“Milano, Italy-based user interface designer Sebastiano Guerriero has envisioned this great looking full-on Apple.com redesign which has left me speechless this morning,” Christian Zibreg writes for iDownloadBlog. “I’m especially digging the uniformity, focus on large images with less text and single-colored buttons that much resemble the design language of iOS 7.”
“But what’s really floored me is his awesomely flattened navigation bar at the top. I know Apple has removed some of the shine and depth to it over the years,” Zibreg writes. “But – but – Guerriero’s version is so much better! I’m not exaggerating, his mockup is an eye-candy and puts Apple’s current website design to shame, hands down.”
Zibreg writes, “Hopefully, Apple is paying attention to Guerriero’s work.”
Read more, and see the image, in the full article here.
Want a job with the US Government? Know anything about healthcare?
The federal government doesn’t employ people who build websites; they hire contractors to do that. Privatization. The company the was in charge of Healthcare.gov has been replaced already.
On the contrary Thomas, FYI the government hires contractors exclusively for its people and their skills and not because their name sounds cool, like Blackwater or Cogent Computers.
My questions were rhetorical but you answered them anyway. You and the other mouth breathers who flamed my comment know exactly what I meant and yet you think the idea is stupid to hire him to build websites.
If he immigrated to America and opened his doors as a one-man private contractor to get government work, you and 10 others would say no? Is that what you would have us believe?
He appears to be more interested in visual design than the complexities that led to the initial problems with Healthcare.gov. I don’t think that the appearance of the site was the problem, but if it was, I would highly recommend him.
Hence the rhetorical questions, thomas.
He’s into making clever mockups of website pages that don’t actually work.
Just like healthcare.gov.
OMG. I just realized you can vote on your own comments. I just gave myself 5-stars. Quick, someone knock me down before I get a big head. Oops too late….n vjjnk befz
Hit my head on the keyboard.
5 Stars
tanx
It’s always easier to design something when all you have to think about is one thing, the interface.
A sign of the times. More potatoes less meat. When I go to a website I want information not “Eye Candy”. This is just that, “Eye Candy”. This is just pandering to the masses that are distracted by the shiny baubles instead of focusing on the information.
Great point but I think you are in the minority. People like and buy shiny things over dull even if the dull thing is better. I can think of some car comparisons but don’t want to start that argument as beauty is subjective. In the end a corporate website is a balance of content (technical data) and aesthetics (marketing).
There is a very clear purpose for the existence of the art and skill of graphic (visual) design. It is to convey a message in the most appropriate way.
The “Eye Candy” is an expression coined by people who don’t understand this. When a web site is build by a skilful and experienced designer, it will be delivering its content in most efficient and effective way.
The balance between “information” and “Eye Candy” is NOT a consequence of the work of the site’s designer; it is a result of poor content decision. The designer simply packages the content (provided to him/her by content owner) in most effective and efficient manner.
The mock-up offered here seems to do exactly that — with the existing content that Apple currently provides on its web site, the design improves on the effectiveness, as well as efficiency.
Nothing to do with shining baubles, eye candy or any of that. It is all about delivering information to the reader.
You’re spot on.
I would add in response to your statement, “The balance between “information” and “Eye Candy” is”
Information Design.
Terrific college course.
Eye candy is a euphemism for select elements being given special treatment until your brain’s “muscle” memory is developed, after which the “candy” coating could be omitted over time as the button recedes.
The classic “stop light” feature in the upper-left corner of every Mac window has been the subject of such treatment over the last thirty-years as its design has changed to accommodate more information.
Designers are paid to communicate a ton of information to the most people in the least amount of time. Those who can, can be a powerful team member.
That’s why the Desktop trash can is such a powerful icon and Bill Gates had to have it by any means possible.
Good to see you around the boards Predrag. Happy New Year.
Agreed. If I’m a quality shopper and I go to Walmart, then I go to Lord & Taylor, which one do you think I’m going to think has better quality? If I go Walmart, chances are I’m a Windows user, you know where the Apple crowd is going to shop, and it isn’t Walmart.
And yet his own website isn’t like that.
The best barbers are too busy to find a decent barber.
I cant even find his website when doing a search just various social sites he’s at. Not great marketing.
Thank you!
Personally, I would characterize this as making it as ugly as iOS 7. I will say I’m past the point where I see it any more, but when I stop and look, I remember how much I like the previous version and just how awful iOS 7 looks.
And that’s you. For me, every time I pick up my brother’s iPhone 4 with iOS6, i cringe at the stale, unappealing and inefficient look and feel of it, compared to iOS 7. And in the beginning, I was also one of the skeptical, not quite excited about the new visual interface. It probably took all of two weeks to get thoroughly won over.
Hence my use of the word personally… I will say that everyone that I know feels the same way. What I don’t get though is your use of efficient. I’m talking about the look of the icons and many of the programs Apple changed. How is one icon design more efficient than another?? How is a plain (and often visually painful) black and black interface more efficient?
Functionally I agree it has been improved which is why I tell the ones who haven’t yet done to go ahead and upgrade. I tell them they will get used to the new look soon enough.
iOS 6 looks like a Victorian living room now; I guess you’re happier living in an over-complicated, cluttered environment.
There could be an underlying emotional component to such preferences, as with Dickens’s Miss Haversham.
I didn’t feel Rorschach’s comment was worth replying to but with yours I will finally do so.
Something like Predrag, I don’t understand the over-complicated, cluttered environment comment. They are simply icons. It isn’t as though there are fewer to unclutter the screen. Nor do plain icons uncomplicated the user interface. For my eye, they simply make it less visually appealing. In fact, as I said my previous reply to Predrag, I think the icons are almost painful to look at.
Also a correction, I meant to black on white, not black on black.
Wow, 1 whole page, and he already has a typo.
Looks inspired by a retarded OS like Metro/Zune/Win8.
I just looked at Apple’s site and I think it looks great. The header menu looks a little cleaner in this design but also takes up more real estate. I prefer the layout of the Apple site, if I was to improve anything it would be Search, if you don’t spell Aperture correctly you won’t find it.
All he did was take the current toolbar on Apple.com and apply the flat iOS design to it (along with incorrect casing of the product names). This is what Apple.com currently looks like:
This happens often…
Apple begins implementation of something. A designer or developer jumps ahead on the same track. Apple gets around to implementing the change on the same component, and the people get butt-hurt over Apple copying them.
Ya, guess what folks, this isn’t an example of innovative design, but rather a prediction of how Apple will likely change their toolbar.
It’s sooooooo much easier to be the critic.
Spoken like a critic.
meh…
Looks like a free template from Squarespace.com.
Since when is a photograph a proof of concept?
He’s going to do the App Store next? ooh that photo is liable to crush Apple’s hopes and dreams.
One photo, is that it?!?!?
All this hype and all they (yes, even the link) have to show is one sideways photo of a screen?
Wait so basically all that’s wrong with Apple’s website is the gray toolbar? I’ll admit it seems out of place and am surprised it hasn’t been fixed but I’m not sure what makes his redesign better.
I want the $199 iMac!
All he did was take the UI from iTunes and applied it to the website. Hrm.
The problem with Apple.com is that, though it’s very attractive and tasteful, it is still quite glossy/Aqua, whereas OSX/iOS are already going flat.
If you look at http://www.apple.com/iphone/, you’ll basically see his design already in place. The only thing that needs help is the glossy Nav bar.
flat & boring. i remember when graphics artists attempted to immerse the user into a world that had realistic texture, lifelike elements, and clear user inputs. Now that computers and displays finally have the ability to really accomplish it, the fad is to make everything flat and boring.
So what you’re really saying is designers are no longer patronizing people, no longer treating them like children.
No, that is not what I am saying at all.
Quite the opposite. Designers are claiming “minimalism” while being lazy in their work, making unituitive messes of what should be obvious, and burying important things under what they claim is a “clean” page. Utter garbage. Nobody likes a radio on their car that you have to jump through sub-menu after sub-menu to find what you want. Same for web pages.
What makes you think a web site with an buried menu and pointless pictures from odd angles is an improvement? Do you think these three pictures do a good job of representing all of what Apple stands for?
This is a gorgeous web page layout on Apple’s site today:
http://www.apple.com/your-verse/new-depths/
I’m already tired of the flat design. It removes visual information.
For example, imagine three iOS icons. Call them, say, FaceTime Phone, and Messages. Without looking at them, try to describe them. Now look at your iPhone.
Facetime is a flat green rounded square with a flat white shape.
Phone is a flat green rounded square with a flat white shape.
Messages is a flat green rounded square with a flat white shape.
Message has the outline of a comic book dialog bubble, filled with white.
Facetime has the the outline of a stylized movie camera, filled with white.
Phone has the outline of an old telephone receiver, filled with white.
Put them in a row. To use the right one, you have to look at the iPhone for a few seconds to tell them apart. Some people can’t see the difference without their glasses; a problem if they are in bed. Halfway through the day, rearrange them. Do you use the wrong one by mistake? If not, do you hesitate before using them?
Find a person who is unfamiliar with iOS 7. Show them the rounded white square icon that looks like the NBC Peacock sitting on a mirror. Do they guess that it is Photos? Show them the flat white icon with soap bubbles. Do they guess that it’s Games? Those are abstract icons with completely arbitrary shapes that give you no clue as to what the app does. Imagine your iPhone screen filled with icons like that. That’s the future.
Now imagine three OS X icons. Be quick, they are scheduled for demolition. Call them, say, Disk Utility, Dictionary, and Calendar. Without looking at them, try to describe them. Now look at your screen.
Disk Utility is a silver rectangular with perspective, leaning back. It is a disk with a stethoscope, so you know right off it’s about fixing disks.
Calendar is a square, leaning to the left. It looks vaguely an old desk calendar or wall calendar, with perspective, shading, and just a few embellishments. The month name is on the red band across the top (legible when the icon is large), and the current date, which is legible at all sizes, is at the bottom. You know at a glance that it is a calendar, and you even know today’s date without opening the application.
Dictionary is a rectangle leaning to the left. It looks like a book with letters on it. You don’t know for sure that it is a dictionary, but it’s no surprise when it turns out to be one.
Put them next to each other on the dock. There’s very little chance of clicking on the Disk Utility when you want the Dictionary. Halfway through the day, rearrange them. Does that make them harder to find?
The iOS icons are harder to tell apart because they convey less visual information, or none at all in the case of the icons for Photos and Games. It’s sometimes hard to tell them apart, and it’s easy to imagine someone confusing one for the other. The OS X icons convey more visual information. It’s easy to tell them apart, and you are unlikely to click on the wrong one.
The flat design is a degradation of the user interface. They convey less information, sometimes none at all. They have fewer elements, which means the there are a lot of near duplicates. They are harder to see, harder to differentiate, and it’s easy to confuse them. A fifth grader could draw them, but it takes an artist to make the OS X icons.
The more icons that get “updated” to the flat look, the harder it is to use them.
There’s not enough tiles on it. Ha ha.