This is much better than shituomorphism. And the reports are exaggerated. The icon is the same design used by App Store Connect icon, that exists a long time ago. Definitely this is not shituomorphism.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Why is Big Sur so ugly?
- Thread starter name1
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This is much better than shituomorphism. And the reports are exaggerated. The icon is the same design used by App Store Connect icon, that exists a long time ago. Definitely this is not shituomorphism.
Did I say neumorphism or did I say “non-flat?”
However, while we’re discussing non-flat, as you mentioned earlier that “flat design is best” and your not being willing to take on any jobs for customers wanting a more non-flat and/or neumorphism-like interface...you should realize that the design world (and customers) are full of fad-chasing lemmings who will largely accept what’s presented to them and/or will demand to follow what may seem like the competition (especially the perceived leader of the competition) is using as an advantage. Which means they’ll especially (continue to) follow most anything Apple does, even blindly sometimes. So prepare thyself and your business for a trend/move away from Flat Design. Styles do cycle, but most importantly, what’s perceived as the most useful, classic, non-trendy and non-fad-chasing tends to repeat the most and/or stay around the longest. And what’s more useful, classic, and non-trendy than truly intuitive and attractive design that is engaging and intuitive and even fun to use?
Blah blah blah.
I will never use shituomorphism in my projects, that's for sure. I will use either the perfect flat design for much longer time, or something better that can happen. But never, ever, shituomorphism. Never.
Flat/Minimalism is my style and will never change. Has always been my style for more than ten years. I do NOT follow "trends". I dictate my own trend.
I hear you. I’m not a fan of single-color (usually blue, and sometimes with a lemming-faddish gradient) with a single white Arial font letter icons such that the icons blend together and take a little more work than before to quickly differentiate and then recognize. May as well go back to presenting apps as a list — at least the advantage there would be more info on the same size screen, be it the dock or a mobile screen.
#NoToBevelAndEmboss
#NoToHighlightsAndShadows
#NoToShituomorphism
Come on Jony. Show your face once and for all and stop lurking in the shadows.
Now we’re in agreement on something. I’d be fine with throwing out the word neumorphism. Just go back to non-flat more intuitive & more interesting design. “Reinventing” and forcing a title on yet another wave/fad of an interface “method” is self-defeating and just silly. How about instead: stick with what works. Be the anti-Microsoft and don’t radically reinvent an interface every few years (which is just an admission of “what we did last time was a failure and just plain sucked, so look at THIS).
#NoToBevelAndEmboss
#NoToHighlightsAndShadows
#NoToShituomorphism
Nope. No need to digress to the past, best to incorporate best-in-class intuitive (and attractively interesting while we’re at it) design into the future, always. It’s not at all about retaining a preferred look. It’s very much about maintaining an intuitive & efficient interface into the latest operating systems. Enough of the frequent guesswork and extra taps brought on by flat-design, all-white interfaces, spread-out space-wasting interfaces, thin low-contrast font, text-for-buttons, hiding functions offscreen for that clean look, etc. Less form-first more function-first as it always should have remained.
Last edited:
it's all moot; the next OS will have it's own differences (and ppl here will complain, of course); and so on and so on.
ultimately, i don't care. i tend to like each OS's look in it's moment (altho i always changed my icons with liteicon), and in the 'old' days, changed some menubar icons as well (i made the location icon invisible, for example).
i've used bartender since it first appeared. and have had my dock locked away (with a terminal command) since 10.3.9.
but really, i spend most of my time living & working on my mac, and very little time looking at icons and window corners. and consequently, i get all the things done i need to get done... just as it's been on every version of the OS (since 10.2). and that's what matters to me most.
this thread is like a political debate; each side makes it's point, explains why they're 'right'... and no one changes their mind. ever. what could be more fun? 🤔
ultimately, i don't care. i tend to like each OS's look in it's moment (altho i always changed my icons with liteicon), and in the 'old' days, changed some menubar icons as well (i made the location icon invisible, for example).
i've used bartender since it first appeared. and have had my dock locked away (with a terminal command) since 10.3.9.
but really, i spend most of my time living & working on my mac, and very little time looking at icons and window corners. and consequently, i get all the things done i need to get done... just as it's been on every version of the OS (since 10.2). and that's what matters to me most.
this thread is like a political debate; each side makes it's point, explains why they're 'right'... and no one changes their mind. ever. what could be more fun? 🤔
You and me both. And I sure like to work efficiently and not guess or tap more than should be required. Intuitive function-first interfaces with interface cues that almost seem to work themselves with an absence of guesswork are always the universal best.
There is no guess work in flat design.
There is a lot of guesswork in shituomorphism. A lot of terrible bevel and emboss, highlights and shadows. This kind of "design" is not efficient, is not good for browser performance and is not good for developers. It's practically useless.
Flat design is faster, direct, efficient, intuitive and minimalist. straight to the point. better browser performance. easier for developers. That's a winner.
You're just a troll. I won't bother replying on this subject again.
There is a lot of guesswork in shituomorphism. A lot of terrible bevel and emboss, highlights and shadows. This kind of "design" is not efficient, is not good for browser performance and is not good for developers. It's practically useless.
Flat design is faster, direct, efficient, intuitive and minimalist. straight to the point. better browser performance. easier for developers. That's a winner.
You're just a troll. I won't bother replying on this subject again.
you mean, as the OS always is (and is now)?
if you think of all the 'normal' people who don't live on forums like this, and just do their work (many now on big sur)... no one's crying that they can't tell the finder icon from mail (or whatever). we adapt... just as we've been doing since our first OS.
I really liked skeuomorphism in the 10.5-10.9 days, I didn't liked flat design back when Yosemite released, now I got used to it and I enjoy it
But Big Sur, I don't know, I don't like the design change.
I upgraded from my Mid 2012 13" to a Late 2013 13" mainly because it wasn't compatible with Big Sur, now I intentionally stay on Catalina, because I don't like Big Sur icon, and also because its quite slower on my machine.
But, skeuomorphism is still my favourite design to this day, few days ago I had to reinstall my MacBook, I had to go through Mavericks, I almost didn't wanted to upgrade as I enjoyed the old design so much, if only it wasn't simply outdated
But Big Sur, I don't know, I don't like the design change.
I upgraded from my Mid 2012 13" to a Late 2013 13" mainly because it wasn't compatible with Big Sur, now I intentionally stay on Catalina, because I don't like Big Sur icon, and also because its quite slower on my machine.
But, skeuomorphism is still my favourite design to this day, few days ago I had to reinstall my MacBook, I had to go through Mavericks, I almost didn't wanted to upgrade as I enjoyed the old design so much, if only it wasn't simply outdated
Last edited:
Seriously? Oh man, ok.
Troll, nope. Passionate about the subject and frustrated when I have to guess or do more work for what used to be obvious & out in front? Yes.
The only time I can be convinced that flat design may be highly efficient is in the case of a highly-repetitive mission-critical type of interface where the user is well-trained on it and uses it many many times an hour/day, to where the intuitive affordances I and many value are superfluous. That’s the only instance I can think of where flat design could be highly efficient compared to a more detailed interface. That and in any imaginary world where consumers must pay by the pixel.
Last edited:
Not always. Consider an earlier OS iteration that indeed utilized less-monochromatic interface elements that were more intuitive, such as highlighted in this post by @Feyl:
Why is Big Sur so ugly?
Just a few months back macOS had actually some color and buttons. Honestly, this is how the progress looks like? That pic from Big Sur looks like an inactive window. And those arrows on media, view and insert buttons are actually giving you a hint that you can do more with that button. I like...
forums.macrumors.com
Before, the clever incorporation of distinct looking icons and colors made for much faster repetitive use once somebody got used to looking for a certain color or icon shape instead of having to read the similar-looking monochromatic flat/stick-outline icons and low contrast text. With every “advancement” towards a more monochromatic, text-based interface design, it takes just a little bit much much more work it’s time to recognize the tool that’s needed.
From my standpoint, this discussion is not just about flat design. It’s about all the “added minimalism” that reduces interface cues presented on the screen.
For the sake of constructive discussion, let’s flip this. How might the prior method that I prefer in this example be less efficient? After all, if the newer, flatter, more text based and monochromatic interface design is more efficient (or functionally better) to some, then how specifically is the prior version less efficient? Specific answers to this question might prove to be very helpful in this thread.
Last edited:
all this discussion won't change what apple does. and i don't believe that macusers in general struggle with the GUI, or ever have.ppl generally adapt pretty quickly to what's new (and, to be honest, i imagine most macusers just do as they've always done, and don't investigate new options... until they need them.
the only people stressing 'added minimalism' (or whatever) are people on forums like this, who thrive on obsessing over details (i do too, sometimes). but then i get back to work, and life goes on... until the next OS.
EDIT: btw, do ppl not know that jony ive left apple 2 years ago? since some of you are still yelling at him... 🤣
the only people stressing 'added minimalism' (or whatever) are people on forums like this, who thrive on obsessing over details (i do too, sometimes). but then i get back to work, and life goes on... until the next OS.
EDIT: btw, do ppl not know that jony ive left apple 2 years ago? since some of you are still yelling at him... 🤣
You shouldn’t confuse “obsessing over details” with criticizing interface “improvements” resulting in inefficiencies for me and many.
Intentionally not taking a stab at being one to answer my question? It’s OK if you or nobody does or can. I’m not looking to prove or win anything. I just would like to understand specifically what broken design aspects were fixed, to counter the specific things I frequently list that are worse than before after all the added minimalism.
am not confusing anything, and i respect your right to your opinion... which is all that it is... an opinion.
EDIT: your signature is stonishing:
"Flat design ruined uIX in iOS, OSX, & website design. It’s time for the flat fad to go away, and intuitive uIX cues based on decades of learning to return. Hey Jony & Tim: “Think Different” never meant Change for the Sake of Change."
flat hardly seems a fad, it's a direction... and subject to change; who knows what the GUI will look like over the next few years?. and if you think apple makes 'change for the sake of change'... i have a bridge to sell you. finally, jony left apple 2 years ago, in case you missed the memo).
Thank you for your opinion.
Ah but aspects of the wastefully inefficient & sometimes confusing minimalist interface linger...
I’d dare say aspects of Big Sur OS & mobile OS’s of today are, at a high level, closer to iOS6/Mavericks than they are to Jony’s silly forced-change-festivals of iOS7/Yosemite, luckily.
Meanwhile I’ll eagerly await any solid response from anyone to my request in post #1,366, whether the response is helpfully objective or just based on subjective opinion. What was inefficient or broken that needed fixing in the “before?” What is the functional improvement from the minimalism added to the “after?” Should be easy to answer from anyone with an opposite viewpoint of mine that feels there’s too much minimalism in flat/monochromatic/buttonless/too-much-empty-space interfaces that results too often in uncertainty and avoidable extra taps/swipes.
there's no need for an 'answer'; why does any aesthetic decision need an explanation? and when you say 'before', which moment in mac OS history are you referencing? because there have been many 'befores' (and different people may prefer different looks).
apple makes changes to the GUI (usually in small steps) with every new OS, & they'll (undoubtedly) continue. you can shake your fist at the heavens as much as you want, it won't change anything.
or you can take a deep breath, accept big sur as it is, and get back to your real life... until the next OS rears it's (ugly?) head.
just my opinion, of course
Last edited:
Well, if nothing else, thank you for agreeing with me that those are aesthetic decisions.
I thought I very clearly referred to a specific “before” and “after” in post #1,366 for my question.
Why? For the sake of 2-sided give & take discussion and to move from others’ opinions and towards others’ objective input.
It’s funny, when I call those “aesthetic decisions” as being form-first “fashion over function” changes that result confusion at times and/or inefficient interaction and then provide specific examples of what I consider to be broken design from all the added vagueness from my perspective, I’ve been told more than once how flat design is more efficient and clearer, etc.
But when I ask others to back up their claims by pointing out the flaws and/or broken-design aspects in interfaces I find ideal and how they were fixed by flat/minimalist design interfaces, it’s all silence...
(And that deafening silence is a fact, not an opinion)
Last edited:
I don't know, maybe because that's why we're wasting our time here discussing and explaining stuff. If somebody ask me why I like this or that or why I like this kind of music I know why I like it. Some people just say "I don't know I just like it". I never understood this. I can say that about food.. I eat burgers because I just love them. I drink beer because I just like it. There's not much on there as it is with art, music or in this case the devices we buy.