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

Skeuomorphism

skeu.it

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 106 posts

Re: Skeuomorphism

#51

Post by nileshk »

The audio plugin example is typical because the vast majority of music production software exhibits a great deal of skeuomorphism. I personally don't like this because it increases the cognitive load in trying to figure out an interface, and I don't feel like it helps make things more intuitive than a non-skeuomorphic interface -- rather the opposite, it becomes more confusing.

This is one of the reasons I like Ableton Live ( http://www.ableton.com/suite-8 ): it has a simple, consistent user interface elements and the entire user interface happens to be vector based. Not only is it easy to navigate and understand, but the fact that it is vector based allows it to have a resolution-independent interface that can be zoomed in/out. Which addresses another problem with music production software: they tend to use tiny fonts and other UI elements which makes it hard to read when used with a high-PPI monitor and/or when the monitor is far enough away from the user (which seems to often be case in many studio setups). And once you've done a highly graphical skeuomorphic interface that uses lots of bitmaps, scaling doesn't always happen smoothly.

On the other hand, many people like skeuomorphic interfaces when they've had past experience with actual audio hardware. Reason ( http://www.propellerheads.se/products/reason/ ) is one such example where the interface is so skeuomorphic that is often considered a hardware simulator. People who have past experience with such hardware often love Reason because they are able to draw upon past experience to understand the interface. I suppose in this case, this is a very appropriate use of skeuomorphism.

People like me who don't have experience with such hardware aren't necessarily going to appreciate this, though some people will enjoy it even without past experience with hardware because some people simply enjoy visually appealing graphical interfaces. So it's a tough call which group of people is in the majority and who you want to cater to. Personally I like music/audio software to focus on it's core task of being a music creation tool, and less on being graphically impressive; but that's just me.

Re: Skeuomorphism

#54

Post by bpatrianakos »

recoiledsnake wrote: post #45
shinratdr wrote: post #7

So skeuomorphism is now anything besides Windows Phone style "pure digital"? Shiny = glass, black texture = leather, blue texture = denim, etc? That's going to be really, really boring. I don't know why texture is such a bad thing. Of course you can overdo it like anything, but personally I prefer Reeder with a light paper-pulp backing texture instead of a plain light peach background. For example, what is so bad abo…

>So skeuomorphism is now anything besides Windows Phone style "pure digital"? Shiny = glass, black texture = leather, blue texture = denim, etc? That's going to be really, really boring How is Metro really really boring? Have you used WP beyond seeing screenshots? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=locNEna0of4&feature=plcp . If you're really interested in the design philosophy , here's some analysis of Metro's alternativ…

In defense of your parent I think you misunderstood what he's saying is boring. What I took it to mean was that if you write off everything remotely skeuomorphic, textured, etc. and only leave 2D Windows Phone style pure digital design then that becomes boring. It's not boring because it's WP-digital style but because after a while that style of design will become as boring and played out as skeuomorphic design. Windows Phone and Windows 8 are actually really nice looking and that's coming from a guy who loves Apple's design sensibilities and have hated Windows' design up until Windows Phone and Win8 (with 7 having some redeeming qualities to it).

I actually think Aero Glass is quite skeuomorphic. It's literally a window. And for me it definitely does get in the way. The way the shadows and colors change behind the glass is distracting, it's often hard to tell what window is active, and I always get distracted by the taskbar because suddenly one of the icons will flash except the flash isn't a real instance of an app trying to alert me but a false alarm caused by my mouse getting too near it or, again, another window moving just the wrong way as to make the taskbar glass react even though nothing relevant is going on there for me to look at.

I don't want to start a flame war over Apple UI v. Windows at all. What I'm saying is that the parent has a point. I'm also saying Aero Glass isn't for everyone. There are lots of people like me who have the same problems with it and we're not imagining it and no, we're not using it wrong. It's just now we are and it doesn't mean you're wrong for liking it just as much as it doesn't mean we're wrong for disliking it.

The larger point I want to make beyond all that is that design flair matters. It's not superfluous at all. A lot of people like to talk about design flair like its a gimmick and take a purist view of design where it's only about usability. Usability is most important but design flair can take an interface with perfect usability to the next level. It's what gives apps credibility. It makes the experience enjoyable and it's what makes people love their apps. Any trend taken too far can become exhausting and awful to look at though and I think we're starting to see this with skeuomorphic design. It's sad because I loved it until some people butchered it. It's Web 2.0 all over again and the "pure digital" style will eventually fall victim to overuse too eventually.

I think this site is funny but it's meant to be taken with a grain of salt. Some of those designs really are nice but it's still fun to poke some fun at them nonetheless.

Re: Skeuomorphism

#55

Post by dm8 »

wvenable wrote: post #35
dm8 wrote: post #19

As a designer, I couldn't agree more. Skeuomorphism can be great if done right. Nowadays visual designers (who are wannabee UX folks) think any sexy texture (leather patterns) can increase usability of an app. Even startup founders think the same. They don't realize design is not the shiny new coat of paint, design is how it works. In fact if your users think "it works fine", it means you've done great job. Your obje…

I've been a software developer for many years and sexy design sells. For good or bad, that's the way it is.

Somewhat agree. Dropbox didn't sell because it had shiny icons for folders or sexy web interface. It sold because it provided immense value and it just worked. Same can be said about Google, YouTube, Microsoft Word etc. None of them had sexy design to start with but they simply worked and provided great value to end-users.

Re: Skeuomorphism

#56

Post by Smudge »

gbog wrote: post #43
Smudge wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wasn't arguing that texture is worse. When used appropriately, it's generally better than solid colors, both in terms of UX and just visual attractiveness. But there is a certain category of textures that seem to come up most often on this site. Things like leather, denim, paper that perhaps remind users of rough, tactile, durable materials. These metaphors get a lot of use, especially on iOS, and I find that it's…

Anything to back the claim that textures are "generally better" in terms of UX? Studies? Statistics? A/B testing?

That was just opinion. Should have made that clear.

Re: Skeuomorphism

#57

Post by wvenable »

dm8 wrote: post #55
wvenable wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been a software developer for many years and sexy design sells. For good or bad, that's the way it is.

Somewhat agree. Dropbox didn't sell because it had shiny icons for folders or sexy web interface. It sold because it provided immense value and it just worked. Same can be said about Google, YouTube, Microsoft Word etc. None of them had sexy design to start with but they simply worked and provided great value to end-users.

You've picked apps with necessarily minimal interfaces; the only exception being Microsoft Word. Word doesn't need a new UI every other year but it gets one because, without making the UI sexier each year, people don't buy it.

I like this anecdote from Raymond Chen on this subject: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/oldnewthing/archive/2004/05/25/14125...

Re: Skeuomorphism

#58

Post by jlgreco »

mikeryan wrote: post #46
ajross wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "leather" tagged posts on the front page are more than "black texture". Both of them feature "thread stitching" along the borders. I thought these were the worst of the bunch, actually. I agree that the "Skeumorphism must die" meme has gotten out of hand. But the examples on this site are actually pretty well justified AFAICT.

Both of them feature "thread stitching" along the borders It may be overused and bad taste but "thread stitching" is not in itself Skeumorphic design which is I believe the GP's point. A skeuomorph /ˈskjuːəmɔrf/ skew-ə-morf, or skeuomorphism (Greek: skeuos—vessel or tool, morphe—shape),[1] is a derivative object that retains ornamental design cues to a structure that was necessary in the original A calendar app which…

The way I see it, this website features two types of design. The first is skeumorphic design, and the other is a sort of mimicry of skeumorphic design by people who presumably did not realize the underlying point of skeumorphism.

Cargo cult design, basically.

Re: Skeuomorphism

#59

Post by snogglethorpe »

shinratdr wrote: post #7

So skeuomorphism is now anything besides Windows Phone style "pure digital"? Shiny = glass, black texture = leather, blue texture = denim, etc? That's going to be really, really boring. I don't know why texture is such a bad thing. Of course you can overdo it like anything, but personally I prefer Reeder with a light paper-pulp backing texture instead of a plain light peach background. For example, what is so bad abo…

> So skeuomorphism is now anything besides Windows Phone style "pure digital"? ... I don't know why texture is such a bad thing. Of course you can overdo it like anything, ...

Here's a key to interpreting the internet (and, well, all of society really, but the internet is like normal society on speed):

(1) People love to whine.

(2) People love to feel that they're on the cusp of a trend.

(3) People love to repeat what said, because that makes them feel smart too -- but often don't really understand the basis of 's statement (details matter!).

(4) People like black-and-white, crisp, clear-cut dogma; details and shades of grey are confusing and annoying. Whoooo, slogans!

Apparently, for whatever reason, some people have decided that so-called "skeuomorphism" is so-misguided, so-yesterday, so-OMG-ARE-YOU-STILL-DOING-THAT?!1? No doubt there is a kernel of truth behind this, but it's also probably completely swamped by the resulting noise...

Anyway, right.

Re: Skeuomorphism

#60

Post by cooldeal »

bpatrianakos wrote: post #54
recoiledsnake wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>So skeuomorphism is now anything besides Windows Phone style "pure digital"? Shiny = glass, black texture = leather, blue texture = denim, etc? That's going to be really, really boring How is Metro really really boring? Have you used WP beyond seeing screenshots? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=locNEna0of4&feature=plcp . If you're really interested in the design philosophy , here's some analysis of Metro's alternativ…

In defense of your parent I think you misunderstood what he's saying is boring. What I took it to mean was that if you write off everything remotely skeuomorphic, textured, etc. and only leave 2D Windows Phone style pure digital design then that becomes boring. It's not boring because it's WP-digital style but because after a while that style of design will become as boring and played out as skeuomorphic design. Wind…

Aero glass is gone in Windows 8. Design flair is different from skeuomorphism, you can have one without the other.
Post reply on HN