5 ms·
> old GUI paradigms were just right It's a permutation of "worse is better". Skeuomorphism and hierarchical organization cargo-culted as evil, ignoring that ou
by hnzix 8y ago
> old GUI paradigms were just right
It's a permutation of "worse is better". Skeuomorphism and hierarchical organization cargo-culted as evil, ignoring that our traditional built environments work using these paradigms.
User-hostile design. Let's replace all buttons and text labels with arbitrary flat abstract icons! See also: nosql and SPAs.
- agumonkey 8y agoI'm not sure I parse your comment well. I think I've seen enough UI/GUI/UX paradigm to know when something is near the sweet spot. It seems you agree ? The flat trend was a reaction to abusive skeymorphism; arguing that visual information should be reduced to a minimum.. but somehow ~serious interaction requires a little bit more than layout and font to be enjoyable.
- cm2187 8y agoWell, Microsoft is a good illustration. They imposed a ribbon on all customer UIs, except of course the one software that their developers actually use (Visual Studio).
- int_19h 8y agoExtreme skeumorphism a la Mac sometime ago is also undesirable, though. You want them to look just close enough to trigger recognition, everything above that is cognitive overhead.
- coldtea 8y ago>Extreme skeumorphism a la Mac sometime ago is also undesirable, though Mac never had extreme skeumorphism. Extreme skeumorphism would be like the common case of DVD player apps made to look real-life DVD players (with all the frustrating LCD-like text displays and tiny cryptic buttons). It's not about having 3d looking buttons, or having faux-leather on your Notes app, which are the kinds of things Apple did.
- agumonkey 8y agofaux-leather falls into abusive skeu IMO
- coldtea 8y agoThe bad skeuomorphism is about replicating physical world design and constraints in digital apps -- and thus imposing constraints that don't exist in the digital world. Merely looking like a physical product (but with interactivity that takes advantage of what the digital world affords) is not the skeuomorphism people complained about. One might like or not like faux-leather, for example, but that's just an aesthetic preference (and those things come in circles, in 10-15 years it could be all skeuomorphism in vogue again, as a backlash against too minimal / plain vanilla designs).
- int_19h 8y agoI'm probably using the word wrong, then. But those 3D-looking buttons with glare, or faux leather, is exactly what I'm talking about - it is unnecessary cognitive overhead.
- hnzix 8y agoA button that looks like a physical real world button that I'd push, with a clear text label beneath it, is less cognitive overhead for me than an abstract squiggly icon with no border or text that I have to interpret. Bonus points if the icons are hidden inside various hamburger menus sprinkled across the interface - Atlassian I'm looking at you. I shouldn't be forced to learn some designer's personal visual symbology to use an app. It's hieroglyphics.
- int_19h 8y agoI'm not advocating for either of those extremes. To remind, in this thread, we were talking about UI aesthetics of the times when Delphi was popular. That's Windows 9x and NT, classic MacOS 7.x to 9.x, BeOS; and on Unix: Motif, NeXTSTEP, Gtk 1.x, Qt 1.x to 2.x. So, basically, buttons are chiseled gray (or other color of user's choice), with prominent 3D borders, but flat where the label is for maximum readability. Just enough to capture the essence of a physical button, but without actually rendering one.