Google reveals vibrant Material 3 Expressive, coming soon to a Pixel near you

silverboy

Ars Tribunus Militum
2,027
Subscriptor++
The bells and whistles have taken over! There was a time when people knew what mattered, or at least knew that they should know. Now it's nonsense all the way down.

Nobody seems to remember that most animations and so on are just distractions that undermine our focus.

Also, if the pictures in the article are any guide, everything will now look like a Grateful Dead poster ca. 1968.

Hurray??
 
Upvote
1 (4 / -3)
Yeah, the original Material Design was definitely the apex of Android design philosophy (though I maintain a soft spot for Holo).

Safety corners vomiting up a rainbow, ugh.
The original material design is a fluke anomaly in a history of bad design (all thanks to hiring Duarte after Palm failed) from a company that never understood UI design and still doesn't. The only other thing they ever had was the "clean" simple google search home page and they've ruined that too. Google has always sucked so much at user interfaces it's kind of astounding that they're still finding new lows to sink to
 
Upvote
7 (8 / -1)

MechR

Ars Praefectus
3,212
Subscriptor
The original material design is a fluke anomaly in a history of bad design (all thanks to hiring Duarte after Palm failed) from a company that never understood UI design and still doesn't. The only other thing they ever had was the "clean" simple google search home page and they've ruined that too. Google has always sucked so much at user interfaces it's kind of astounding that they're still finding new lows to sink to
Duarte still seems to be VP of Design at Google, so I wouldn't let him off the hook for MD2 and 3, unfortunately.
 
Upvote
4 (4 / 0)

J.C. Helios

Ars Scholae Palatinae
979
Instead of brighter, I want a Vantablack dark mode. I want all light that gets anywhere near it to just disappear.

1747182130307.png
 
Upvote
2 (2 / 0)
It depends on how you define "better".
Google is an ad company, so they almost always define "better" as "more engagement" - with engagement being "clicks", "use/watch time", and "ad views".

So to an internal Google study, a better interface is one that forces you to use your phone more. More scrolling. More clicks to get anything done. More ads.
To Google, a better interface is one where everything is harder and takes longer.

This is the exact opposite of how any reasonable user would define a good interface. Users want to get things done quickly and easily, so they can either get away from the interface to the content, or put the phone down - but Google has never cared what their users think. Google doesn't want you to put the phone down. Their customers are the companies buying the ads, the users are merely a consumable product.
^Where's the double upvote button.

If your theory is correct it certainly explains the still total garbage usability of phones today. Like the biggest example: why can't you do whatever you choose from the lock screen? Anything you want in fact - should be able to assign any function or any setting from any app to a lock screen button or control you can customize - same with home screen of course. They're not actually interested in usability, or are just really stupid and know nothing about human interaction (so need an 18,000 person focus group to try to learn); but almost certainly both.

(Btw there's an app called Tasker I think that can do some of this but I've never used it, you have to buy it, it certainly can't execute any internal app action (without a macro, which I think it has but which is also ridiculous) and you shouldn't need a separate app for the most basic functionality that should've been on the very first smartphone. And in Windows.)
 
Last edited:
Upvote
1 (1 / 0)

vortex_mak

Ars Scholae Palatinae
602
Subscriptor
It depends on how you define "better".
Google is an ad company, so they almost always define "better" as "more engagement" - with engagement being "clicks", "use/watch time", and "ad views".

So to an internal Google study, a better interface is one that forces you to use your phone more. More scrolling. More clicks to get anything done. More ads.
To Google, a better interface is one where everything is harder and takes longer.

This is the exact opposite of how any reasonable user would define a good interface. Users want to get things done quickly and easily, so they can either get away from the interface to the content, or put the phone down - but Google has never cared what their users think. Google doesn't want you to put the phone down. Their customers are the companies buying the ads, the users are merely a consumable product.
You've stated perfectly why Google needs to be broken up
 
Upvote
7 (7 / 0)
D

Deleted member 192806

Guest
It depends on how you define "better".
Google is an ad company, so they almost always define "better" as "more engagement" - with engagement being "clicks", "use/watch time", and "ad views".

So to an internal Google study, a better interface is one that forces you to use your phone more. More scrolling. More clicks to get anything done. More ads.
To Google, a better interface is one where everything is harder and takes longer.

This is the exact opposite of how any reasonable user would define a good interface. Users want to get things done quickly and easily, so they can either get away from the interface to the content, or put the phone down - but Google has never cared what their users think. Google doesn't want you to put the phone down. Their customers are the companies buying the ads, the users are merely a consumable product.
Ads? What ads? Certainly not on MY phone.
 
Upvote
-3 (0 / -3)

fcdecker

Ars Centurion
248
Subscriptor++
One of the first thing I do with a new device is disable the animations. I certainly hope I can continue to do so. I find it extremely difficult and draining to use an interface where stuff is moving around.
This. O. M. G.

The first thing I did on any Win 10 installation was to nuke the Live Tiles. All of the people I message with know not to send me anything containing an animated GIF, because it means they'll get back an anguished AAAAAAAGH! and then several lines of
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
just to make the bloody thing scroll off the message window.

Okay, I have a friend or two who will deliberately send me one on occasion just to get that reaction. But the point holds: I understand the point of having animation in an advertisement, where being annoying and intrusive is just table stakes, but in the OS? Fuck that.
 
Upvote
0 (2 / -2)

icypioneer

Smack-Fu Master, in training
31
May be futile to hope for, but I hope this includes more display settings in the way of 'Color Correction' or 'Night Light' options. While I appreciate combining the 'Grayscale' color correction with 'Night Light' for nighttime use, I'd enjoy a red monochrome setting even more. Candy Crush color schemes are inherently designed to keep you stimulated and glued to the screen.
 
Upvote
0 (0 / 0)

stk5

Ars Scholae Palatinae
982
Subscriptor++
^Where's the double upvote button.

If your theory is correct it certainly explains the still total garbage usability of phones today. Like the biggest example: why can't you do whatever you choose from the lock screen? Anything you want in fact - should be able to assign any function or any setting from any app to a lock screen button or control you can customize - same with home screen of course. They're not actually interested in usability, or are just really stupid and know nothing about human interaction (so need an 18,000 person focus group to try to learn); but almost certainly both.

(Btw there's an app called Tasker I think that can do some of this but I've never used it, you have to buy it, it certainly can't execute any internal app action (without a macro, which I think it has but which is also ridiculous) and you shouldn't need a separate app for the most basic functionality that should've been on the very first smartphone. And in Windows.)
There's a lot of wiggle room to argue the particulars, but I think it's self-evident that if you could do literally anything on the lock screen, it would defeat the point of it being a lock screen.
 
Upvote
0 (0 / 0)
There's a lot of wiggle room to argue the particulars, but I think it's self-evident that if you could do literally anything on the lock screen, it would defeat the point of it being a lock screen.
Ya, I wasn't too clear; I meant configure it in any way you want, so any shortcuts, a menu, add a slider that controls a single notification volume, etc...anything. Most people would have whichever things they use constantly during the day. It makes 0 sense that it's not already like this esp. now with all the smart home devices etc. Even if some of those apps use lock screen notifications properly, not all do and none of the ones I've seen are done properly. Also as I say, you need the same simple functionality on the home screen. You can have one page for example be your custom control panel you can build however you want.
 
Upvote
1 (1 / 0)

Yaky

Smack-Fu Master, in training
4
I remember disliking Material at the time for wasting so much space on then-small screens, making everything flat (losing distinctions between content and interactive elements), as well as their pretentious "design guide" (these are paper shapes hovering above a surface)

This new design looks like it uses the same approach. More "look what I can do" than anything pragmatic.
 
Upvote
1 (1 / 0)

MechR

Ars Praefectus
3,212
Subscriptor
I remember disliking Material at the time for wasting so much space on then-small screens, making everything flat (losing distinctions between content and interactive elements), as well as their pretentious "design guide" (these are paper shapes hovering above a surface)

This new design looks like it uses the same approach. More "look what I can do" than anything pragmatic.
The paper-sheet concept actively encouraged subtle drop shadows and square corners. Those are gone, gone, gone, and MD is worse off for it.
 
Upvote
4 (4 / 0)