Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 12th Feb 2013 22:52 UTC
Graphics, User Interfaces "If you're paying attention to what's going on in the design world, you've probably noticed the ongoing debate around skeuomorphism vs. flat design." Good overview of the subject from Sacha Greif. This is a very important point: "But where the main victim of realism is merely good taste, taking minimalism too far can have serious consequences on usability. Users have come to rely on a lot of subtle clues to make their way through an interface: buttons have slight gradients and rounded corners, form fields have a soft inner shadow, and navigation bars 'float' over the rest of the content. Remove all these clues, and you end up with a flat world where every element is suddenly placed at the same level, potentially leading to confusion: Is this a button, or simply a banner? Will anything happen if I tap this?"
Thread beginning with comment 552444
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Hmm...
by Novan_Leon on Thu 14th Feb 2013 14:55 UTC
Novan_Leon
Member since:
2005-12-07

Hmmm... the supposed debate between skeumorphism vs. flat design seems like a false dichotomy. The two aren't even mutually exclusive except for the fact that there aren't any "flat" interfaces outside of computer interfaces for skeumorphism to draw from.

Personally, I'm not a fanboy for any particular school of UI design. I just like UIs that are simple to use, simple to understand and flexible/powerful like everyone else. How you achieve this may vary.

On an unrelated note, I see good UI design as one of the greatest weaknesses of the uber-geek/open-source developer community. It usually seems to take a much larger organization, company or the rare single individual with a clear vision to actually provide an UI that is powerful and reasonable enough for common use. This is one of the reasons for Google and Apple's great success: presenting power and complexity in an appealing aesthetic while keeping it easy to use.

Edited 2013-02-14 14:56 UTC

Reply Score: 2