> Google and Apple are not much better. Neither have upgraded to Flat 2.0 [1]...
[1] "Google’s Material design language is one example of flat 2.0 with the right priorities: it uses consistent metaphors and principles borrowed from physics to help users make sense of interfaces and interpret visual hierarchies in content."
Re:Microsoft Fluent Design System
by ananth22by7 on Saturday November 23, 2019 @12:34AM
(#21612667)
Design is much more than flat vs skeuoumorphic. In fact, this debate (despite its publicity) is of little concern to designers. We are often more focused on how things work, not just how they look. Also, usability (what NNG tests) is but one aspect of design (an important one nonetheless).
As a designer, I feel truly inspired by Apple’s UI even today. Google tries to get design but their company goals do not place user experience on as high a pedestal as Apple, and they are always a little behind.
My two cents.
But how things look has to reflect how they work. This is what many designers today are missing. Without it things become hard to figure out. Also, this is the aspect that designers have most control over. Most designers don't have the skills needed to go deeper into how things work.
Google and Apple are not much better. Neither have upgraded to Flat 2.0 [1] although Apple is slowly moving in that direction in the post-Jony-Ive era.
Apple's name used to be synonymous with good design. But that was back when Jobs was still around.
[1] https://www.nngroup.com/articles/flat-design/