most web designers have no skills they just copy the big players

>>104002451
Graphic designers did, it's easier to make things look consistent with flat because you don't need to match the skeuomorphic style. The glossy/skeuomorphic look only works if everything is super consistently designed, you don't need to do that with flat

Microsoft did, now be happy.

peak

>>104002469
The problem isn't just the web designers but the whole DOM system. Where that type of flat design is the hyper optimized end state.

For web design to evolve, the browser must evolve. I an idea for the tech stack required, everything exists already. I'm just too lazy to actually put the work in.

>>104002451
I love everything flat

>>104002451
>He doesn't know that UIs were designed to consider all kinds of screen size as opposed to CRT square screens in the old days
Zoomer-kun, I...

>>104002451
it's me, I asked for it.

>>104002469
Not true. Modern design is a highly skilled field. Its terrible on purpose, and it takes significant skill to consistently produce such terrible designs.

>>104002566
It's absolutely possible to make an adaptive skeuomorphic UI.

>>104002451
Microsoft with their Windows Phone project probably popularized it if I had to guess.

>>104002535
>that type of flat design is the hyper optimized end state.
>
>For web design to evolve, the browser must evolve.
Seriously. Almost 600 years since the Printing Press and we're still only using flat rectangles or a 2-3 column split (sidebars + content + ads). It works, but some new toys would be nice

>>104002451
I actually think flat (generally speaking) looks much better. It elevates simple applications by allowing them to exist frictionless alongside complex ones. For more complex ones, it's minimal and sleek, which is not only important for intuitive organization, it also gives an air of quality because it lets its actual merits speak for themselves. Maybe kind of a stupid example since it's not flat, but I like flat for complex stuff in the same way I loved the XMB wave for the PS3. It was a very tame menu aesthetic for such a powerful system, and that gave it an elegance that I loved. In a way, I feel like early 2000s design was kinda like ricer cars, and flat is a bit more like sleek/modern European supercars. Function over form can be a form unto itself.

That being said, it isn't lost on me why people hate it. The flipside of a standardized look is that nothing really has personality anymore. And I'd be lying if I don't love or nostalgia trip over so many of the designs I grew up with, like Windows 98/XP/Vista, 3rd gen game UI/UX, etc. When everything became glossy with smooth gradients in the aero years, I ate that shit up. I would literally look at screenshots of Windows Vista on Google because I loved the look so much.

My personal style is flat at the base level, but with non-flat accents for personality.

>>104003060
We've been stuck on this "trend" for over 10 years.

>>104002535
>that type of flat design is the hyper optimized end state
By what metric?

>>104002451
i tried youtube tv recently, and it feels like they really don't want you to use the live guide. they removed all the color to where the channel icons aren't easily readable.

>>104002611
You faggot. Gimme your address so I can punch you in the face.

>>104003246
1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW Washington, DC 20500

>>104002451
The great thing about the post-modern internet is that everything being designed for tiny, vertical phone screens inadvertently makes everything super easy to browse on a CRT at sub-hd resolutions. It all fits nicely.

>>104003225
Not the anon you're asking, but:

It takes the vaguest variables out of visual design. Therefore, it takes a tiny fraction of the time/effort/skill/imagination to create flat instead of non-flat. Therefore, it's the path of least resistance and most people will do that. Therefore, it's a good idea to also be flat so your work can maintain coherence with "standards" and not stick out like a sore thumb. Also, flat is minimal and modern, which looks nice.

True enough that it's tired at this point, but it's extremely functional and resource-cheap. Flat is to contemporary architecture as skeuomorphism is to gothic cathedrals.

>>104003365
I guess my next question is how we got to this point. For this to be a rationale most people agree on, we have to agree that actively thinking about design for too long is a waste of time and that functionality trumps above all else. I see this a lot with a lot of IT related topics. Seems like a lot of effort is spent trying to convince people IT in general is a field where creativity is to be avoided, and optimizing stuff is the most important. I hate it personally.

>>104003415
The actual point of modern UIs is to be addictive. Everything about modern UIs has been scientifically proven to increase screen time.

>>104003415
Well that's the thing, I don't think it's something people had to choose; It's just the path of least resistance. Like the Cathedral vs contemporary architecture analogy, I think most people prefer the proverbial cathedral, and indeed MANY people ask "Why is architecture so soulless now? We could we do this a thousand years ago but not today?" It kinda just boils down to money. We're completely free to run wild and make nonstandard design choices, but *why* would you personally do it? Simply asking where that design went, and being the one who puts in the work to recreate it yourself is are totally different ordeals.

And I think maybe another big reason for it is that the big corporations were slow on the uptake of computers/internet. Maybe partially because they never guessed how much potential it had to generate revenue, but also probably because they had no idea how to monetize it yet. I feel that as time goes on, and the more corporate giants that become attracted to a technology, the more that technology moves in the direction of being aesthetically modernized and streamlined. Like, imagine going to your trillion-dollar corporate bank's ATM and the UI looked like picrel. Or a terminal at an airport. lmao. It would certainly be fun, but at the end of the day, all of the big corporations are far more interested in removing friction points from their services, because they're all competing to be the the most convenient option for the consumer.

That's my take on it at least.

>>104002535
Anyone in this age bracket remember the flash games promoting Jak 2 where he was just working out in prison?

>>104003732
Oh, and I forgot to add GOVERNMENTS too. Governments are extremely slow on the uptake of new technologies unless they stand to gain more power through them (the obvious example is weapons or surveillance). Though in the case of governments, it's less about being the preferable option for profit, and more about spending the smallest, bare-minimum amount of money and effort on its people that it can.

Think about self-service car registration renewal kiosks at the DMV, digital voting machines, passport/ID applications, public record searches, online healthcare portals, websites for public services, etc. These are all areas where the government has a legal responsibility to provide services to its people, but if they can make the process easy enough that a boomer or soccer mom can guide themselves through the process, they can get the public to do the work for them. That's a big area where you see services that are barebones and streamlined into aesthetic oblivion. And I think that carries over to everything else in subtle ways.

>>104002660
webms or gtfo

>>104002451
no one asked for it. faggots asked for it. people with blue hair and green hair and nose rings who suck dick and get fucked in the ass and can't do anything in the real world wanted it - and normal people (GOYIM) accepted it just like they accepted 9/11, covid lockdowns, and paying reparations for a genocide that never happened
>>104002962
windows 95, motif, and mac classic had abstract styling too - but with the added benefit of good visual ergonomics by way of vibrant colors, contrast, and 3D elements. flat is better than faggoter shitro in that it is abstract and stylistically inoffensive - but it also has the worst visual ergonomics of any style. in an interface, you want things to stand out symbolically, and navigationally, and logically, but you DON'T want things to stand out too much stylistically. styles that stand out too much tend to be disagreeable to a lot of people

>>104002451
Apple did it first, the rest followed. Win8 did it before that, nobody cared. Apple, however, is a cult among designers, they do whatever Apple does.