4 ms·

Maybe it doesn't come closer enough for perspective to kick in? Why is it coming closer in the pressed state? Aren't I pushing it down?

• nnq 10y ago
  EXACTLY! "Material design" is very much opposed to how "real-world material interfaces" would look like in anything above the basics. Think about fucking ripple & light efects, but on otherwise solid-looking and matte-looking surfaces! I mostly label this whole "material design" crap as "flat & minimalistic (metro-like) design" + "minimal volumetric efdects backported from the abandoned skeumorphic design bandwagon" in order to give the user some "visual cues". In truly like the style and cues of material design practically... but there is a subconscious "uncanny valley intuition" about it that triggers a primitive warning sign in my primitive bran or something... kind of like "fear/stress about something that is practically the right thing but it... deceives you in a way and maybe also in others". I find both flat/minimalistic and rich/skeomorphic interfaces more soothing / calming / trust inducing. I think most banks and ecommerce and enterprise/infrastructure UI professionals also share this intuition with me: you see in most banking, AWS etc. UIs always "a touck of skomorphism" plus "a lack of unnatural/magical effects", and it makes you trust more the app, be more *relaxed and confident" and willing to open you soul & wallet to it...
  • moeffju 10y ago
    Yes, that's kinda the point. Touch screens are not like any other "material" interface we know. Read through the Material Design intro sometime - it's an interesting read regardless of whether you agree with their thinking.
  • sfifs 10y ago
    Which generation/age group would you belong to? Funnily enough, the opposite is true for me. Banks and eCom sites that don't have polished modern flattish interfaces make me think the company is out of its depth and likely insecure
• moeffju 10y ago
  It's not a physical button. In material design language, the button rises up towards your finger.
  • ethanbond 10y ago
    So it's a selectively applied metaphor aka arbitrary stylistic choices.
    • SippinLean 10y ago
      Are you aware that Material Design uses consistently applied metaphors and adheres to a style guide? That's the opposite of both of those.
      • ethanbond 10y ago
        "Consistently applied metaphors" except for where they don't want to be consistent. Copy/pasting from another comment of mine, quotes from the manifesto: > The material is grounded in tactile reality, inspired by the study of paper and ink, yet technologically advanced and open to imagination and magic. "It's grounded in reality... but not!" > Surfaces and edges of the material provide visual cues that are grounded in reality... Yet the flexibility of the material creates new affordances that supercede those in the physical world, without breaking the rules of physics. "Except for rules of physics like things moving against the force applied to them, or shadows changing without the light source, object, or perspective changing." > The fundamentals of light, surface, and movement are key to conveying how objects move, interact, and exist in space and in relation to each other. Realistic lighting shows seams, divides space, and indicates moving parts. "Except where we decide we don't want to be realistic."
        • SippinLean 10y ago
          It's grounded in reality, not bound by it. If you familiarize yourself with MD you'll realize the edge cases you tried to come up with have been covered and explained; it's not a contradiction.
• DonHopkins 10y ago
  Maybe the button is staying in the same place vertically, but you're pressing the entire background and all its other contents except the button away from you. :/