3 ms·

The issue is the conflation of the form and functional aspects of design. The 'Stripe gradient' on their home page, and a few other things are purely aesthetic

The issue is the conflation of the form and functional aspects of design. The 'Stripe gradient' on their home page, and a few other things are purely aesthetic, and frankly extraneous to the more functional aspects. Most of the 'guidelines' from Material were reasonably pragmatic, although very picky, beyond what is necessary in all but the most comprehensive apps with big budgets. There's nothing wrong with some aesthetic on a home page, and such things will always be trendy and evolving.

turbinerneiter 7y ago
I think this is a great point. Design has two layers. The first one is based on science. Ergonomics (i.e. edge of the screen is fast to reach with a mouse, color contrast, size of fonts, ...). The second layer is style. In the given constraint of color contrast, you use _these_ colors, ... The minimalist style often acts like it is on the first layer, but it is just style on top of ergonomics. It is a good design system. Because it is minimal, it is easier to not make first-layer-mistakes. It is timeless because the second layer is so thin as to not show the trends of the century. A lot of people think this is good - but I don't think it universally is. As long as you get the first layer right, being more wild on the second layer adds character. Being timeless can also be interpreted as being boring.
- spectramax 7y ago
  I have a particular fascination for "boring" professor websites: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/38619/why-are-professors-websites-so-ugly https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/38619/why-are-p... Particularly the following comment: "In some scientific fields/cultures, a stylish website could be viewed as unnecessary or even pompous. In this view, the textual content of a website is the only thing that matters, and if you "need" to make your website stylish perhaps it lacks real substance. This is the same line of thought that supports simplicity in presentation with minimal graphics. I have encountered this especially in math and theoretical CS."
  - turbinerneiter 7y ago
    There is also the old-school bare HTML hacker website, that encourages you to bring your own css with ?css=whatever.css
  - sonnyblarney 7y ago
    There's some reason behind this. But - and get this - this is an aesthetic in and of itself! It's part of the subtle 'self branding' of academics! Banking culture, academic culture, SV startup culture, punk culture - they all have their idioms, behaviours, signalling etc. in fact far more so than we'd ever like to admit.
- sonnyblarney 7y ago
  "Ergonomics (i.e. edge of the screen is fast to reach with a mouse, color contrast, size of fonts, ...)" It's more basic than that - the premise of UI deals first core usability, the layout of information of components in a manner that communicates information and allows for basic interactivity, and then to make it all coherent across the app. That alone can get pretty hard, there's all sorts of decisions that need to be made. Consider that it's as much about what you don't see as those elements you do. Then you can get into the more granular aspects such as those covered in this article that I identified as 'picky' (for example, the specific contrast ratios among various elements - this is far beyond what 99% of UI designers have the luxury of addressing) and then of course broadening the scope of accessibility, corner functions, cross platform consistency. Even the basics of UI can be pretty hard, let alone the aesthetic elements, and very specific things. And of course, all of it 'cross cuts' with the aesthetic aspects, which is why the disciplines of UI and classical design are so tightly interwoven. Design and UX is very poorly understood, and it's difficult to professionalize or measure given the abstract nature of the subject. As Engineers, we love to measure things, and much of great design defies the kinds of classical measurements we are used to. As the OP indicated, it's also a field wherein it's hard to be self aware i.e. to 'know what you don't know', and so 'everyone has an opinion'. A great UI is almost like a great API - it's hard to measure and articulate, but generally we know it when we use it.
- andrewingram 7y ago
  In the case of Stripe, a lot of their value hinges on being able to convince both developers and designers that the experience they offer is worth the slightly higher transaction fees. Their design aesthetic (and documentation) communicates this very effectively (in my opinion).

turbinerneiter 7y ago

I think this is a great point. Design has two layers. The first one is based on science. Ergonomics (i.e. edge of the screen is fast to reach with a mouse, color contrast, size of fonts, ...). The second layer is style. In the given constraint of color contrast, you use _these_ colors, ... The minimalist style often acts like it is on the first layer, but it is just style on top of ergonomics. It is a good design system. Because it is minimal, it is easier to not make first-layer-mistakes. It is timeless because the second layer is so thin as to not show the trends of the century. A lot of people think this is good - but I don't think it universally is. As long as you get the first layer right, being more wild on the second layer adds character. Being timeless can also be interpreted as being boring.

spectramax 7y ago
I have a particular fascination for "boring" professor websites: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/38619/why-are-professors-websites-so-ugly https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/38619/why-are-p... Particularly the following comment: "In some scientific fields/cultures, a stylish website could be viewed as unnecessary or even pompous. In this view, the textual content of a website is the only thing that matters, and if you "need" to make your website stylish perhaps it lacks real substance. This is the same line of thought that supports simplicity in presentation with minimal graphics. I have encountered this especially in math and theoretical CS."
- turbinerneiter 7y ago
  There is also the old-school bare HTML hacker website, that encourages you to bring your own css with ?css=whatever.css
- sonnyblarney 7y ago
  There's some reason behind this. But - and get this - this is an aesthetic in and of itself! It's part of the subtle 'self branding' of academics! Banking culture, academic culture, SV startup culture, punk culture - they all have their idioms, behaviours, signalling etc. in fact far more so than we'd ever like to admit.
sonnyblarney 7y ago
"Ergonomics (i.e. edge of the screen is fast to reach with a mouse, color contrast, size of fonts, ...)" It's more basic than that - the premise of UI deals first core usability, the layout of information of components in a manner that communicates information and allows for basic interactivity, and then to make it all coherent across the app. That alone can get pretty hard, there's all sorts of decisions that need to be made. Consider that it's as much about what you don't see as those elements you do. Then you can get into the more granular aspects such as those covered in this article that I identified as 'picky' (for example, the specific contrast ratios among various elements - this is far beyond what 99% of UI designers have the luxury of addressing) and then of course broadening the scope of accessibility, corner functions, cross platform consistency. Even the basics of UI can be pretty hard, let alone the aesthetic elements, and very specific things. And of course, all of it 'cross cuts' with the aesthetic aspects, which is why the disciplines of UI and classical design are so tightly interwoven. Design and UX is very poorly understood, and it's difficult to professionalize or measure given the abstract nature of the subject. As Engineers, we love to measure things, and much of great design defies the kinds of classical measurements we are used to. As the OP indicated, it's also a field wherein it's hard to be self aware i.e. to 'know what you don't know', and so 'everyone has an opinion'. A great UI is almost like a great API - it's hard to measure and articulate, but generally we know it when we use it.
andrewingram 7y ago
In the case of Stripe, a lot of their value hinges on being able to convince both developers and designers that the experience they offer is worth the slightly higher transaction fees. Their design aesthetic (and documentation) communicates this very effectively (in my opinion).