Is Material the next Bootnetstrap?

>>59247846

its due to mobile

you have to revert back to the basics cause the majority of humans on this planet browse the internet on underpowered shitty mobile phones (no joke)

>>59247852
it looks a fuckton better than all that disgustingly inconsistent and distracting glossy glass shit with fugly useless bezels everywhere

File: tmp_4888-1483905401646-658209925.png (359KB, 1024x2304px) Image search: [Google]

359KB, 1024x2304px

Best UIs ITT

>>59247846
>underpowered shitty mobile phones
Underpowered is unfortunately not right. They're just fine with downloading multiple MiBs worth of data and running tons of JS.

They just all have relatively small screens and need huge input space (fingers). So you will see little content with lots of padding and giant buttons.

>>59247846
I like it, because it's easy to implement correctly and I suck at design so it helps a lot.

>>59248026
>>59248053
.5 rupees have been deposited into your Google Wallet.

>>59248062
>hating everything related to google for no reason
Blind rms/FSF followers are just as retarded as blind Google/Apple/(whatever's popular) followers.

>>59248053
I agree.

>>59247852
>suck at making websites
>reeee stop using mobile phones

>>59247846
Hopefully.
Bootstrap is awful, while Material Design actually has a lot of thought behind it.
If it's implemented correctly, that is. Sadly, mostly it's just the assets slapped together with no consistency in movement, shading, positioning and dimensions whatsoever.

Well implemented Material Design is actually the single best design languages for interfaces currently available, but badly implemented it's one of the worst.

>>59248047
What went wrong?

>>59248580
People wanted jingles and whistles

>>59247852
I prefer responsive design to those shitty 700px fixed-width pages that we were swimming in back in the 2000s.