Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 17th Dec 2012 22:59 UTC
Graphics, User Interfaces "In this article I'm going to talk about what flat design is, review what other designers are saying about it, and offer some tips on how to achieve it in your own designs." I give you one attempt to guess which 'design aesthetic' the next version of OSNews is inspired by. And yes, we will eventually get it done.
Thread beginning with comment 545574
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by ssokolow
by ssokolow on Tue 18th Dec 2012 01:17 UTC
ssokolow
Member since:
2010-01-21

To be honest, I think I'm firmly in the middle.

I don't like skeuomorphism, but I also find flat design to be unpalatable.

I suppose what I'm looking for is more along the lines of my GTK+ and Qt themes. Subtle use of subdued gradients, shadows, and curves to provide an interface that's consistent and non-distracting but, at the same time, doesn't remind me of how much work I've put into making Motif applications like DDD and Tk applications like git-gui less off-putting.

Reply Score: 10

RE: Comment by ssokolow
by Chrispynutt on Tue 18th Dec 2012 11:35 in reply to "Comment by ssokolow"
Chrispynutt Member since:
2012-03-14

I have to agree. Light and depth are babies I would rather not throw out with the skeomorphic bath water.

It is especially useful in a windowing interface to have some idea of depth.

Also flat interfaces are falsely seen as non-skeomorphic. Just swapping real world objects and textures for real world signs, posters and screen print style flat tones are equally skeomorphic.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE: Comment by ssokolow
by Laurence on Tue 18th Dec 2012 12:55 in reply to "Comment by ssokolow"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

I was going to post this but you've phrased it better than I ever could.

I cannot stress enough how good subtle shadows are as allowing the viewer to differentiate different objects on the same pane.

Plus Facebook is easily one of the worst examples of design done well (flat aesthetics or otherwise). It's crowded with no clear grouping and even has some content duplicated. Plus there's a confusing mismatch of hover-over, click through, pop up and drop down interfaces that leave me lost whenever I'm trying to perform something new. It's the kind of site that relies on it's users committing common actions to muscle memory.

Reply Parent Score: 4