Simple Design vs Minimal Design

[IntaglioGraphics]

lol no more tutorials from me I am bad at it. :p

I request administrator to delete this topic

[spacer]

Aside from the grammar and wording, it's a pretty good post. Although the tone of the post and the last sentence give the impression that "simple", as you describe it, is less desirable than "minimal". I disagree with this opinion, but I like that you took the time to describe the difference between the two styles. I frequently hear people interchange them too, and it does begin to grate after a while.

[+jamesyfx Subscriber²]

Your content is good but I think you're trying too hard to direct people from Neowin to your website.. All your posts, even your username.

[IntaglioGraphics]

Aside from the grammar and wording, it's a pretty good post. Although the tone of the post and the last sentence give the impression that "simple", as you describe it, is less desirable than "minimal". I disagree with this opinion, but I like that you took the time to describe the difference between the two styles. I frequently hear people interchange them too, and it does begin to grate after a while.

It's my first ever tutorial :)

Your content is good but I think you're trying too hard to direct people from Neowin to your website.. All your posts, even your username.

You are right but i am not forcing people. I think I should get something in return :)

[IntaglioGraphics]

I disagree with this opinion, but I like that you took the time to describe the difference between the two styles. I frequently hear people interchange them too, and it does begin to grate after a while.

if you ask some expert designers that what you prefer simple or minimal they will definitely go with minimal.

[threetonesun]

I would argue the Simple design above looks better, and is more represented in modern advertising/design, but what do I know.

[mail]

I suggest that the OP and people who believe the content to be accurate, read up on the bauhaus design style.

[Zain Adeel]

i agree with the above post.

but i wouldnt say it will look better everywhere.

It depends what are you desiging for. On the web sometimes simple is too flat and effects add a good element to it. But for letterheads flats are better than depth related designs.

[game_over]

All i see here is spam lol :whistle:

[DirtyLarry Veteran]

Wow, I could not disagree more with everything you said. That is why we all have opinions though. ;)

I agree with others, to me the simple looks much, much better.

I would even go as far as to say your definition of minimal is completely off.

[IntaglioGraphics]

ok I see many haters here so I will not post any tutorials here :) but if any of u haters have some sense of design and image it in website design or other designs minimal is the winner and always will be. And talking about Metro UI it look simple but if u look closely it has also effects applied but very slightly so its not simple its minimal. And to the person who said its a spam. If its a spam then I would just have posted this thread and gone away to other forum to spam more but instead of going to other forum I discussed this tutorial with you guys other reason if I spammed I would have been banned from this forum due to spamming. Discussion over!

[primexx]

Wow, I could not disagree more with everything you said. That is why we all have opinions though. ;)

I agree with others, to me the simple looks much, much better.

I would even go as far as to say your definition of minimal is completely off.

agreed. that "minimal" box looks like it came from the 90s

[ashpowell]

Centre Alignment looks neat :)

[Kami-]

I would argue the Simple design above looks better, and is more represented in modern advertising/design, but what do I know.

+1

[DirtyLarry Veteran]

ok I see many haters here so I will not post any tutorials here :) but if any of u haters have some sense of design and image it in website design or other designs minimal is the winner and always will be. And talking about Metro UI it look simple but if u look closely it has also effects applied but very slightly so its not simple its minimal. And to the person who said its a spam. If its a spam then I would just have posted this thread and gone away to other forum to spam more but instead of going to other forum I discussed this tutorial with you guys other reason if I spammed I would have been banned from this forum due to spamming. Discussion over!

Yeah, I am a hater. :rolleyes:

I have a BFA from Parsons School of Design in Illustration. I have been an artist my entire life. I am not a hater. I just completely disagree with you. And I am not the only one...

The Web Design Ledger made an article about "60 Mininal and Super Clean Websites." that can be found here...

Here are some of the sites they say are minimal...

Random Minimal Website 01

Random Minimal Website 02

Random Minimal Website 03

Random Minimal Website 04

And there are 54 other examples on that site. Sure, some may even have a slight effect here or there, I was never saying that a minimal design could not have a few slight effects here and there, you are the one saying that is one of the aspects that makes them minimal vs simple, and that is just not the case.

So you may want to not throw accusations around like people being haters when all they are simply trying to do is say the disagree with you, and also let other people know that you are sharing your opinion as if it is a fact and those who may not know better may believe it to be true.

Now the thing is, art is left open to interpretation, so you can very well believe your definition of minimal is right, no one is saying otherwise. But to start a thread about your blog post "because many people confuse the term" when you yourself seemed to have confused it, well not sure what else you expected then the reaction you are getting.

[wctaiwan]

That's not minimal, that's Web 2.0 (abuse of jargon intentional).

Actually, I'm only half joking. I clicked through to your site. It frankly looks like any of the other second-rate tutorial sites out there. If you call that minimalism, I think you really need to rethink your definitions and your ideas of good web design. Look at sites like Daring Fireball, Airbag Industries, these sites are more like your "simple" than your "minimal," and they look brilliant while serving up content in a highly readable fashion.

Your arrogance and ignorance are really quite stunning.

[Mr. Chronopoulos]

Agreed with pretty much everyone saying you're mistaken.

Also, why oh why oh why is your url so long?!

[brentaal]

Stopped reading at

Simple design means ?Artless? but minimal design means less distracting but beautiful and artistic.

[Mouldy Punk]

^ I'm glad I wasn't the only one :laugh:

I appreciate that the OP wants to share his/her knowledge with the world - I'm pro-sharing. But you really, really need to check your facts. It's half-baked tutorials like this that misinform people who are new to the subject area, who then go onto make mistakes and spread similar misinformation. It's viral ignorance.

Ignoring criticism can be a virtue to an extent. You can't please everybody, that's just how the world works. If you took every bad word to heart you'd be pretty miserable. But ignoring criticism from people who are more knowledgeable and experienced is just arrogant and foolish.

[IntaglioGraphics]

I just wanna say sorry to guys to whom i said haters. I also deleted the tutorial section on my website.

[DirtyLarry Veteran]

I just wanna say sorry to guys to whom i said haters. I also deleted the tutorial section on my website.

(Y) To say sorry like this is very much appreciated. It takes a very big person to do that, so you have my respect for doing so.

And I would also like to apologize if I came off rude in any way at all. That was not my intent. My only intent was to share with you what I have learned over the years and just to let you know there are definitely different opinions and beliefs about what minimalism is. I was doing so while at work, so I tend to just type and not read things over and do so super quick, and sometimes I come off as blunt and or rude when it really is just me not having much time.

I would say the biggest thing to keep in mind is something I shared before, and that is art is without a doubt open to interpretation. As such trying to define generalized styles like minimalism or simplistic, when those general styles can mean so many different things to so many different people, well it is just a no win situation as far as I see it.

Now with that said, by all means share with the world what YOUR thoughts on those styles are and why, I just suggest avoiding trying to do so in a way that tells them what a general style should mean to them.

Obviously when explaining periods in the history of art such as Pointillism or the Dada movement for example, one can get pretty specific with things and cite specific examples, as these are very distinct movements, etc.

Again, it took a lot to say sorry, so respect for that, and I do feel bad you chose to delete the tutorial section on your website, but at the same time if that made you do a bit more research on minimalism and you were able to learn something new, at the end of the day that is what is most important, continuing to learn and grow as an artist. (Y)

[threetonesun]

All art movements are subjective, but Minimalism is highly subjective, because you're usually walking a fine line between functional abstraction and something indecipherable.

A simplistic, usually folk, movement is something different, and less subjective, although equally appealing if done correctly.

Here's an example. Take a Christmas tree. An actual tree, decorated with popcorn and nothing else would be simple. A green aluminum pole, a functional abstraction of a Christmas tree, would be minimal.