4 ms·
This is nearly as bad as grey/monochrome icons, which is the way Google chose to ruin the GMail interface years back. In both cases you're completely discarding
by TillE 6y ago
This is nearly as bad as grey/monochrome icons, which is the way Google chose to ruin the GMail interface years back. In both cases you're completely discarding one great way to let users quickly and easily distinguish between different icons: color.
Apple did the same thing with the iTunes interface (colors -> grey) even longer ago, and I just don't get it. Different colors are objectively good for the UX. It's information that gets instantly processed by your brain.
- duffmancd 6y agoAnd Microsoft with recent additions to Office. The larger icons in the ribbon at least have splashes of colour, but the quick access toolbar is entirely monochrome.
- trilinearnz 6y agoThey tried the monochrome look with the Visual Studio toolbar a few iterations back. It did not end well! The simultaneous introduction of uppercase menu bar text probably didn't help, either :)
- pgcj_poster 6y agoMonochrome icons cause the interface to recede into the background, giving more focus to the content. It's the same logic behind hiding UI elements when not in use. This is a good choice in situations where the user is mainly viewing content rather than interacting with the application—for instance, PDF readers and video players. Google probably found that most users use Gmail mainly for reading, rather than processing, emails—and decided that it should more like a viewer and less like an application.
- thesuperbigfrog 6y ago>> Google probably found that most users use Gmail mainly for reading, rather than processing, emails—and decided that it should more like a viewer and less like an application. Do they really think that people do not write emails any more?