8 ms·

Congrats on releasing, that's a huge feat. A Go GUI app is an interesting concept, it definitely has compelling advantages like single binary targets and inhere

Congrats on releasing, that's a huge feat. A Go GUI app is an interesting concept, it definitely has compelling advantages like single binary targets and inherently cross platform code. I do take issue with the repo description "Cross platform GUI in Go based on Material Design" though. Looking on the screenshots in the README (eg [1]), I can't see how this is actually based on Material Design, other than using some material design icons. The widgets don't even follow the basic spirit of Material design [2]: > Material Design UIs are displayed in an environment that expresses three-dimensional (3D) space using light, surfaces, and cast shadows. It looks much closer to Microsoft's "fluent design". Maybe the repo description was accidentally left unchanged? It's weird that the public website https://fyne.io/ https://fyne.io/ doesn't actually contain any references to material design. [1] https://raw.githubusercontent.com/fyne-io/fyne/master/img/widgets-light.png https://raw.githubusercontent.com/fyne-io/fyne/master/img/wi... [2] https://material.io/design/environment/surfaces.html https://material.io/design/environment/surfaces.html

tyingq 8y ago
"Material Design UIs are displayed in an environment that expresses three-dimensional (3D) space using light, surfaces, and cast shadows" Somewhat amusing because my biggest issue with Material Design is buttons I don't know I can click, because they are flat and have no depth or shadows: https://storage.googleapis.com/spec-host-backup/mio-design%2Fassets%2F1rI63_05lNHyMtSwrnzXJ1Erg0TbkSDTY%2Fbuttons-types-all.png https://storage.googleapis.com/spec-host-backup/mio-design%2...
- wongarsu 8y ago
  People for some reason always think just because things are flat in material design they shouldn't have shadows. Or maybe it's just people calling lots of things material design that really aren't.
  - tyingq 8y ago
    Maybe taking cues from the official docs. My picture is from the Material Design website. https://material.io/design/components/buttons.html# https://material.io/design/components/buttons.html# (scroll down to types)
    - fastball 8y ago
      Most of the buttons on that page have a shadow though...
      - tyingq 8y ago
        Okay then, the buttons on their home page have no shadow: https://material.io https://material.io See any of the (many) "Learn More" and "View All" buttons.
        peteretep 8y ago
        In that case they have outlines, and are clearly buttons?
        deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
        dmitriid 8y ago
        Design flexibly -> Learn more. It's a link (hover over it). For some reason it's displayed as a button. Develop across platforms -> platform links. All links are links. Collaborate seamlessly -> View Tools. It's a link (hover over it). For some reason it's displayed as a button. Further down the page. Applying typography -> Learn more. It's a link (hover over it). For some reason it's displayed as a button. Applying typography -> Related -> Typography. It's a link. But it's displayed as plain text, and you wouldn't know it's a link until you hovered over it. And even then the only clue is cursor changing to pointer (if your status bar is turned off, good luck figuring out it's a link). What's new -> Develop -> Cards. It's a link. That looks like plain text. ---- And that's the main problem with anything coming from Google. Their pages and designs are wildly inconsistent and contradict their own guidelines. ANd sometimes it looks like they are implemented by the main character from Split. My favourite example is is their Google Maps "design": https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dq2_soxWsAEqKWo?format=jpg https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dq2_soxWsAEqKWo?format=jpg
andydotxyz 8y ago
The biggest reason is that we have not implemented shadows yet... once we have that things may look more like you expect.
WorldMaker 8y ago
>> Material Design UIs are displayed in an environment that expresses three-dimensional (3D) space using light, surfaces, and cast shadows. > It looks much closer to Microsoft's "fluent design". It's a bit of a digression, but Fluent Design (esp. 2.0, but even 1.0) actually has very similar requirements of light, surfaces [materials], and casting shadows. It's a more nuanced approach than Material Design, which can somewhat be summed up as Material Design imagines the application as a stack of paper and cardboard and Fluent Design has both a subtler concept of "materials" (not every thing needs to be obviously stacked like a three-tiered 2.5D layer cake when displayed in 2D) and a broader concept of "materials" than Material Design (Fluent throws in things like glass-like parts, "acrylics", glinting metal bits, etc). I understand what you probably meant that it looks like Microsoft's Windows 8.x-era "modern" designs, but I find it useful to point out that Fluent Design and Material Design have nearly converged at this point and Fluent Design is a lot more like Material Design than people think. (To the point where I'd argue today that a lot of the best Fluent Design stuff is better at Material Design than Material Design stuff.) Does this not sound almost exactly like the Material Design quote above? [1] > The physical world is our vocabulary. Fluent speaks in light and shadow, in spatial dimensions, in the weave and fold of fundamental materials. [1] https://www.microsoft.com/design/fluent/ https://www.microsoft.com/design/fluent/

tyingq 8y ago

"Material Design UIs are displayed in an environment that expresses three-dimensional (3D) space using light, surfaces, and cast shadows" Somewhat amusing because my biggest issue with Material Design is buttons I don't know I can click, because they are flat and have no depth or shadows: https://storage.googleapis.com/spec-host-backup/mio-design%2Fassets%2F1rI63_05lNHyMtSwrnzXJ1Erg0TbkSDTY%2Fbuttons-types-all.png https://storage.googleapis.com/spec-host-backup/mio-design%2...

wongarsu 8y ago
People for some reason always think just because things are flat in material design they shouldn't have shadows. Or maybe it's just people calling lots of things material design that really aren't.
- tyingq 8y ago
  Maybe taking cues from the official docs. My picture is from the Material Design website. https://material.io/design/components/buttons.html# https://material.io/design/components/buttons.html# (scroll down to types)
  - fastball 8y ago
    Most of the buttons on that page have a shadow though...
    - tyingq 8y ago
      Okay then, the buttons on their home page have no shadow: https://material.io https://material.io See any of the (many) "Learn More" and "View All" buttons.
      - peteretep 8y ago
        In that case they have outlines, and are clearly buttons?
        deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
        dmitriid 8y ago
        Design flexibly -> Learn more. It's a link (hover over it). For some reason it's displayed as a button. Develop across platforms -> platform links. All links are links. Collaborate seamlessly -> View Tools. It's a link (hover over it). For some reason it's displayed as a button. Further down the page. Applying typography -> Learn more. It's a link (hover over it). For some reason it's displayed as a button. Applying typography -> Related -> Typography. It's a link. But it's displayed as plain text, and you wouldn't know it's a link until you hovered over it. And even then the only clue is cursor changing to pointer (if your status bar is turned off, good luck figuring out it's a link). What's new -> Develop -> Cards. It's a link. That looks like plain text. ---- And that's the main problem with anything coming from Google. Their pages and designs are wildly inconsistent and contradict their own guidelines. ANd sometimes it looks like they are implemented by the main character from Split. My favourite example is is their Google Maps "design": https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dq2_soxWsAEqKWo?format=jpg https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dq2_soxWsAEqKWo?format=jpg

andydotxyz 8y ago

The biggest reason is that we have not implemented shadows yet... once we have that things may look more like you expect.

WorldMaker 8y ago

>> Material Design UIs are displayed in an environment that expresses three-dimensional (3D) space using light, surfaces, and cast shadows. > It looks much closer to Microsoft's "fluent design". It's a bit of a digression, but Fluent Design (esp. 2.0, but even 1.0) actually has very similar requirements of light, surfaces [materials], and casting shadows. It's a more nuanced approach than Material Design, which can somewhat be summed up as Material Design imagines the application as a stack of paper and cardboard and Fluent Design has both a subtler concept of "materials" (not every thing needs to be obviously stacked like a three-tiered 2.5D layer cake when displayed in 2D) and a broader concept of "materials" than Material Design (Fluent throws in things like glass-like parts, "acrylics", glinting metal bits, etc). I understand what you probably meant that it looks like Microsoft's Windows 8.x-era "modern" designs, but I find it useful to point out that Fluent Design and Material Design have nearly converged at this point and Fluent Design is a lot more like Material Design than people think. (To the point where I'd argue today that a lot of the best Fluent Design stuff is better at Material Design than Material Design stuff.) Does this not sound almost exactly like the Material Design quote above? [1] > The physical world is our vocabulary. Fluent speaks in light and shadow, in spatial dimensions, in the weave and fold of fundamental materials. [1] https://www.microsoft.com/design/fluent/ https://www.microsoft.com/design/fluent/