The number of tech or tech-adjacent people that have completely torched their reputation in the last few weeks is staggering. I hope they get publicly shamed.
Lol the CEO of Palantir said enthusiastically during an investor conference that it's necessary on occasion to kill his enemies, why would you think tech reputations would get torched? If anything it should be a boon when getting hired for big tech. As the government becomes more fascist and more integrated with industry, these contracts will be more and more important and enthusiastically embracing the anti-domestic-terrorist line will improve reputations even more.
"Bible of design" might be a bit excessive. It's a good design 101 book. Definitely longer than it should be, and kind of fumbles the explanation of "affordances", which the author had to clarify later. It's representative of "design thinking" as a historically well-situated concept in design, but that's not necessarily a good thing in itself.
It really depends what you're looking for. If you want something deeper, more abstract, I would recommend going straight to something like Notes on the Synthesis of Form by Christopher Alexander, which I think typically appeals to the more abstraction-oriented part of the mind of engineers. If you want to get more actionable, practical day to day recipes, Refactoring UI as suggested somewhere else in the thread is a decent suggestion.
It is sophistry. Common problem around here is that a lot of tech people are too busy thinking they're incredibly smart and always need to be playing 5D chess instead of being decent human beings. I hate to blame Paul Graham for that, but holy shit that /r/iamverysmart shit needs to stop.
It's not sophistry, it's just the assertion that there are far more important things than the feelings of the Nobel committee and the "integrity" of their award. If you're ranking the committee's feels over those other things, then you've got your priorities out of whack.
> Common problem around here is that a lot of tech people are too busy thinking they're incredibly smart and always need to be playing 5D chess instead of being decent human beings. I hate to blame Paul Graham for that, but holy shit that /r/iamverysmart shit needs to stop.
I agree with you there. Another problem around here is getting kinda morally unglued, and prioritizing some weird abstract thing over more important and practical considerations.
It is sophistry because that's not the point. Of course there are things that matter more than awards. But pretending like there's some world where we're trading the integrity of awards to solve important problems is a laughable fantasy.
Concept seems fun, and I'm expecting we'll see a bunch of those in the next few weeks/months. UX of that specific page seems broken, however, as the container for the explanation of each "function" doesn't scroll along with the rest of the content (stays stuck at the top) and makes it impossible to see.
I can confirm the broken UI. The demo container disappears as you scroll down, leaving a blank space that takes up most of the screen. I want to make a snarky joke about this but I'm just tired at this point.
Author here. That's actually great feedback. I accidentally broke the container scroll with a single line CSS change to fix something else, ugh. Should be fixed now.
Works now! Another free suggestion: when you drag a bit fast, since the animation is a bit slow, sometimes the boundary between before/after will barely move before your cursor makes it to the edge and reset to the middle, which is a bit jarring / doesn't let me really see anything. Should either make the animation faster, or put the reset threshold outside of the container somehow.
I'm not intimately familiar with the UI/UX principles behind Liquid Glass so I could be wrong, but the main difference I see here is that in the second screenshot, on the Reeder app on the left, the "floating" section is used for emphasis on the main content area (right hand side), while in the Finder screenshot on the right, it's the navigation menu on the left that is floating, and brings unneeded emphasis to itself.
Looking at it for 30s, I still don't understand what Apple was trying to do. What am I supposed to believe happens to the table as it goes under that floating menu? It clearly doesn't seem to continue all the way to the left edge of the window. Why not? If not, why bother with that whole floating menu concept if the underlying content arbitrarily stops at the menu?
The most surprising part to me is how people keep calling that nonsense "skeuomorphic" when it doesn't replicate any kind of physical intuition known to mankind. It's just made up physics that looks dumb.
This. The shadows and highlights tell "this is the main thing on top", and in Apple's world, they wrongly picked the sidebar as worthy of this attention.
So instead you get a sophomoric meta-ending that has absolutely no originality and shits on decades of storytelling? The ending is trash and an insult to the fans' intelligence because the author can't accept he's "just" writing adventure fiction, as if that's beneath him and instead needs to make some philosophical point about the nature of aging, thereby completely stepping out of his skill set. Go read Proust, Ron Gilbert, and leave that silly ambition to rest.
Looking at it from a slightly different angle, one I find most illuminating, removing "friction" is like removing "difficulty" from a game, and "friction free" as an ideal is like "cheat codes from the start" as an ideal. It's making a game where there's a single button that says "press here to win." The goal isn't the remove "friction", it's the remove a specific type of valueless friction, to replace it with valuable friction.
reply