort, but I noticed that it rarely represents characters of different ages or styles.

This is very low on my list of grievances though. I like those vector characters quite a bit more than the stock photos they replace.

Re: Google Images Restored

#158

Post by nicbou »

Havoc wrote: post #155
gchokov wrote: post #5

Someone in Google’s UX and Design department, really needs go out and breathe some fresh air. Is it only me, who dislikes 95% of the design decision of Google products in the recent years?

Not just google. e.g. Reddits new interface is in the same league

It features many quality of life improvements, but it's slow as molasses and obviously geared towards a very different kind of community.

Re: Google Images Restored

#159

Post by iFreilicht »

neilpanchal wrote: post #51
gchokov wrote: post #5

Someone in Google’s UX and Design department, really needs go out and breathe some fresh air. Is it only me, who dislikes 95% of the design decision of Google products in the recent years?

There are so many things that bother me about contemporary UI in general, I ranted on here the other day: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24965293 I sincerely feel that the discipline of building user interfaces is long lost and perhaps never to come back. From car dashboards to loud typography, the whole field is regressing. Minimalism, too much white space, infantilization of users, design trends, loss of pred…

I don't agree with you 100% here, I believe some small tweaks could make diskprices.com more accessible. But your own main website is so damn good: https://neil.computer/

Functional, high visibility, accessibility, discoverability. There's no bullshit, no hidden anything, it's true minimalism and 100% honest. This is what actual good design looks like. A dark mode would be nice, though.

Re: Google Images Restored

#160

Post by RobertKerans »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #86
fuzzy2 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's really quite simple. I've been using PCs since Windows 3.1. With "good software", I intuitively know how to use it and how it will behave. Of course, new concepts arrive every now and then, like ribbons or the hamburger menu or whatever. However, what's behind them is in the end still the same. When I am faced with the challenge of designing an interaction in software, I always try to make it fit established pat…

It comes down to a simple, enduring principle: people who don't use something shouldn't have sole authority over its design. So many of the complaints about the dominance of seemingly-incompetent UX professionals really boil down to failure to consume one's own dog food. The UX pros are not incompetent at UX design, but they are unfamiliar with the tasks that the program will ultimately be used for, and that's even w…

Corollary is that many engineers are unfamiliar with the tasks that end users are actually going to use the software for. This phenomenon is definitely more widespread that people in this thread seem to realise, afaics because many are power users used to power interfaces. Power interfaces are generally not enormously useful for the majority of users (preemptive /s: yes, please tell me anecdotes about how pet power interface is superior).

Yes, there is flawed design: that covers most design, in the same way there is flawed programming, which covers most programming, and flawed approaches to business which covers most business, and so on.

[edit] the feeling I get from the threads here is that many commenters don't get that most design involves huge tradeoffs, same as programming. Design training is not "make a pretty thing" (which is what many commenters seem to be dismissively suggesting, which is actively offensive), Dribbble is really not reflective of actual design, and much of what you see is surface driven by designers having to find tradeoffs to deal with management edicts/commercial goals/technical limitations that may conflict with otherwise good design

Post reply on HN