This is the MacOS 11 thread all over again. Apparently no one on HN has been through a redesign...
For those of you complaining, congratulations, you've discovered ~ nostalgia ~
In two weeks you'll inevitably find the old design ugly, and forget GitHub ever looked any other way.
In 5 years, each will get another round of improved designs, and there will be a thread on HN full of people complaining about how the new design sucks and how 5 years ago was "the good old days."
The new GitHub design is objectively better.
The new MacOS 11 design is objectively better.
"Low information density" means less clutter. You find the information that matters quicker.
Changes to padding/visual separation/sizing/etc. all provide similar context to which information is important, and how items relate.
"Flat design" isn't some trend, flat icons are just easier to quickly recognize, and look far more crisp.
In both threads the degree of negativity is disappointing. Can we not have one or two positive comments on how crisp the new commit graph colors look, how nice the transparent pin dragging interface is, or how the action buttons are more prominent? Not to mention the entire code/README page. The flat rounded corner borders are very clean!
If you really don't like the rounded borders, use wget
Low information density means "less clutter" for somebody new to the interface, but it means "many more steps" to provide all the information that a dense design allows for. So much design fails to take into account human expertise, and our ability to learn complex interfaces. They get the A/B treatment which optimizes for beginners, which always leans towards the simpler, easier design.
This is why we'll never get a better spreadsheet design. In the hands of experts it's already perfect.
If modern UI designers were responsible for building musical instruments, there would be a lot more kazoos and recorders, and a lot fewer cellos and bassoons.
This is also linked to the obsession with constant, never-ending growth.
Bringing in new users is more important than making existing users happier - you just need to keep them happy enough that they won't actually leave. It results in targeting the design towards people that don't use the product (yet) instead of the ones that already do.
Seriously one of my biggest pet peeves. So often I hunt around for the login button, annoyed at being force fed some growth hackers moronic idea of a good interface. It undermines the likely hood that I will "recommend this product to a friend".
Excel today is still cleaner than Excel 2010, and Google Sheets easier to use than both. Most spreadsheet users simply don't need the extra functionality Excel provides, and the few users that do need this use the product enough to have memorized the keyboard shortcuts.
That dumb wall of text simply to show you don’t know what the word “objectively” means.
It’s also telling that so much of this “objective” user experience narrative apparently depends on immediate and gratuitous condescension and hostility towards your users.
You sound like a complete asshole. You’re not better than everyone that disagrees with you. Try to do better.
Engagement rate is measurable. The average time it takes for users to complete the action they're looking for is also measurable. Companies test this stuff, Apple isn't spending millions of dollars to redesign MacOS because Tim Cook is bored. Same goes for the Instagram redesign of a few years ago, or this GitHub redesign, etc.
"less clutter" isn't by itself an objective positive. For example in Japanese culture you might be surprised to find information density is considered a positive. Yes much Japanese aesthetic design is considered to lean to simple but for information presentation higher density is usually considered better.
So this idea that ""Low information density" means less clutter." is objectively better is false.
For me, I'm trying to get work done so my criteria is does the design help me achieve that. For an ad or a piece of art to hang on my wall, a poster, something else having a less cluttered design might be good but it's not so clear it's good for developers who interact with the same UI several times day.
The new design is terrible. If it actually made the website easier to use, then I would be all for it. Unfortunately this is an actual step backwards in functionality and information layout design.
I fundamentally disagree that it was not useful to have at the top. Language/platform is a major factor when choosing whether to evaluate a newly-discovered repository, and the colours for each were very recognisable.
> If you really don't like the rounded borders, use wget
Or just add
* {
border-radius 0 !important;
}
to the page stylesheet, either via userContent.css or a browser extension. Once you know the process, it's extremely easy to hack around web developers' poor decisions if you know a bit of CSS yourself.
For those of you complaining, congratulations, you've discovered ~ nostalgia ~
In two weeks you'll inevitably find the old design ugly, and forget GitHub ever looked any other way.
In 5 years, each will get another round of improved designs, and there will be a thread on HN full of people complaining about how the new design sucks and how 5 years ago was "the good old days."
The new GitHub design is objectively better. The new MacOS 11 design is objectively better.
"Low information density" means less clutter. You find the information that matters quicker. Changes to padding/visual separation/sizing/etc. all provide similar context to which information is important, and how items relate. "Flat design" isn't some trend, flat icons are just easier to quickly recognize, and look far more crisp.
In both threads the degree of negativity is disappointing. Can we not have one or two positive comments on how crisp the new commit graph colors look, how nice the transparent pin dragging interface is, or how the action buttons are more prominent? Not to mention the entire code/README page. The flat rounded corner borders are very clean!
If you really don't like the rounded borders, use wget