This made me realize that Bloomberg Businessweek (one of my favorite magazines) seems to have a brutalist style in a lot of its visual elements, if this article is to be believed.
Definitely a fun exercise to look at. Glad that we get a bit more depth in the real world though.
Boxes, apparently. Which, I fucking love boxes. But also, “brutal” also means serifs, which makes no sense when you think of brutalist architecture, which is pretty much entirely about not having decoration.
What an absolutely useless criticism. This is simply a persons re-imagining of certain types of apps design, not some grandiose attention grab. Just because someone likes a style does not mean that they are actively trying to ruin things for people, that’s just absurd. What is the point of building a straw man like that? I like aspects of the design (like using rectangles in a fenced fashion), but apparently that makes me a “literal” bad person.
There seem to be a lot of different things going under the name of brutalism, but several of the examples in the Washington Post article–Pinboard, Craigslist–are almost the opposite of “new designs.”
In architecture, the term came from the characteristic use of béton brut, or raw concrete–concrete left unsurfaced so that the marks of the wood frames used to pour it remain visible in the finished building. In sites like Pinboard, Craigslist, Hacker News, and indeed Lobste.rs, there is a conceptually similar willingness to leave the implementation details exposed to the end user. This is done by leaving default styles in place or applying minimal styling (I’m reminded of Dan Luu‘s site, which has grown less and less styled over the years I’ve been reading it, until today it’s very nearly bare HTML), by building “blocky” pages whose layout doesn’t try to hide or evade the constraints of the underlying CSS box model, and by embracing a links-and-forms interaction model rather than trying to emulate GUI interaction models with an SPA or similar.
Personally I have never heard a “real person”–by which I guess you mean a non-designer–express a desire that Craigslist look and work more like, say, Facebook.
This made me realize that Bloomberg Businessweek (one of my favorite magazines) seems to have a brutalist style in a lot of its visual elements, if this article is to be believed.
Definitely a fun exercise to look at. Glad that we get a bit more depth in the real world though.
I only now the term in the context of architecture. What makes UI design ‘brutal’?
No icons?
That’s what I thought, but he didn’t change instagram’s icons so now I’m confused.
Boxes, apparently. Which, I fucking love boxes. But also, “brutal” also means serifs, which makes no sense when you think of brutalist architecture, which is pretty much entirely about not having decoration.
http://brutalistwebsites.com/
Some of these don’t look bad and might even be pretty good on an e-ink display or an eReader type device.
[Comment from banned user removed]
What an absolutely useless criticism. This is simply a persons re-imagining of certain types of apps design, not some grandiose attention grab. Just because someone likes a style does not mean that they are actively trying to ruin things for people, that’s just absurd. What is the point of building a straw man like that? I like aspects of the design (like using rectangles in a fenced fashion), but apparently that makes me a “literal” bad person.
There seem to be a lot of different things going under the name of brutalism, but several of the examples in the Washington Post article–Pinboard, Craigslist–are almost the opposite of “new designs.”
In architecture, the term came from the characteristic use of béton brut, or raw concrete–concrete left unsurfaced so that the marks of the wood frames used to pour it remain visible in the finished building. In sites like Pinboard, Craigslist, Hacker News, and indeed Lobste.rs, there is a conceptually similar willingness to leave the implementation details exposed to the end user. This is done by leaving default styles in place or applying minimal styling (I’m reminded of Dan Luu‘s site, which has grown less and less styled over the years I’ve been reading it, until today it’s very nearly bare HTML), by building “blocky” pages whose layout doesn’t try to hide or evade the constraints of the underlying CSS box model, and by embracing a links-and-forms interaction model rather than trying to emulate GUI interaction models with an SPA or similar.
Personally I have never heard a “real person”–by which I guess you mean a non-designer–express a desire that Craigslist look and work more like, say, Facebook.