For something like CloudFlare which in itself is designed to be a security filter as well as a CDN, having people able to touch the origin server (if they can find it) would be highly undesirable.
So "Material Design" is "Flat Design" with shadows?
I'm not sure I can quite get used to this particular theme at all. The colors are pretty gaudy, the main action buttons (brown and purple) particularly are almost unreadable to me. I couldn't find the input boxes at all even though they had a header, they just parse as horizontal rules rather than something I can click on an add text. I respect the effort that has gone into creating this, but on a fundamental level I don't feel this is a good step in interface design.
After looking through Google's own material design guidelines (http://www.google.com/design/spec/material-design/introducti...), I find them much more pleasing than this bootstrap theme. When it comes to material design, it seems that context and execution details will play a big role in delivering an experience that looks and feels right.
My project is just a 1:1 conversion from Polymer Paper project to Bootstrap. It's still in early developement but I'm sure it will become much better in future :)
Thats what I thought until I tried Android L...looks flat + shadows when you look at screenshots. But I was wrong. It's about layers and movement after interactions. You have to experience it with animations, sliding down notification menus, and tab-switching between apps. It feels like an very smooth remake of the Android 4 redesign, that flows cleanly between panels and screens.
The flat/shadowy UI elements are secondary IMO to the layering effects that have been added. Something bootstrap themes can't really capture.
The Google stuff looks eerily like Metro to me, but perhaps flat design with strict guidelines and good principles converge into similar looking aesthetics.
I just find "material design" obnoxious, pathological cargo-culting and can't bring myself to elocute it, except maybe if I'm referring to someone designing synthetic leather.
Not to mention third-party keyboards are not allowed in password fields. I guess that's unfortunate for anyone with non-standard unicode in their passwords, though.
Big scary warning, I like it. Swiftkey does badger people to enable it though, so presumably it's sending a lot of data back to their servers as a business model. Nasty.
well swiftkey iirc does some data analysis on stuff like commonly used words and then uses those for suggestions for new users. its not totally without user benefit, though the potential for evil is certainly there.
I didn't mean to suggest that at all, I was commenting on the concept of having executable keyboards outside of the usual application sandbox rather than yours in particular.
The "instructions" at the start of the app are a bit baffling. I spent a good few minutes looking at a screen that told me to tap and drag and a weird orange circle that keys popping up above the capture button. In fact the entire selection with the ISO and shutter speed are a little on the janky side, I'm having a good deal of trouble seeing what I'm actually selecting. It's more completely random than anything with the shutter speed as my thumb obscures the entire view. Weird control usability aside it seems fairly functional, I've wanted something like this for a while.
Do you have a privacy policy somewhere with details about the information you collect from the application? I was unable to find any on your website.
I was always under the impression that a link to this was a requirement for approval in the app store, but I see no such link in iTunes. I suppose my impression was incorrect.
