Where the design community meets.
Joined about 3 years ago
Do you sincerely believe Eli's arguments stoop to the level of Donald Trump's?
Unlike Mr. Trump, Eli makes coherent arguments, does not attack people for irrelevant qualities such as their physical appearance, usually explains the “why” (in this case, why he believes a design is poor), and is a decent human being.
I would counter that people do not have to present solutions in order to illustrate a problem.
I would very much like to discuss this topic (subjectivity and taste), should anyone take interest.
To amend my question above, shadows, highlights, and noise effects do not exist solely as metaphorical lipstick. They play functionally and aesthetically important roles. Does this design team reverse all their decisions whenever a new ideology takes hold?
How does the removal of shadows, highlights, and noise effects achieve that goal?
(This is not a rhetorical question; I genuinely seek an explanation.)
We said goodbye to our strong shadows, highlights and noise effects on top of our gradients.
Why did you unquestioningly yield to the trend instead of sticking by the design decisions you originally deemed best?
You urge, "Stay the course," yet you did the opposite in this case.
before the world recognizes that they couldn’t imagine a life with only this reality.
I would warn against unreservedly embracing a virtual one simply because we have the technology, and before it has justified itself morally. Can anyone here argue a moral justification for virtual reality (without resting on the assumption that technological progress is inherently good)?
Virtual reality, as an example of an emerging technology, bears little resemblance to the Wright-Brothers-plane and laptop examples (as an aside, I know Erik Sandberg-Diment; his appearance in this article put a grin on me). Those objects did not create an entirely different reality. This does.
Hi, Dan. I appreciate your insights.
These are definitely good criticisms, though funnily enough not things that frustrate me day-to-day.
They frustrate me mainly in aggregate... (See below.)
I think perhaps because I've been able to transfer learned behaviours from using early OSX versions that did have a more intuitive and usable interface. I imagine these issues would have more of an effect on new users.
... Precisely because early OS X versions had a more intuitive and usable interface. I am disheartened to see it all fall so far from its well-considered origins.
Thank you very much for your kind words about my website: I designed it 16 months ago after a long-held certainty that if I ever were to have a personal website, it would be a custom creation. I believe every design deserves such care and reject the "choose a template" solution that has ballooned in popularity. I particularly liked your turn of phrase, "... cultivating your little corner of the internet."
Also nice to see a links page, not enough websites have those these days.
Why do you think links pages have ebbed in popularity?
There's removing visual affordance and then there's deliberate obfuscation. Many of OSX's recent changes fall into the latter camp, unfortunately.
Is it not unfortunate when OS X's changes fall into either of these camps? Why should we remove visual clues?
Thank you, Jackson. I try to make everything I say "well thought out."
Where the design community meets.
Designer News is a large, global community of people working or interested in design and technology.