• Steven CavinsSteven Cavins, 3 years ago

    For my part, hands up, I've admitted to myself that a lot of this hand-wringing is simply designers following trends. I've been designing all the way through a few, the skeu and the flat. I never thought "skeu" was philosophically correct, like I don't think "flat" is philosophically correct either. It's super annoying to read mission statements that seem to imply anything is "purer" or "more content focused" than another.

    I don't think of this design thing as a line of evolution, but rather lots of tiny revolutions. It's probably an impossible thing to prove that things are harder to use now than they were then, and as far as I can tell, we haven't yet hit on some timeless "t-shirt and jeans" vibe that will stand the test of time. Aqua looks super dated to me, and Sierra is probably dated on arrival.

    I think we can all probably agree that Apple isn't the prom queen of the design universe anymore, but whether it's because of skeu or flat or whatever, I think that's a really hard thing to deconstruct.

    1 point
    • Nicholas Windsor Howard, 3 years ago

      Hi, Steven. Thank you for your measured and thoughtful reply.

      It's super annoying to read mission statements that seem to imply anything is "purer" or "more content focused" than another.

      I found this above comment particularly refreshing.

      Aqua looks super dated to me, and Sierra is probably dated on arrival.

      Perhaps Aqua appears dated to you, but why should that matter? I would argue that vapid trendiness, not dated-ness, is the opponent of timelessness.

      0 points
      • Steven CavinsSteven Cavins, 3 years ago (edited 3 years ago )

        But do you think Aqua is the "t-shirt & jeans" of UI design or is it, say, on the bottom of a ladder we should be on?

        I sort of disagree that trendiness is inherently vapid though (if that's a point.) A lot of cool stuff comes of it despite the ethereality of it all, and I don't think permanence is necessarily a beacon for the value of things. Does everything have to stand the test of time to actually matter?

        1 point
        • Nicholas Windsor Howard, 3 years ago (edited 3 years ago )

          Hmm... perhaps Aqua lives somewhere in the well-tended broom closet with the ladder we should be on. While not as visually simple as a t-shirt and jeans, in my view it looks splendid and holds up exceedingly well. It felt intelligent and aesthetically celebratory. I certainly would not offer any of the same sentiments for Sierra.

          (Clarification: I believe Aqua looked better or more timeless at certain points in its lifetime than at other points.)

          0 points
        • Nicholas Windsor Howard, 3 years ago

          I don't think permanence is necessarily a beacon for the value of things. Does everything have to stand the test of time to actually matter?

          Not necessarily: I would never rule it out. But timelessness is almost always a lighthouse for my personal ship.

          0 points
    • Nicholas Windsor Howard, 3 years ago

      If this makes sense to you, I believe Aqua was "cool," while Sierra is "hip."

      0 points