Why is Big Sur so ugly?

[CasualFanboy]

It's time to deep dive into the reasoning behind this mess.

One of the more simple explanations behind this monochromatic, stark, flat white style is the relatively low skill/effort required.

Open up an SVG editor and try to recreate a screenshot of Snow Leopard's finder window, then do the same for Big Sur's. I could recreate the look of Big Sur in less than 10 minutes, and it would take me over an hour to recreate Snow Leopard's look... especially if I wanted to make it look really close to the original.

 

[nickdalzell1]

The operative phrase always ends up being "for the masses" aka the stupid, illiterate folks which is why we have a UI that feels designed for elementary school children. Something kinda reminiscent of the Apple IIgs. But it's not the 80s anymore. We've long since moved on from Spell-A-Vator and Jenny's Journeys. It's 2021. Our UI still looks like a modern take on GS/OS. Hasn't 9 years of flat UI design gotten 'dated' by now?

I always hate when 'the masses' are what everyone carters to. That means geeks like me are out, or obsolete, and the UI has to be so sterile, feel like work rather than enjoyable to use, and really homogenized.

However, I would argue that the skeuomorphic UI was far more accessible to the elderly and newbies to an OS or computer since it made perfect sense. You knew what a button was, what an app did. It didn't take a manual or any weird swiping like a moron to find out what action does what like the interface of the iPhone has become today. You knew what the Notes app did, and how to use the Music player. Don't believe me? Check out the original iPhone presentation from 2007:

Steve Jobs iPhone 2007 Presentation (HD)

Today? Ask any elderly person how to even unlock a modern home-button-less iPhone. Heck I'm 42 and I still can't figure it out every time. I keep wanting to tap the pill to go home. Oftentimes when I have to do something to help my mom out with her iPhone 11 Pro, I have to ask Siri to do it since I can't do the gesture at all properly (I think it's meant to look cool to young folks, and my hands are already pretty messed up from working on cars and golf cars a lot, so that doesn't help, but I can use my 6S perfectly fine)

 

[CasualFanboy]

Also, let's talk about this ball-fanning defense of Apple, with responses like "well obviously Apple has been successful therefore your argument is invalid LOL." It's lazy, dishonest, and/or overly simplistic. Speaking for myself, the only thing Apple still offers me that no one else can is a UNIX foundation with good hardware support.

If FreeBSD or even Linux could sell me a quality laptop comparable to MacBook Pro, at the exact same price, I would walk away without a second thought. But I'm not going to use Windows, which is a completely foreign platform to the type of work I do, and foreign to the way I've learned to interact with systems over the last couple of decades. Plus as I've said before, setting the bar to "better than Windows" is no standard at all. It's always been a terrible operating system once you look beyond point-and-click.

 

[nickdalzell1]

Companies are only successful not because what they change is ok to the public, but more because the public has this disease known as 'upgrade culture' and are so complacent that no drastic UI change can bother them anymore. In fact, the lack of change bothers them since they need a change every year or two otherwise they get bored. It's something to do with the lack of attention span which gets worse each generation.

No one knows or believes in "if it ain't broke, don't fix it"

Eventually when a UI is perfected enough, leave it alone. Just like cars still have four wheels and a steering wheel. Eventually it comes down to leave the important bits alone and improve security, privacy, features, and get rid of bugs.

I'm surprised Windows still has a start menu. It's so dated, right? to use the logic of those who defend modern UI design, why aren't they angry that Aero transparency and the start menu as well as the basic design of 2009's Windows 7 has become the latest version of Windows 10? (of course, I quite like it myself)

I'm still trying to wrap my head around modern smartphones getting rid of features and calling that an 'upgrade'. What's the upgrade?

 

[Feyl]

What's easier on eyes? And I don't mean what do you like better, but which is more "comfortable" to look at?

 

[vddobrev]

View attachment 1746484View attachment 1746485
What's easier on eyes? And I don't mean what do you like better, but which is more "comfortable" to look at?

For me the second image 100%. There is visually a clear distinction between each area and component of the window and items/tabs within the window.

Also why do we need more rounded corners of the window? It looks funny on a rectangular monitor.

 

[CasualFanboy]

What's easier on eyes? And I don't mean what do you like better, but which is more "comfortable" to look at?

Well, in terms of which one allows you to distinguish elements, and which visually maps form to function, there is no comparison. If I had never used OSX before, my first question would be, "what the hell are those two random left/right arrows doing there?" Because, as opposed to the grid icon right next to it, there is nothing to indicate these are interactive buttons. And they look so..... amateurish, out of place and slightly misaligned. I could literally draw these things free-hand and you wouldn't be able to tell the difference. 😂

Looking at those two screenshots at the same time actually makes Big Sur look even worse than I was giving it credit for.

 

[fisherking]

all of this, as always, is subjective. i think the top picture looks a lot better (but, to be fair, i like clean, minimal).

this thread can (& probably will) go on forever. yet apple will continue to do what it wants, and millions of macusers will continue to use their macs, unaffected by the displeasure of a dozen people on a mac forum.

 

[Feyl]

all of this, as always, is subjective. i think the top picture looks a lot better (but, to be fair, i like clean, minimal).

this thread can (& probably will) go on forever. yet apple will continue to do what it wants, and millions of macusers will continue to use their macs, unaffected by the displeasure of a dozen people on a mac forum.

As the people before you said, the earlier version is objectively better in terms of orientation. That speaks a lot. I specifically asked to not judge the pictures by how much you like them. Why do you keep doing this? We know what your opinion is. To make this conversation worthwhile, can you list something that you think was better in earlier versions of OS X in terms of design?

 

[Feyl]

Also why do we need more rounded corners of the window? It looks funny on a rectangular monitor.

I personally think that rounded corners is a good thing, but they’re so exaggerated in Big Sur.

 

[fisherking]

As the people before you said, the earlier version is objectively better in terms of orientation. That speaks a lot. I specifically asked to not judge the pictures by how much you like them. Why do you keep doing this? We know what your opinion is. To make this conversation worthwhile, can you list something that you think was better in earlier versions of OS X in terms of design?

just to be clear, people here who agree with your point-of-view can continue to post the same thing over & over... but i can't?

also, you put 'objectively', where 'subjectively' would be the correct word. there is no fact here, this is all opinion (just ask the apple people who worked on the current GUI.... for example).

EDIT: another thought (i have lots of them); people who've worked with macs for years know their way around; i bet you could replace Finder - File -Edit - View - Go with aztec symbols, and most users would intuitively know their way around.

for new users, they're growing up in the computer era, and will adapt... just as we did with our first mac. simple!

 

[CasualFanboy]

this thread can (& probably will) go on forever

Admit it, you've had a little fun, right?

 

[Feyl]

just to be clear, people here who agree with your point-of-view can continue to post the same thing over & over... but i can't?

also, you put 'objectively', where 'subjectively' would be the correct word. there is no fact here, this is all opinion (just ask the apple people who worked on the current GUI.... for example).

The fact here is that one picture has more contrast and as a result a clearer visual interpretation of function elements in the GUI that user can interact with. That's an objective observation based on evidence. There's no room for dismissing this because it's clear. The other question is, whether you like it or not. But that was not my question.

 

[fisherking]

The fact here is that one picture has more contrast and as a result a clearer visual interpretation of function elements in the GUI that user can interact with. That's an objective observation based on evidence. There's no room for dismissing this because it's clear. The other question is, whether you like it or not. But that was not my question.

you're still talking about your observation, which is... your opinion. whether more contrast automatically assumes a 'clearer visual interpretation', is, in fact, your interpretation.

and that.. is a fact. 😎

 

[Feyl]

you're still talking about your observation, which is... your opinion. whether more contrast automatically assumes a 'clearer visual interpretation', is, in fact, your interpretation.

and that.. is a fact. 😎

I'm not sure in which world you live in, but in my world the word contrast means the difference between light and dark areas. There's the definiton of the word form the dictionary for you.. Contrast: "degree of difference between the lightest and darkest parts of a picture" or "the difference or degree of difference between things having similar or comparable natures".

 

[fisherking]

I'm not sure in which world you live in, but in my world the word contrast means the difference between light and dark areas. There's the definiton of the word form the dictionary for you.. Contrast: "degree of difference between the lightest and darkest parts of a picture" or "the difference or degree of difference between things having similar or comparable natures".

haha, nice try. it's this: "and as a result a clearer visual interpretation of function"

 

[CasualFanboy]

whether more contrast automatically assumes a 'clearer visual interpretation', is, in fact, your interpretation.

But you have to admit, visual distinction helps identify functional differences, especially when applied consistently. With Mavericks I can instantly identify elements and patterns.

• glossy = option interaction (checkbox, radio button, spin button)
• darker etched button = current selection
• the search box is easy to identify but not jarring

Then with Big Sur it's hard to tell which option is selected. The color pattern is reversed - now it's the lighter color representing active selection and the others have faint separation indicators (Barva and Night Shift) with very little color difference from window bg. The search box is practically camouflaged.

Pure opinion part: The white color is so stark and off-putting.

People have been complaining about flat design for years, it didn't start with Big Sur and it certainly hasn't been "validated" by Big Sur as a good thing to those who never liked it in the first place. If you think this thread is overly critical, you should have seen how hard the community railed against Gnome 3 when it was introduced - and many people still do rail against it. It has of course died down now due to some just accepting it and others fleeing to other desktops.

 

[fisherking]

But you have to admit, visual distinction helps identify functional differences, especially when applied consistently. With Mavericks I can instantly identify elements and patterns.

• glossy = option interaction (checkbox, radio button, spin button)
• darker etched button = current selection
• the search box is easy to identify but not jarring

Then with Big Sur it's hard to tell which option is selected. The color pattern is reversed - now it's the lighter color representing active selection and the others have faint separation indicators (Barva and Night Shift) with very little color difference from window bg. The search box is practically camouflaged.

Pure opinion part: The white color is so stark and off-putting.

People have been complaining about flat design for years, it didn't start with Big Sur and it certainly hasn't been "validated" by Big Sur as a good thing to those who never liked it in the first place. If you think this thread is overly critical, you should have seen how hard the community railed against Gnome 3 when it was introduced - and many people still do rail against it. It has of course died down now due to some just accepting it and others fleeing to other desktops.

"people have been complaining"... which people? & how many of them? i mean, besides the 12 on this thread.

and am sure that most macusers are having catastrophic experiences on big sur, based on confusing patterns and buttons.

for me, the definitive post on this (endless) thread is the one where someone mentioned that his wife sat down to his big sur mac, worked a bit, and said she noticed nothing different.

but seriously, i get it. my own feeling is... why won't apple let us customize anything? i bought an android tablet some years back, and was amazed at how easy it was to customize the UI (& had a field day doing that).

apple could give us choices, themes perhaps. but, we can't even (easily) change the login background.

and so it goes. i still think that, if people here focused on their real work, and stopped staring at the traffic lights... everyone would be a lot happier.

but... who'd want that? 🤔

 

[CasualFanboy]

"people have been complaining"... which people? & how many of them? i mean, besides the 12 on this thread.

In the general sense, not specific to OSX.

 

[fisherking]

In the general sense, not specific to OSX.

yes, got it.

so...how many people? & where are they complaining? &, since is a thread about big sur, on a mac forum... how many macusers are unhappy with 'flat design'?

 

[nickdalzell1]

If only someone knew how to bring that second picture's UI to Big Sur. I got the icons down but I'd love to mess with the traffic lights and window UI.

I can only theorize what purpose rounded corners do or why they exist (although they also exist on Android as well)

The original Mac and Macintosh Classic had rounded corners in the UI. But not for the simple aesthetic. The shape of the CRT had rounded corners and when a window was fully maximized (full screen) the window edges wouldn't be cut off as they'd fit the shape of the CRT, so controls such as scroll bars or window controls remained visible.

But today? Maybe to hark back to that early Mac UI? Pointless with LCDs though. Oh, and System 6 was quite flat design as well.

 

[Jamalien]

No idea how to articulate this and I'm tired. The world is full of all kinds of different textures, some more 3-dimensional than others, and forming all kinds of geometries. Using pre-Yosemite for extended periods I felt like I was almost 'in' the OS since it tried to replicate/resemble the real world in many ways (especially textures), and in doing so was very non-homogeneous. The continual flattening and unifying of UI elements makes the experience less 'organic', and I feel like I am losing brain cells using it. A more messy UI, as long as it is done right, I find is more cognitively stimulating and engaging.

 

[Tozovac]

View attachment 1746484View attachment 1746485
What's easier on eyes? And I don't mean what do you like better, but which is more "comfortable" to look at?

Not just comfortable, but — which one presents info in a way that your eyes/brain can almost instantly “get” the different areas the provide different function? Title vs. Content? Info vs. actionable? The bottom, hands down.

 

[nickdalzell1]

A skeuo UI is far more accessible for the elderly as well as users not familiar with the OS. Ask anyone if they ever thought the original iPhone was hard to use.

For me it made the device fun (no one else did it at the time) and it really connected me to my world instead of distancing me from it. It felt like the natural world and the digital world were converging. Today it feels more like the digital world doesn't fit in the natural world. It's a clash. What could be more simple than the pre-iOS 7 Notes app? Or the older Voice Mail interface? Music player and calculator? It all made sense. No weird gestures needed, and you knew what a button was. I guess I can't understand who in charge thought it needed to change? I mean it was not remotely broken.

Companies are supposed to respond to the market, not define it. What customer asked Apple to go flat? anybody? Bueller?

 

[Tozovac]

all of this, as always, is subjective. i think the top picture looks a lot better (but, to be fair, i like clean, minimal).

Curious, what’s “unclean” or unnecessarily complex about the bottom picture?