11 comments

  • Mike JohnsonMike Johnson, almost 6 years ago

    Ugh I don't want to be a troll, but what Google is calling "Material Design" is BS. Designers like us, out in the wild, have been designing this way for some time now. It's nothing more than the current trend. Google has jumped on board with the trend, thought up some fancy verbiage to justify it, given it a snappy name, and now they're taking credit for it. Polymer looks like a great tool for building sites that will fit with current design trends, but I'm fairly offended that Google is taking credit for the trend. This Youtube video confirms to me that they're BSing their way through this media push.

    6 points
    • Abhishek SureshAbhishek Suresh, almost 6 years ago

      When Apple does it, its a "revolutionary design", everybody who has been doing it before Apple releases it feels like an elite designer. Everyone loses their mind.

      When Google does it. It is offending. It is Bullshit. Its a ripoff

      Why is it so hard to believe that Google can do good design too?

      :\

      1 point
      • Mike JohnsonMike Johnson, over 5 years ago

        Google can and does to good (and bad) design. I'm not offended by the quality of the design, I'm offended by the manner in which they're packaging and marketing an existing trend. I listened to their reasoning and to me it sounds like they picked an aesthetic first and then came up with rhetoric to justify it.

        Apple's physical product design was undeniably revolutionary. Their skeuomorphism and resistance to responsiveness in digital design was derided by the design community until they changed it.

        0 points
  • Nick NobleNick Noble, almost 6 years ago (edited almost 6 years ago )

    .... ummm I think his definition of skeuomorphism might be wrong.

    He calls it 'unnecessary ornaments', which seems like a broad definition (or he doesn't understand it well enough to explain it). My understanding is that it's 'details that remind you of another object that performs a similar action, for affordances'. Like a writing app that looks like a notepad, and you recognize the notepad and go 'this is for writing'.

    If everything is based on pieces and layers of paper to give context, it is a form of skeuomorphism... but that's not necessarily a bad thing.

    3 points
  • , almost 6 years ago (edited almost 6 years ago )

    It's good to see more people are dialing back on 100% flat design. We're seeing more and more designs that are adding small gradients or drop shadows back to their CTA buttons.

    3 points
  • josh matsonjosh matson, almost 6 years ago

    SkeuoFlatism...

    1 point
  • Darth BaneDarth Bane, almost 6 years ago

    Why is he having such a hard time answering the question, it's pretty straightforward: is Material Design skeuomorphism or not? The answer is no, it's not. Surely they must have had this discussion internally a million times before releasing the guidelines.

    1 point
  • Johnny LamJohnny Lam, almost 6 years ago

    I still consider Google's "Material Design" to be flat but with interactions they give you feedback with touch inputs, drop-shadows and parallax movement. Some could argue its similar to iOS 7 but without the blurs...

    1 point
  • Alina Kem, 3 years ago

    Flat design will appear more simplistic on the background of material, besides, all these animations are aimed more on user interaction with mobile devices, rather than with the site. While the material is ideal for smartphones and tablets, flat – is ideal for simple and light websites that require the fastest possible response and flash-like work. https://erminesoft.com/flat-design-vs-material/

    0 points
  • Jim SilvermanJim Silverman, almost 6 years ago

    second dude summed it up pretty well: looks fake, feels real.

    0 points