4 ms·

I too hate the material design kind of flatness. For me, only apple somehow gets UI right (at least for me) and it feels very intuitive for me while also lookin

I too hate the material design kind of flatness. For me, only apple somehow gets UI right (at least for me) and it feels very intuitive for me while also looking very good. The new "flat" design that pops up everywhere sometimes just feels like a lazy version of UI design, where you basically don't need proper styles anymore and just make everything b/w with maybe a border here and there.

kjeetgill 5y ago
My understanding of material design is that it tries not to be too flat. Material design reduces the 3d roundedness and gradients of many elements but still relies heavily on drop shadows to indicate hierarchy and overlapping.
lelanthran 5y ago
> I too hate the material design kind of flatness. For me, only apple somehow gets UI right (at least for me) and it feels very intuitive for me while also looking very good. I dunno about that (both Apple using flat, and the "gets it right" part). I'm looking at activity monitor now, under memory pressure, and the table of memory types has "Memory used" row expanded, and yet none of the rows are actually clickable. I spent a few seconds yesterday trying to click the other rows. Then I looked at system preferences, and it's not actually flat widgets - they have relief for those things that can be interacted with. Things that are clickable are visually marked as such.
- tonyedgecombe 5y ago
  >I'm looking at activity monitor now, under memory pressure, and the table of memory types has "Memory used" row expanded, and yet none of the rows are actually clickable. I spent a few seconds yesterday trying to click the other rows. I can see why you might get confused there but it feels like nitpicking. I never expected to click on any of those elements because they don't look like a traditional table or outline view.

4 ms·

I too hate the material design kind of flatness. For me, only apple somehow gets UI right (at least for me) and it feels very intuitive for me while also lookin

by ghosty141 5y ago

kjeetgill 5y ago
My understanding of material design is that it tries not to be too flat. Material design reduces the 3d roundedness and gradients of many elements but still relies heavily on drop shadows to indicate hierarchy and overlapping.
lelanthran 5y ago
> I too hate the material design kind of flatness. For me, only apple somehow gets UI right (at least for me) and it feels very intuitive for me while also looking very good. I dunno about that (both Apple using flat, and the "gets it right" part). I'm looking at activity monitor now, under memory pressure, and the table of memory types has "Memory used" row expanded, and yet none of the rows are actually clickable. I spent a few seconds yesterday trying to click the other rows. Then I looked at system preferences, and it's not actually flat widgets - they have relief for those things that can be interacted with. Things that are clickable are visually marked as such.
- tonyedgecombe 5y ago
  >I'm looking at activity monitor now, under memory pressure, and the table of memory types has "Memory used" row expanded, and yet none of the rows are actually clickable. I spent a few seconds yesterday trying to click the other rows. I can see why you might get confused there but it feels like nitpicking. I never expected to click on any of those elements because they don't look like a traditional table or outline view.