Be nice. Or else.
Designer News is where the design community meets.
Designer Joined over 3 years ago
Brian hasn't posted any stories yet.
Okay the two of you are both very smart people who have reasonable opinions and knowledge of the topic at hand, and all of us reading can see that. Congratulations, I hope you're proud of yourselves.
You're right, they don't. But in quantity, and when simply given a pass by the rest of the community?
I'm suggesting that the community as a collective is responsible for the values propagated by that community.
If this is how you feel, then perhaps you should call out those comments when they are made here on DN? And not allow the statements of individuals to "paint every single man", as you say.
The whole 'swiping through panels' bit looks a lot like the way I work already: On OSX, my tendency is to full-screen all my apps, use the split-screen view for multi-tasking, and swipe between them all.
I'd have to wonder about the notion of tracking gaze: e.g. lack of on-screen visual feedback affirming that the device accurately knows what you're 'looking at/selecting' before you ask it to do something.
EDIT: I just noticed — six-finger gestures!?
tfw when yr Fullscreen gesture is Goatse.
Weird, I wonder if this is a bug or something, because it doesn't match the behaviour on my machines. I get much better affordance for the resize tooltips than what's shown in the video.
Only slightly related, but it'd be nice if OSX had better window management in general built-in. Something like Spectacle/Divvy/et al., or Windows' 'snap to screen half'.
Love the Raft of the Medusa stencil a few clicks in.
I mean, in many cases, you are obligated not to share "real work" in progress. And if you're interested in seeing and reviewing real work — I mean, the stuff is all out there in public — download the actual app! Visit the actual site! You don't need to go to Dribbble for that.
It's true that the shots of nonsensical animations and mystery meat dashboard apps that track everything from what's on Netflix to what the weather's gonna be in Sydney a week from now have no place in practical application. And, when viewed that way, the idea of the Implausible Hypothetical Eastern European App is pretty funny.
But to say that there is absolutely no value to them as a result is laughable, and that's the key point that Eli's making here.
Because what I see on Dribbble is lots of experiments and practice work — often done by the young and aspiring. Yes, they are frequently done for no purpose at all other than to stretch the skills of the designer in question, and expand their familiarity with their toolset. And that is a value in itself.
And further, these experiments, which are allowed to be free of client considerations and project constraints, allow us to glimpse approaches, aesthetics, and ways of interpreting that can can later be applied to our own "real works". Yes, in doubtlessly more restrained, practical ways. But that's how aesthetics evolve — the wild and avant is inevitably whittled down to the core of what makes it interesting and relevant to the widest audience. And then we move onto the next thing.
And I'd much rather have that that staidly repeating what we know.
Having a big list of recently opened files seems pretty handy to me — I've already unconsciously taken to clicking from that list, especially since I tend to launch PS from my dock, rather than opening a file directly.
It's definitely more helpful than the typical welcome screen that focuses on links to tutorials or social media, or random connected services (stock photos, etc) that I never use, or staring at an empty canvas if you don't have a document open.
What's your issue with it?
They all seem very derivative of De Stijl.
They all play with the tension between empty/solid spaces, solid blocks of color, and use of the grid as an alignment aid.
EDIT: Sorry, I didn't realize you were specifically referencing the use of motion and parallax.
translateY. Alternatively, you could look into this neat/hacky CSS-only approach for that specific effect.
I'm not sure I understand the logic behind this argument.
It sounds like this is suggesting that we ignore the segment of users who adjust font sizes as an accessibility concern, because browser vendors also provide other methods of zooming?
Besides arbitrarily deciding a user segment with real needs and concerns who are adjusting font sizes isn't worth our time, this is questionable because using REM and EM units are functional in development beyond accessibility concerns (e.g. adjusting the size of a UI component based on its parent's size, etc.).
And since EM units are related to pixel values anyway, zooming functions that do change the reference pixel scale aren't really affected by their use.
Am I missing something?
Be nice. Or else.
Designer News is a large, global community of people working or interested in design and technology.