
Flat design and improperly rescaled design: main threats to tablet usability - kyro
http://www.nngroup.com/articles/tablet-usability/
======
pasbesoin
I don't care whether it's "flat" or not. I'm fucking sick of "mystery meat"
UI. Undistinguished words and graphics that have associated actions -- or
don't. Varied by individual designer/developer tastes -- or some committee, I
suppose.

I can stumble my way through. Worse is having to support "ordinary" people,
e.g. family members. (I'm increasingly done "supporting" people to whom I
don't have strong ties. Time for them to instead complain to / boycott the
people creating and perpetuating this mess.)

Form follows function, damnit.

~~~
Skeuomorph
Form indicates function? Or at least insinuates.

------
robbyking
Regarding flat design, I think the criticisms raised in this article are
criticisms of poorly executed flat design, not flat design in general.

With that said, I think a lot of underskilled designers are mistaking flat
design for ambiguous/overminimalist design[1]. A lot of flat design _is_
horrible, but it's not because it's flat (per se), it's because the designer
took an existing visual asset and "simplified" it rather than taking the time
to redesign it without skeuomorphic or 3d elements.

[1]
[https://www.iconfinder.com/icondetails/85100/128/apple_finde...](https://www.iconfinder.com/icondetails/85100/128/apple_finder_flat_mac_icon)

------
alexfringes
"Dumb" scaling and lack of flow have been painful for a while and it certainly
can't hurt to hear some arguments against them. However, the skeuo-flat wars'
inclusion is oversimplified and seems like it stems from a marketing decision
rather than actual data points. Attack poor hierarchy, obliviousness to
information architecture, lack of designers' restraint, or the absence of
focus and rigor. With specific examples and counter-examples, attached to the
data found in their research, these topics all seem like valuable information.
Maybe this is all hidden behind the buy link. Using contrarianism in
conjunction with buzzwords won't motivate me to find out.

~~~
lnanek2
Doesn't really surprise me seeing that in there. Nielsen is from way back in
the usability community. You have to remember that it was considered
revolutionary then to make buttons look 3D, like they stick out, and should be
touched. Like they are real buttons. Gloss, shadows, etc.. User affordances.
It's been backed up by heavy studies as well.

The modern flat movement, on the other hand, is more just graphics designers
making something that looks good and doesn't work well. I've put users through
user studies on converted Android apps and they have a hell of a lot harder
time figuring out they are supposed to tap an understated flat icon with no
label in the top corner, the new action bar pattern, instead of a big glossy
shadowed button at the bottom like earlier designs.

I've brought these numbers to Googlers before at conferences, but they just
shrug and say users will get used to it. So even Google admits the current
flat designs are testing poorly and that they just hope numbers will improve
as users learn to look for the flat hidden icons.

~~~
paultyng
I don't see how it follows that they are admitting something by shrugging
their shoulders. But what this is missing is that there are technical reasons
for flat design, namely performance and power usage, that are critical on
mobile devices.

~~~
stan_rogers
Somehow we managed to have 3D hinting on the monochrome (1-bit) Macintosh.
Affordance doesn't have to mean heavy graphics, gradients, blurred drop
shadows or any other battery-vampire elements.

------
badclient
When you can't easily tell a label from a textarea from a button, you know the
UI is crap.

Man here's me hoping that I hate the flat UI because it is new and not because
it makes different behaviors so indistinguishable in the name of being flat.

------
incision
In the case of Android, I just wish developers would follow the design
guidelines [0]. At a glance, just following the skeleton of those docs would
address several egregious design issues I've seen.

Anecdotally, I see a strong correlation between adherence to Android style and
app quality.

0:
[http://developer.android.com/design/index.html](http://developer.android.com/design/index.html)

------
6cxs2hd6
After reading it, the 30-second summary: Most companies -- and their users --
would be better served by a responsive web site/app.

Rather than making a native app because {it might seem cooler | our competitor
does that | marketing out-shouts the CTO if any | a Dilbert-esque CEO said
"app" and no one is willing or able to educate}.

------
Tloewald
I've seen UI designs lately with cancel buttons disguised as text because
"that's how websites do it" (according to the UI designer). Right, that's how
websites A/B test users into unintentionally progressing through a
sales/signup process.

------
systemtrigger
I'm in the wrong section of the industry apparently. I have been focusing my
efforts on building technology when what I should have been doing is writing
blog articles about user interface design. I suspect many more people will buy
the $198 paper being sold here than have ever purchased software written by
me. That is not to indulge in self pity but I can't help wondering if changing
my name to Nielsen and sharing my observations about skeuomorphism and
rescaled design would be a better investment of my time than writing code.

~~~
publicfig
I don't really understand what your actually criticizing here. Are you upset
that you aren't making enough at your current position? Are you upset that a
group that specifically focuses on conducting user experience research is
selling their results for a price that you don't want to pay for it? Do you
not feel as though their work is valid enough to justify charging for it, even
though they've been an established group within the field of user experience
for years?

~~~
systemtrigger
I am saying it seems much easier to write about compelling user experiences
than to create them, and given the price they are charging for their product
it makes me wonder if I should be writing papers about user experiences
instead of programming them.

~~~
onli
Well, try it then. It actually isn't that easy. Sure, everyone can try to
write something about design. But that is not what Nielsen is selling, mere
writing. Not everyone can back his writing up with self-conducted user
studies, for which one needs (a lot of) time, money (the equipment alone) and
people. This is what generates the value of those reports.

------
ender89
saying flat design is a danger to tablets is thinking wrong. They aren't
thinking like a user, where all the pretty little pictures do something and
you can interact in the tablet in new and exciting ways. We don't need a
scrollbar to tell us the list can scroll, we should be able to figure it out
by the way it runs off the page. We don't need a 3d-esque button to know that
clicking on the box labeled "send" (or the little paper airplane icon) will
ship off our letters. Everything is touchable and does something. If someone
sits down at your app and doesn't realize that they can interact with the
element, or tries to interact only to find out that they can't, flat design
hasn't failed you - good Design has failed you.

------
ivanbrussik
FRAMES are BACK!!!

~~~
jared314
Just like tables for layout (CSS grids) came back a few years ago.

~~~
dredmorbius
Or just plain tables. Look under the HN hood.

~~~
davidw
I don't think PG ever gave up on regular old tables for layout. He's old
school that way :-)

