Designers Criticize Apple's User Interface For OS X and iOS

Hugh Pickens writes "Austin Carr notes that a number of user interface designers have become increasingly critical of Apple's approach to software user interface design. Much of their censure is directed against a trend called skeuomorphism, a term for when objects retain ornamental elements of the past that are no longer necessary to the current objects' functions, such as calendars with faux leather-stitching, bookshelves with wood veneers, fake glass and paper and brushed chrome. A former senior UI designer at Apple who worked closely with Steve Jobs said, 'It's like the designers are flexing their muscles to show you how good of a visual rendering they can do of a physical object. Who cares?' The issue is two-fold: first, that traditional visual metaphors no longer translate to modern users; and second, that excessive digital imitation of real-world objects creates confusion among users. 'I'm old enough, sure, but some of the guys in my office have never seen a Rolodex in real life,' says Designer Gadi Amit. 'Our culture has changed. We don't need translation of the digital medium in mechanical real-life terms. It's an old-fashioned paradigm.' One beneficiary could be Microsoft, where the design of Windows 8 distances itself from skeuomorphism by emphasizing a flat user interface that's minimalist to the core: no bevel, no 3-D flourishes, no glossiness and no drop shadow."

Comments

Easy to prove or disprove

[martijnd]

The minimalist verses skeuomorphism assertion has been made a few times already. Its quite easy to prove right or wrong.

Simply design a calender or contact app that follows your new "modern" design methodology.

If it beats the crap out of Apple's existing app because its so much better that people download it in droves to use it you have won, and you are rich(er).

Re:Easy to prove or disprove

[Anonymous Coward]

The minimalist verses skeuomorphism assertion has been made a few times already. Its quite easy to prove right or wrong.

Simply design a calender or contact app that follows your new "modern" design methodology.

If it beats the crap out of Apple's existing app because its so much better that people download it in droves to use it you have won, and you are rich(er).

It is an interesting thought experiment but doesn't take the target market into account. The people who prefer good functionality before shiny but useless design isn't likely to use Apple in the first place. It also doesn't factor in that while a modern functional design could have a higher value the difference in value might be less that the time it takes to test a new app.
All in all i think that the RDF-factor will skew the result of such a test too much to make it meaningful.

Re:Easy to prove or disprove

[tmosley]

The people who prefer good functionality before shiny but useless design isn't likely to use Apple in the first place.

Ha. Haha. Hahahaha. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Mod parent HILARIOUS.

Re:What the fuck is it with the fluff?

[Lumpy]

You think the dock is cluttered but the Windows task-bar is the epitome of awesome? what drugs are you taking? The Windows and all linux variants of the taskbar is a cluster turd of clutter. Yes the Dock is cluttered a bit, but no where near as cluttered as the mess that windows and Linux has going on.

Re:"a number of user interface designers"

[oh_my_080980980]

Except it rearranges them based on usage - very bad idea - and you can't expand the start menu the way you could in XP or even just drag it out so you can actually read the titles of programs...

You can stop trolling.