4 ms·

I for one miss the 3-D buttons of the Windows 95 era. It was obvious what could be clicked and what could not.

by RcouF1uZ4gsC 3y ago

yard2010 3y ago
It was so good that Google incorporated this idea in Material Design
- YoshiRulz 3y ago
  And then all but killed it >:( https://m3.material.io/styles/elevation/overview#f9947307-4818-4d94-b98a-fa1cb5498eb1 https://m3.material.io/styles/elevation/overview#f9947307-48... My first smartphone ran KitKat and IMO it was Google's best work to date, design-wise.
ben_w 3y ago
Absolutely agree; I think the anti-skeuomorphic "clean" fashion of the last decade has been terrible for discoverability even in mobile apps, and it's somewhat ironic that the same design cues have gone back to WIMP devices, giving us interfaces designed to look like touch screen mobile apps even though the tech is different — and design cues matching a different technology in order to give a sense of familiarity is the actual definition of skeuomorphic.
- flohofwoe 3y ago
  Tbf, Apples baroque "skeuomorphic phase" with wood paneling, shiny metal and cloth was absolutely terrible even back then and most likely responsible for the "skeumorphic backlash" that followed. Subtle 3D hints for interactive elements always made sense, and don't need to look "old fashioned".
attractivechaos 3y ago
This! I hate iOS’ flat design and the trend after that. When that UI first came out, texts and buttons looked so similar that I often had to poke to distinguish them. Now iOS is not as bad but I still prefer its original 3D design. I guess Jobs would never approve the current iOS UI.
bitwize 3y ago
Oh man, I can remember when the Windows 9x/Motif/Nextstep look was so modern, we thought the future of UI was going to be more of the same: huge bevels on the buttons with maybe a texture map. Think the buttons from the menus in Super Mario 64, and then go watch some old 90s scifi or other technology-themed movies and see how much their "futuristic" UIs looked like that. The Lawnmower Man and some scenes from Hackers come to mind.

I for one miss the 3-D buttons of the Windows 95 era. It was obvious what could be clicked and what could not.

yard2010 3y ago

It was so good that Google incorporated this idea in Material Design

YoshiRulz 3y ago
And then all but killed it >:( https://m3.material.io/styles/elevation/overview#f9947307-4818-4d94-b98a-fa1cb5498eb1 https://m3.material.io/styles/elevation/overview#f9947307-48... My first smartphone ran KitKat and IMO it was Google's best work to date, design-wise.

ben_w 3y ago

Absolutely agree; I think the anti-skeuomorphic "clean" fashion of the last decade has been terrible for discoverability even in mobile apps, and it's somewhat ironic that the same design cues have gone back to WIMP devices, giving us interfaces designed to look like touch screen mobile apps even though the tech is different — and design cues matching a different technology in order to give a sense of familiarity is the actual definition of skeuomorphic.

flohofwoe 3y ago
Tbf, Apples baroque "skeuomorphic phase" with wood paneling, shiny metal and cloth was absolutely terrible even back then and most likely responsible for the "skeumorphic backlash" that followed. Subtle 3D hints for interactive elements always made sense, and don't need to look "old fashioned".

attractivechaos 3y ago

This! I hate iOS’ flat design and the trend after that. When that UI first came out, texts and buttons looked so similar that I often had to poke to distinguish them. Now iOS is not as bad but I still prefer its original 3D design. I guess Jobs would never approve the current iOS UI.

bitwize 3y ago

Oh man, I can remember when the Windows 9x/Motif/Nextstep look was so modern, we thought the future of UI was going to be more of the same: huge bevels on the buttons with maybe a texture map. Think the buttons from the menus in Super Mario 64, and then go watch some old 90s scifi or other technology-themed movies and see how much their "futuristic" UIs looked like that. The Lawnmower Man and some scenes from Hackers come to mind.