Google released a material design framework for web (finally)!

[Adam K M]

Hey guys!

So google has released a (second?) material design framework for the world wide web, and this time it looks simply fantastic and much more easily integratable with most websites nowadays, unlike polymer that preceded it.

It's always so tempting to pop this down on a xenForo style and get to work, but as that'd probably see some very big rewriting going on, I'll hold off on it for now.

What are your thoughts on this new framework?

 

[Arty]

It looks shiny, but I don't see anything different from other frameworks. It uses exactly the same concept as Bootstrap and other frameworks - layout is defined by class names.

To modify layout designer has to change HTML code. That's not suitable for forums.

 

[Adam K M]

@Arty have you checked out Google's Polymer? It's quite different compared to the traditional front-end framework, although yeah - none of these frameworks are ready for xenForo out of the box, it'd require a complete framework/xenForo template rework to fully combine the two.

 

[RickM]

It looks shiny, but I don't see anything different from other frameworks. It uses exactly the same concept as Bootstrap and other frameworks - layout is defined by class names.

To modify layout designer has to change HTML code. That's not suitable for forums.

It's not about the quantity of components or anything like that. The purpose of Material is to sort out the complete mess that is the online user experience. Few websites have good UX. This needs fixing.

It starts with a good set of components that actually make sense. All Google are doing here is trying to unify how we build sites and apps to keep a consistent user experience across them. Note that this does not mean they are trying to make every site look the same - far from it.

 

[Sheratan]

Ehh... MetroUI anyone?

 

[Mr. Goodie2Shoes]

Few websites have good UX.

Blame bootstrap for that

 

[RickM]

Blame bootstrap for that

Actually no. Blame lazy frontend devs for not taking the time to learn how to use Bootstrap correctly Bootstrap is not the issue when it comes to UX. People not learning how to correctly work with it to build their own style are the issue.

 

[Arty]

It's not about the quantity of components or anything like that. The purpose of Material is to sort out the complete mess that is the online user experience. Few websites have good UX. This needs fixing.

As far as I can see, it fails miserably in that. It doesn't offer anything new. Every element has dozens of class names that modify its layout and behavior, just like in Bootstrap. That's the issue that needs fixing. Elements should be semantic, not giant list of class names.

It starts with a good set of components that actually make sense. All Google are doing here is trying to unify how we build sites and apps to keep a consistent user experience across them. Note that this does not mean they are trying to make every site look the same - far from it.

So same thing as Bootstrap? The only difference is tying it to Google services, so anyone trying to customize stuff from Google services will be forced to use that UI.

 

[RickM]

As far as I can see, it fails miserably in that. It doesn't offer anything new. Every element has dozens of class names that modify its layout and behavior, just like in Bootstrap. That's the issue that needs fixing. Elements should be semantic, not giant list of class names.

Thats the bit you're not understanding. Sure, there will ALWAYS be things in the markup to be improved. That's got nothing at all to do with the actual purpose of the Material Design project. End users couldn't give a damn about the markup. The purpose is to get everyone used to a common UI function (note, this has nothing to do with looks at all).

For example a button. You expect a button to act a certain way. Yet it doesnt on most sites. When you click a button on some sites, there's no feedback, it just loads a page. Yet when you click them on another page, you might get a inset bevel effect.

Material's sole purpose is to get a common set of UX style guides out there - its not to enforce a theme on people, or to force a certain way of doing markup.

So same thing as Bootstrap? The only difference is tying it to Google services, so anyone trying to customize stuff from Google services will be forced to use that UI.

Bootstrap is not a UX framework, it's a UI framework. It's also not backed nor built by UX experts, its built by UI experts.

They are not, even remotely, the same thing.

Material is young. Give it time and you'll see completely different themed frameworks being created that make use of material UX.

There's technically no reason Bootstrap can't use it. and remain looking pretty much as it does now.

 

[Arty]

Then I'm missing something because I don't see how they are doing it any differently than other frameworks.

UI functions is job of HTML. There are HTML elements that provide basic set of UI elements with predefined functionality. They already exist in all browsers and don't need any frameworks. Button already exists as <button> that functions like a button. If some website wants to change that functionality, they have some reasons to do so and no framework can change that.

 

[Xon]

So same thing as Bootstrap? The only difference is tying it to Google services, so anyone trying to customize stuff from Google services will be forced to use that UI.

I would also trust Bootstrap to be around longer than the latest fad Google floats around, that gets use a bit and then Google nukes from orbit because it isn't the dominate player and they no longer want to support.