Comment by vFunct
7 days ago
I like it a lot. Reminds me of the OG Mac OS X Aqua theme, except a more reactive/dynamic version of it to account for accessibility.
Refreshing counter to the brutalist styles that were trending. The problem with brutalist styles is that they tend to be busy, which becomes confusing and unintuitive to new users.
This seems like it would help separate elements for easier focus, to make things more obvious.
> Reminds me of the OG Mac OS X Aqua theme
What I find surreal is that most comments are exactly like those back in the day, too! (Pinstripes, what were they thinking? Glossiness is distracting! Where's my platinum? This is a stupid toy!)
Anyway, this will be refined and fine tuned and we will all be fine.
Platinum's pinstripes and Aqua's glossy buttons didn't interfere with contrast. That's the golden rule - as long as content is legible, you can go off doing whatever sorts of cute baffles you want as a bonus. The pinstripes created texture that defined the titlebar in Platinum, Aqua's color emphasized interactive elements using visual contrast. In my opinion Aqua looks awful, but I do accept that it was an extremely usable interface for people with weak vision or little computer experience. The same can be said for Comic Sans and it's deliberate ugliness.
How will those same audiences react when they see a glassy squircle pop up on their iPhone? What is it a metaphor for? Is it a button? A notification toast? An entry window? An app? A widget? Did they forget to put on their glasses this morning? Is it interactive, are there gestures or buttons to close it? How do you call someone from this screen?
This is objectively bad design. I would argue you don't know what made Platinum and Aqua great if you're comparing those complaints to this clown vomit.
> Aqua's color emphasized interactive elements using visual contrast.
There were loads of complaints about readability with Aqua, particularly of the menus and the windows title bars, both of which were translucent and had pinstripes. Briefly discussed here for example: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2011/05/mac-os-x-revisited/ . There was also the uproar at Leopard’s transparent menu bar and glossy dock, discussed here: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2007/10/mac-os-x-10-5/ . All these were over the top initially and were toned down and tweaked over time.
> How will those same audiences react when they see a glassy squircle pop up on their iPhone?
It’s a button. It has a shape, some physical character, and when you poke it wiggles and does something. It looks miles better than the label-button-links things that looked all identical in iOS 7 and that still plague modern design.
> This is objectively bad design. I would argue you don't know what made Platinum and Aqua great if you're comparing those complaints to this clown vomit.
I did not really like Platinum (I spent quite a lot of time with Kaleidoscope, which I miss very much). I really liked Aqua, though, despite its occasional brushed metal excesses. I would not mind going back to Lion, when they toned down the glossiness they introduced in Leopard. I think that UI was very elegant. But I have to admit there is a kind of playfulness with the concept of liquid UI that is intriguing. I love how the Dynamic Island reacts and behaves as it splits, grows, and shrink. I think I like it better than iOS 5-era glossy everything, and definitely more than iOS 7+. I am willing to admit that I have bad taste, but I am optimistic about the possibilities with the concepts they showed.
That said, I swear I read the clown vomit but about Aqua back in 2001. Some things never change.
3 replies →
You can't "fine tune" fundamental flaws away
Apple learned a lot of lessons with Aqua and eventually dialed back the translucency. Unfortunately, they seem to have forgotten those lessons.