I wish I could up-vote this a thousand times.

I often tap things that are just rectangles and fail to realize that other rectangles are buttons.

I can't wait for "everything is flat, two-tone, and rectangular" to be replaced by whatever the next trend is. Hopefully something more useful.

Ironic note: the flat trend was really made mainstream by Microsoft when it released Windows Phone 7.

With flat design, sometimes it's really hard to know what you are suppose to click on. I enjoy its simplicity, but it does have some usability problems that come with it.

I think we went way overboard with it and the pendulum swung to far to the side of flat design. Hopefully we start moving away from super trendy flat design, much like we moved away from those crazy web 2.0 design styles.

flat design is trending because we have so many "designers" who can't design.

What do you think separates a "designer" from a designer?

I would say Consideration. I am a designer, and I work with lots of designers. Design is harder than it looks and even brilliant designers don't get it right 100% of the time, but I can see a clear difference between the types of designers whose work "looks right" and designers who have approached a brief with the aim of figuring out what "works right".

It's easier to be the former than the latter both in terms of skill and the politics of the client relationship, and that's why there are so many "designers" and so few designers.

Yes. A real designer isn't just a UI artist. Art is one skill among others. A real designer should also understand: UX, human behaviour and interaction, logic, visual language (architecture, shape, color, animation) and other skills...

Most designers don't get it right because they don't have these skills, they are only artists. And because of that they don't understand why a particular design is better than another or even what their own design expresses.

To do a real design, it asks you to do a ton of research and going back and forth between art and UX. Doing brain storming to implement old and new logic elements in a fashion way.

It's like the iOS 6 it was a big step forward because it was a design: simple, expressive, and functional. The guys who created it understood all of that. Then again, Apple followed the fashion trend more than the logic and did the iOS 7 design criticized even before it was out. The problem, among its specific fashion, was that the design was so flat it was destroying UI information. Plus visual problems: sometimes the color seems to mean something but you find one red button that isn't one, sometimes the shape, sometimes the animation...

Here is an example of what a designer should do to design a UI. http://blogs.msdn.com/b/visualstudio/archive/2013/06/27/desi...

In Material design, you are still intended to make use of proper cues for useable components. Interactive components are supposed to exist as another logical layer on top of static content. This is the change from Holo, do not use flat things so often for interactive widgets.

I have to echo this sentiment. Comparisons to print design do not hold up to event he most casual scrutiny.

Simplifying the design ethos of Material down to 'print design' without understanding how it works is unhelpful, IMHO.

I think we were talking about the print paradigm in general. I agree that it would be a false dichotomy where material is concerned.