14 comments

  • A B, over 4 years ago

    Material Design is Different, Not Better Than Apple Design - FTFY

    13 points
  • Cesar ZeppiniCesar Zeppini, over 4 years ago

    Finally someone said it. I can't understand why lots of talented designers are taking Material Design as a bible, when the people that created it are not more talented than them. There are some good rules and thinking there, but designers, please: filter what is actually useful for your work, don't try to be so strict to this guideline.

    3 points
    • Jameson Tyler, over 4 years ago (edited over 4 years ago )

      It is a more complete and thoroughly documented design system though (not saying it includes everything, but more basic components). Apple's iOS HUI has a long was to go before it can even pretend to compete (Apple Watch design guidelines are moving in the right direction though).

      More broadly, it's driving designers to be more meticulous in the spatial models they use (make and break) to establish design systems.

      0 points
      • Cesar ZeppiniCesar Zeppini, over 4 years ago

        But that's what is crazy for me: design systems? Design is everything but a system. Design doesn't need limits or walls to be inside. Every single design innovation comes through the fact that somebody was brave enough to break the normal. That being said, I agree that consistency is key to a good design and that users can benefit from a more consistent UI throughout different apps, BUT Material Design is being taken as a bible, and that's what is weird. It's not Google's fault, they are just trying something new, but designers are getting obsessive, like "if it's not inside their rules, it's WRONG", and that's not healthy at all for new design trends.

        0 points
        • Jameson Tyler, over 4 years ago (edited over 4 years ago )

          Designing is about creating (& sometimes breaking) patterns, especially about when it has to be functional (think complex content site or web app). Creating new form styles (components) and page layouts (assemblies of components) for every piece of content just isn't humanly possible, or is it particularly usable.

          0 points
  • Jan LehtinenJan Lehtinen, over 4 years ago

    Solid read, could probably take some other factors in and not just compare to Apple's current design.

    3 points
  • Ed AdamsEd Adams, over 4 years ago

    I abhor, despite, loathe, and hate Material Design's FAB.

    At least on the web or when MD is implemented on a large screen. It's too far out of the way to be comfortable, moving my mouse down to it is a pain in the ass.

    Phew. I finally said it.

    2 points
  • Dirk HCM van BoxtelDirk HCM van Boxtel, over 4 years ago

    Since we're interacting with things on a screen, and not things in real life, intuitiveness isn't something that comes automatically.

    It has to be brought into the world of the screen. There are different rules in real life than inside the screen. However, since we're all exposed to real life rules (gravity, motion, touch, etc) every single day of our lives, we're used to it. That's why "material design" (and any solid design really) comes from the right place. It's re-building the rules from real life, inside the screen.

    There are many different levels to this process, and of course the screen has some rules of it's own. Some of those rules are limiting, others allow us to do things that are impossible in real life.

    But intuitiveness, which is (generally) the goal of "good" design, comes from those real life rules that have been brought into the screen.

    1 point
  • Luca Candela, over 4 years ago

    Yet another person that uses the word skeuomorphism but doesn't know what it means. The sadness.

    1 point
  • Diego LafuenteDiego Lafuente, over 4 years ago

    Good it's just an opinion.

    0 points