Rams had a unique penchant for melding smooth minimalist surfaces with warm contours in a way that made his designs very inviting and appealing to the touch. I think Ive will go more minimal, but the aesthetic will be more warm. I can see a matte off-white background consistent use of round-recs, and fewer primary colors.
Yes, that sounds good. Also, thanks for bringing up surfaces and contours and shapes.
I think that the consistent use of basic geometric shapes is a hallmark of Rams, and we'll see the same with Ive's design language.
Yes, UI development is a specialty, and an important one at that. So are makeup, framing, lighting, fashion design, etc. Bad makeup can hide a woman's real beauty just as bad UI can make an app appear dysfunctional. But anyone who believes these components are more important than the core structure is not a software developer who gets it, and is further someone who appreciates true beauty.
Finally, it is absolutely false that UI has always been designer led. Absolutely false. Go tell Marissa Mayer that she is a designer and not a computer scientist. Furthermore, the designers involved in UI design are not the same class of designer as Jony Ive and the industrial designers he leads. You are misunderstanding and mixing up software design, industrial design, graphics design and UX design. Software developer my eye.
It is absolutely the case in Apple that UI is designer led. I've been there.
Ive, and his team, will furnish the designs and the graphics. The computer scientists will implement the UI designs he decides unless impossible in the time frame. This has nothing to do with me mixing up "software design, industrial design, graphics design, and UX design". We are talking about graphics, and UX design. Thats what UI means as mentioned here. I never mentioned industrial design, understandably, because it is unrelated to this thread.
Software design is something totally different. Its the designing how code interacts. Johnny Ive will have no say in that, and software engineers in return won't draw the buttons ( which is what we are talking about). This is how all major companies work, even if bedroom developers do it all, with understandably shoddy results.
I like the elimination of the shiny glass icons. These might be a bit too abstract and monochromatic, but I think it moves in the right direction for many apps.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling
Here again, I like the flatter look. Definitely feels more modern.
One thing I'd like to see Apple do is "soften" (or "square up") the excessively (in my opinion) rounded corners all over the place. No need to go with perfectly sharp corners, but the current rounding seems a tad excessive.
OMG NO! What is this obsession with making icons flat? It looks is just god awful lazy! Give me icons with details and shading and a hint of artistic ability any day over a UI that looks like it was thrown together in a day by a kid.
Logic and reason don't matter, if you'll read the rest of his post.
Two major differences between OSX and iOS to prove you wrong; there are many more:
Mail: Ability to attach documents from multiple sources. Impossible on iOS (i.e. you need to "push" the attachment from app to mail, can't "pull" attachments from multiple sources into an email). This cannot be a serious business tool until I can attach an Excel, a PDF and a image all in one email.
Calendar: View Availability of invitees. Forward invitation. Impossible in iOS.
If they are going to play with Mail, it could really use proper management of Tables on both OSX and iOS. The only way to create a proper table in Mail is to do it in TextEdit and then copy it over. It would also be great to preserve fonts more accurately on sent mail.
Finally, it is absolutely false that UI has always been designer led.
It is absolutely the case in Apple that UI is designer led. I've been there. ...
Johnny Ive will have no say in that, and software engineers in return won't draw the buttons ( which is what we are talking about). This is how all major companies work,
What you two are saying are not mutually exclusive. Tough for either one of you to prove who led, wherever you have been. But UI encompasses far far more than drawing buttons. And in very few situations would the button drawer lead the UI design.
Well I can say that and I will repeat - skeuomorphs are not the main issue at all. Not in the least. Engineering and design projects are not created on the basis of "I want to get rid of this feature." That, my friend, is the root of your misconception.
IOS has grown into a bit of a a dog's breakfast over the years. There is no design language visible amongst the "core apps". I am 99% certain that the conversation between Cook and Ive went something like this - Since we giving iOS a serious upgrade, it's also time to refresh the look. The way it is right now reflects that we work in disparate silos. Let's make this thing look like it was designed by one company. Let's give it a unified look and feel just as our hardware products have. Of course, any student of Ive would guess that if he were in charge of unifying the iOS UI, he'd choose the spartan look. But a different person could have chosen a highly skeuomorphic approach, which is just fine as long (a) there is uniformity, (b) it makes sense.
Yes, I'm sure it went kind of like that. Of course the main problem isn't removing skeuomorphism.
Furthermore, part and parcel of unifying the design is to apply the same design language and guidelines, where possible and sensible, to the hardware and software. This is why it makes sense to have Ive to be in charge.
To say that skeuomorphic design has been universally panned is itself a serious misunderstanding of the situation, a misunderstanding of skeuomorphic design and a misunderstanding of design altogether. This is not a binary choice. It is impossible to askew skeuomorphs.
Skeuomorphism as done now in iOS6 is seen as something horrible by most graphic designers.
Of course it is possible. Just don't use textures which only purpose is to make the user think of a real notepad, or a real calendar, or a real anything. That's Windows phone for you. I doubt they are not going to trash it completely, but they really need to tune it down.
The play button in iTunes, the very example you raised, is in fact one. So is the virtual keyboard. So is the telephone keypad.
No, they are not. A play 'button' is a skeuomorph. A play icon by itself, as in the current iTunes, isn't. The virtual keyboard is useful to easily distinguish which letter is going to be pressed. That design has a function, so it's not a skeuomorph. The keypad may be, it's not really compulsory.
Are they going to get rid of them all? Of course not.
The skeuomorphic school of design has not been criticized by those in the know. Nor is it fading in prominence. It is simply certain applications of it that is catching attention. Unfortunately, we have too many half-intelligent but nevertheless amateurish pundits too quick to draw the wrong conclusions.
What you two are saying are not mutually exclusive. Tough for either one of you to prove who led, wherever you have been. But UI encompasses far far more than drawing buttons. And in very few situations would the button drawer lead the UI design.
The "button drawer" is generally also the UX guy. In general except for tiny operations and bedroom devs this is not the software engineer. Nobody is saying that the softwarw engineer does not give feedback, but his role is not UX and certainly not button design.
And what we are talking about here is UI largely - to remove skeumorphism from Notes would take no UX and little or no code changes - mostly resource changes.
I was responding to a guy who said that you can't do UI for software unless you code, but neither Ive nor the existing Apple software UI team can code. It's like saying you can't be an architect unless you can wire for electricity, and build a house. Some builders architect but they are small beans, it's a seperate disciple.
The "button drawer" is generally also the UX guy. In general except for tiny operations and bedroom devs this is not the software engineer. Nobody is saying that the softwarw engineer does not give feedback, but his role is not UX and certainly not button design.
And what we are talking about here is UI largely - to remove skeumorphism from Notes would take no UX and little or no code changes - mostly resource changes.
I was responding to a guy who said that you can't do UI for software unless you code, but neither Ive nor the existing Apple software UI team can code. It's like saying you can't be an architect unless you can wire for electricity, and build a house. Some builders architect but they are small beans, it's a seperate disciple.
Your argument is based on the premise that UI/UX are only about what users see and feel. This is not true.
Your argument is based on the premise that UI/UX are only about what users see and feel. This is not true.
That's what UI is. The engineer then has to code it. Software design - and smooth UI - is also about coding for efficiency and reducing lag - which can't be shown in wireframes or design guides. I agree with that, so we may be just talking semantics here. I just am making the point that Ive doesn't need to be able to code to understand UI.
I%u2019ve featured a few articles on iOS 7 and the new products launched or being launched by Google over the coming months. I think Apple really need to pick up the game, they%u2019ve fallen down and they continue to do so:
Also, I have an incline to say Apple will restrict in changing too much of what we're used to for that very fact. The vast number of apps that would need new and updated graphics or UI appearance to match an overhaul would be insane.
I like the elimination of the shiny glass icons. These might be a bit too abstract and monochromatic, but I think it moves in the right direction for many apps.
Here again, I like the flatter look. Definitely feels more modern.
One thing I'd like to see Apple do is "soften" (or "square up") the excessively (in my opinion) rounded corners all over the place. No need to go with perfectly sharp corners, but the current rounding seems a tad excessive.
I like the first concept actually but I'm sure we will all either love it or hate come WWDC
Not to pick on you particularly, but most folks are really not clear on what skeuomorphism actually is. skeuomorphism *isn't* just shading or "3D" effects, it only applies to actual representations of real world objects. It seems that when most people on this thread say skeuomorphism, they are meaning "anything that isn't totally flat" and that's just not right.
So there are really two issues here. "Skeuomorphism" and "Flatness." It gets a bit fuzzier when you consider that many apps are not themselves skeuomorphic but contain skeuomorphic "elements." For instance the Camera app is not skeuomorphic, but the shutter it uses is. Pages and Numbers are similarly not skeuomorphic, but they have a few textures that could be swapped out for less realistic ones. Other apps have skeuomorphic "splash screens" like Game Centre, but are otherwise not really skeuomorphic at all.
I would argue that the real list of "skeuomorphic" (built-in) Apps goes like this:
Notes, iBooks, Contacts, Calendar, Newstand, iPhoto, Garage Band
I would say that "Notes" is by far the most egregious (witness the plethora of Notes replacements in the store), "Calendar" is next, followed by iBooks and Newstand which have those unfortunate wooden shelves and iPhoto, which doubles down on the situation by using those ugly plastic "photo albums" on glass shelves. (insert sounds of retching here)
Funnily enough though, the most skeuomorphic app of all, Garage Band, is brilliant, attractive and would be completely ruined if the skeuomorphic elements were removed. The paintbrushes in iPhoto are likely in the same situation in that they are also skeuomorphic, but also quite brilliant and useful to boot.
So it seems to me that as long as they leave the "3D" stuff alone, or the stuff that is merely 3D-ish looking and focus only on the skeuomorphism it's actually a quick fix for most apps and that the fix will please most people and not remove any functionality. (assuming they leave Garage Band alone and don't go overboard on iPhoto.)
I am still worried though as Ive has absolutely no experience at what he's attempting here.
I won't stop being worried until we see some screen shots, which they should probably leak as soon as possible so that it isn't too much of a shock when it comes out.
I agree 100%. I hate Note Pad et al but ... like you, I love Garage Band as it is. After decades of using the real tools in music production I feel very at home using the digital representations of real world products in this situation.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carthusia
Rams had a unique penchant for melding smooth minimalist surfaces with warm contours in a way that made his designs very inviting and appealing to the touch. I think Ive will go more minimal, but the aesthetic will be more warm. I can see a matte off-white background consistent use of round-recs, and fewer primary colors.
Yes, that sounds good. Also, thanks for bringing up surfaces and contours and shapes.
I think that the consistent use of basic geometric shapes is a hallmark of Rams, and we'll see the same with Ive's design language.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Think I do.
Not if you think a button is an example.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ankleskater
Yes, UI development is a specialty, and an important one at that. So are makeup, framing, lighting, fashion design, etc. Bad makeup can hide a woman's real beauty just as bad UI can make an app appear dysfunctional. But anyone who believes these components are more important than the core structure is not a software developer who gets it, and is further someone who appreciates true beauty.
Finally, it is absolutely false that UI has always been designer led. Absolutely false. Go tell Marissa Mayer that she is a designer and not a computer scientist. Furthermore, the designers involved in UI design are not the same class of designer as Jony Ive and the industrial designers he leads. You are misunderstanding and mixing up software design, industrial design, graphics design and UX design. Software developer my eye.
It is absolutely the case in Apple that UI is designer led. I've been there.
Ive, and his team, will furnish the designs and the graphics. The computer scientists will implement the UI designs he decides unless impossible in the time frame. This has nothing to do with me mixing up "software design, industrial design, graphics design, and UX design". We are talking about graphics, and UX design. Thats what UI means as mentioned here. I never mentioned industrial design, understandably, because it is unrelated to this thread.
Software design is something totally different. Its the designing how code interacts. Johnny Ive will have no say in that, and software engineers in return won't draw the buttons ( which is what we are talking about). This is how all major companies work, even if bedroom developers do it all, with understandably shoddy results.
Definitely some interesting and cool concepts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling
I like the elimination of the shiny glass icons. These might be a bit too abstract and monochromatic, but I think it moves in the right direction for many apps.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling
Here again, I like the flatter look. Definitely feels more modern.
One thing I'd like to see Apple do is "soften" (or "square up") the excessively (in my opinion) rounded corners all over the place. No need to go with perfectly sharp corners, but the current rounding seems a tad excessive.
OMG NO! What is this obsession with making icons flat? It looks is just god awful lazy! Give me icons with details and shading and a hint of artistic ability any day over a UI that looks like it was thrown together in a day by a kid.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Except they do. Stop lying.
Nowhere has that been said.
Enjoy your fantasy world. Rules #12, 15, & 16.
So I guess you've never used iBooks at all, huh?
Logic and reason don't matter, if you'll read the rest of his post.
Two major differences between OSX and iOS to prove you wrong; there are many more:
Mail: Ability to attach documents from multiple sources. Impossible on iOS (i.e. you need to "push" the attachment from app to mail, can't "pull" attachments from multiple sources into an email). This cannot be a serious business tool until I can attach an Excel, a PDF and a image all in one email.
Calendar: View Availability of invitees. Forward invitation. Impossible in iOS.
If they are going to play with Mail, it could really use proper management of Tables on both OSX and iOS. The only way to create a proper table in Mail is to do it in TextEdit and then copy it over. It would also be great to preserve fonts more accurately on sent mail.
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdasd
Quote:
Originally Posted by ankleskater
Finally, it is absolutely false that UI has always been designer led.
It is absolutely the case in Apple that UI is designer led. I've been there. ...
Johnny Ive will have no say in that, and software engineers in return won't draw the buttons ( which is what we are talking about). This is how all major companies work,
What you two are saying are not mutually exclusive. Tough for either one of you to prove who led, wherever you have been. But UI encompasses far far more than drawing buttons. And in very few situations would the button drawer lead the UI design.
deleted
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent
Well I can say that and I will repeat - skeuomorphs are not the main issue at all. Not in the least. Engineering and design projects are not created on the basis of "I want to get rid of this feature." That, my friend, is the root of your misconception.
IOS has grown into a bit of a a dog's breakfast over the years. There is no design language visible amongst the "core apps". I am 99% certain that the conversation between Cook and Ive went something like this - Since we giving iOS a serious upgrade, it's also time to refresh the look. The way it is right now reflects that we work in disparate silos. Let's make this thing look like it was designed by one company. Let's give it a unified look and feel just as our hardware products have. Of course, any student of Ive would guess that if he were in charge of unifying the iOS UI, he'd choose the spartan look. But a different person could have chosen a highly skeuomorphic approach, which is just fine as long (a) there is uniformity, (b) it makes sense.
Yes, I'm sure it went kind of like that. Of course the main problem isn't removing skeuomorphism.
Furthermore, part and parcel of unifying the design is to apply the same design language and guidelines, where possible and sensible, to the hardware and software. This is why it makes sense to have Ive to be in charge.
To say that skeuomorphic design has been universally panned is itself a serious misunderstanding of the situation, a misunderstanding of skeuomorphic design and a misunderstanding of design altogether. This is not a binary choice. It is impossible to askew skeuomorphs.
Skeuomorphism as done now in iOS6 is seen as something horrible by most graphic designers.
Of course it is possible. Just don't use textures which only purpose is to make the user think of a real notepad, or a real calendar, or a real anything. That's Windows phone for you. I doubt they are not going to trash it completely, but they really need to tune it down.
The play button in iTunes, the very example you raised, is in fact one. So is the virtual keyboard. So is the telephone keypad.
No, they are not. A play 'button' is a skeuomorph. A play icon by itself, as in the current iTunes, isn't. The virtual keyboard is useful to easily distinguish which letter is going to be pressed. That design has a function, so it's not a skeuomorph. The keypad may be, it's not really compulsory.
Are they going to get rid of them all? Of course not.
The skeuomorphic school of design has not been criticized by those in the know. Nor is it fading in prominence. It is simply certain applications of it that is catching attention. Unfortunately, we have too many half-intelligent but nevertheless amateurish pundits too quick to draw the wrong conclusions.
You mean 'right conclusions'
The "button drawer" is generally also the UX guy. In general except for tiny operations and bedroom devs this is not the software engineer. Nobody is saying that the softwarw engineer does not give feedback, but his role is not UX and certainly not button design.
And what we are talking about here is UI largely - to remove skeumorphism from Notes would take no UX and little or no code changes - mostly resource changes.
I was responding to a guy who said that you can't do UI for software unless you code, but neither Ive nor the existing Apple software UI team can code. It's like saying you can't be an architect unless you can wire for electricity, and build a house. Some builders architect but they are small beans, it's a seperate disciple.
Your argument is based on the premise that UI/UX are only about what users see and feel. This is not true.
That's what UI is. The engineer then has to code it. Software design - and smooth UI - is also about coding for efficiency and reducing lag - which can't be shown in wireframes or design guides. I agree with that, so we may be just talking semantics here. I just am making the point that Ive doesn't need to be able to code to understand UI.
iOS 7 concept design, featuring widgets and lives tiles:
http://www.aljtmedia.com/blog/ios-7-concept-features-widgets-mission-control-live-tiles-and-more?article=28
iOS 7 Zesty design:
http://www.aljtmedia.com/blog/simply-zesty-ios-7-concept-designs-the-future-of-the-iphone?article=35
Also, I have an incline to say Apple will restrict in changing too much of what we're used to for that very fact. The vast number of apps that would need new and updated graphics or UI appearance to match an overhaul would be insane.
I like the first concept actually but I'm sure we will all either love it or hate come WWDC
I agree 100%. I hate Note Pad et al but ... like you, I love Garage Band as it is. After decades of using the real tools in music production I feel very at home using the digital representations of real world products in this situation.