So I read the first sentence and my immediate reaction was "Well I don't. And I'm not sure anyone has ever expressed that opinion to me" and I stopped reading.
Well, here's that opinion: today's flat UIs all look the same, boring, and bland. I wish there was more quirkiness too. Perhaps not to Kai Power tool's levels, but I enjoy the functional quirkiness of many VST UIs.
Now you can continue reading. Seldom anybody learned much, when they stopped reading at the point they disagreed with.
I want my UI’s to be usable. I want it to be immediately obvious what I need to do. I want them to become invisible in the same way good tools do. I don’t want my hammer to be quirky, I want it to be an extension of my hand.
EDIT - Yeah. I have a certain fondness for Kai’s. But I had time to get used to them. It’s one UI in a thousand where I have time to get bedded in with it’s quirks. For all the rest - be boring.
The opposite could be argued as well: it's design supposed to focus on function alone (after all that was their pitch: put the content front and center, remove aesthetic touches from the "skeuomorphic" UIs, etc.) but with no redeeming aesthetic qualities (which are also important for actual human users).
So, it's not exactly form over function (besides thought into form is necessary for function - you can have a real world lever that is e.g. thin and crooked and it will still function as a lever, but a good lever also has good form -- e.g. be designed to have a good grip).
It's "design ideology and novelty for some manager's sake" over form and function.
There's a bit of truth. The era of extremely engineered everything gave birth to flat design for instance. I'm not pro skeumorphism but I remember how odd software felt good in a way. As long as it was fun (good boards, useful programs) you ended up liking the quirks.
I don’t disagree but I didn’t get any of that from that opening statement. It seems to be arguing for diversity in UI which I happen to think is usually a terrible idea.
> It seems to be arguing for diversity in UI which I happen to think is usually a terrible idea.
I have to agree with this sentiment. I loved KPT, but that was more for the "adventure" aspect. I actually had difficulty using a lot of functions (don't ask me to remember which ones).
It's frustrating, designing innovative UI that also follows convention. It's a joy, when it works.
I have this iOS widget that I wrote[0]. It's really, really cool. Works a charm, and is easy to implement.
But I keep on not using it in my projects. It's too "in your face." I think that UI needs to get the hell out of the way, and just let the user do what they want to do.
I have a couple of more, more conventional widgets, that I use all the time[1], [2].
KPT was "in your face," like no other UI I have ever experienced.
Now you can continue reading. Seldom anybody learned much, when they stopped reading at the point they disagreed with.