5 ms·
They are not. As someone who does GUI design, I recognized many of the rules. If you look at GUIs that don't follow rules for balance e.g. they clearly looks wo
by jernfrost 10y ago
They are not. As someone who does GUI design, I recognized many of the rules. If you look at GUIs that don't follow rules for balance e.g. they clearly looks worse than balanced ones.
The McMansions look cool in a theme park way. But there is nothing timeless about them. It is like the things we thought looked cool in the 80s like big shiny metal fonts. It was cool then, but today we are like "oh my, how did we ever think this was good!"
- Houshalter 10y agoYour second paragraph kind of contradicts the first. If you admit that aesthetics can change over time, then they aren't objectively true. Aesthetic preference is all about what associations you have, not the features themselves. Personally I don't think the examples looked good. And while some of these features might work well for GUIs, forcing them on houses can cause problems. E.g. limiting the number of windows to fit the style. Windows and natural lighting have been shown to have a huge beneficial effect on mental health. Or forcing the house to be symmetrical could make the room layouts suboptimal. Form should follow function, and these rules oppose function.