This just popped up in my recommended, this very much isn't my crowd, and since you asked I'm going to be a grognard about it. To me, these things look like ads, because in most situations I see them in, they are, and ads annoy me. In non-advertising-related contexts, these layouts and effects still invoke the intense annoyance that I feel towards advertising, and therefore on an emotional level they put me off whatever uses them long before I can be positively affected by any of their more practical merits. That said, even when I push past that annoyance, I find that in the way I use the web, such designs prove more often an obstacle than a help. The most immediate reason I can identify for why is the frequent lack of a clear index in a conventional location. My ideal interaction with a website is a lightning-fast affair: I quickly scan a complete and informative table of contents, open the one thing I came for in a new tab, and off I go on my merry way with the information I needed at my fingertips, never having to think about the rest of the website again. Anything that gets in the way of that process just accumulates as regret over choosing that particular website. Attempts by the site to "curate my experience" mainly surface the feeling of being manipulated, and that feels unpleasant and uncomfortable. In my mind, a website should be an open book, unafraid to direct the user to what they came for in the most expedient way possible. Hiding the data behind cute animations and curated layouts seems to me as absurd as a dictionary in flowery prose. That's not to say a site can't look beautiful. It can and as much as possible it should. Just please make that happen in a way that doesn't sacrifice usefulness. I'll drive an ugly car a thousand times if I have to, but I won't replace it with a beautiful statue of a car that doesn't get me to the office.
Actually, I tell an accidental lie. I just realized I am subscribed from the color picker video. That video was very good and very clever, and I am glad to be reminded of it. The topic of this video just happens to be a compilation of everything that drives me up a wall about the modern web.
As a user, I can't stress this enough: never ever ever highjack my scrollbar. I couldn't care less if it's boring or not to scroll, I just want all pages to behave the same. Don't do "smooth" scrolling, definitely don't switch from vertical to horizontal scrolling. Loading on demand / scaling during scrolling is fine, but those other effects are the worst of trendy effects IMO
As a legally blind person that works in IT, I’ll never understand tiny text on websites that then block test size manipulation, or apps that ignore system fonts, I’m all for the large text haha
Thing is, instead of adding useless loading animations or even loading screens, focus on building your application with a focus on performance and you won’t need any of this. I’m a professional software engineer and I guarantee you response times and loading times contribute more to the user experience than any fancy mouse cursor or useless scrolling animation. We spend so much time making things look “good” and completely forget performance implications.
@@juxtopposed that’s because and I don’t mean to be offensive, those projects are often written mostly by people without a good knowledge of the actual technology they use, or they just get pressured into ignoring it by project management. Often I see horrendous JavaScript code that just strings together libraries, without knowing what it actually does under the hood.
I agree with you, but it's still better to have, say, a progress bar that only shows up for half a second, than it does displaying nothing for that half a second. Yes focus on performance and optimisations, but don't forget about informing the user what's happening
"I'm a *professional* software engineer" 👉Red flag. 🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩 Anyways, everything exists on a spectrum: you can't put a blanket statement on these techniques/trends and say they're all bad or useless. As in all things that require taste you'll find more bad examples than good, just as there is more bad music being produced than good. Saying that all these techniques are useless is just snobbism. These sites winning awards are judged by people of very high artistic taste and technical competence. And they're being pinned and bookmarked and collected by designers because they have something other sites don't. That's why people turn to them for inspiration. So within their context or genre they're pushing the boundaries in exactly the right ways. At the end of the day, differentiation is what really wins and sells. As the legendary Tyra Banks teaches in her Harvard business school course: different is better than better. Some food for thought. PS: all this fuss about load times is nice, but have you ever gone to a nightclub, or to the launch of an anticipated product, or to a concert, or to the opening weekend of a summer blockbuster? How long do you think people wait standing in lines? Go figure right?
I agree, but I also say that you should just put a toggle on your page, instead of only relying on the browser, because for some reason, I can't find that setting on mobile, and websites that have a lot of animations, just lag so much on my ipad. I'd say the nintendo websites are a good example, except for their menus, they're terrible on mobile.
@@ego-lay_atman-bayyeah it's most of the times configured globally in your device, not in the browser. The browser then just picks that info up from your device settings.
As a web developer, I find that the more javascript you have to load, the worse it gets. Not only because of the overhead, but because CSS and html standards were carefully designed for usability and accessibility, and javascript is your escape from all that. As a user, I actually don't mind the snazzy CSS effects as long as I feel like I'm navigating a website
I seem to recall finding (or at least looking for) some css way to make dropdowns. Possibly some magic related to hover, like having different (and interactable) styling when its parent or itself is hovered over. I may be remember wrong, because I did end up not using it though, as it turned out to not be needed for the application anyway.
@@yonoseespanolthough a simple dropdown should only add a few hundred bytes of uncompressed JS, which is negligible because that load can also be deferred.
Peak UI design is archived only by those old academic university websites that include a ~ (tilde) in the URL and contain no CSS or JS whatsoever. Usually they contain the information about which version of Apache webserver they are running on in the footer of the site. The best ones also contain "last updated on XX/YY/199X" Even on dial-up, those were always blazingly fast.
pure html (or almost pure html, maybe with like 20 lines of css to center text, change the font, or whatnot) is the best website design paradigm; it's usually always good for the user experience (unless the content is just random bullshit, ex. time cube) also imo all websites should work without javascript; disabling should just cause normally interactive elements (e.g. liking a video on youtube) to refresh the page. the small forum website Raddle is built with this mindset and it's so much better for it
@@thezipcreator This, 100%. I sometimes end up using Lynx, e.g. when I have problems with my main browser or I just happen to be in a terminal at the time, and it's really depressing how many websites fail to function without js. First they try to set about ten or fifteen cookies, then they load the page but the top half is the cookie advisory (obviously) and when you scroll down you have weirdly formatted header menus (sometimes duplicated), and then the body of the site but none of the links work.
Sure they're fast but they look like garbage. Websites from the 2000s look and work fine, and they would be way faster than most websites today. There was still a good chunk of people on dialup those days after all.
As a young developer, I used to cut my teeth on this kind of work. It was a showcase of my technical prowess. As a senior developer, I can't stand these sites anymore. None of them feel right. I always feel like I'm relearning how to use my computer just for this one context. Web Design tutorial content on RUclips doesn't help in this regard. They keep pushing this kind of flashy design without any consideration of the user experience.
Great point. I think this is like all of the trends in any field. That something was a trend and one technology rules but as a time goes by the visual demand is higher and higher because people tend to be "innovative" and creative and want to be remembered so when one tech replaced another the whole loop starts over. Sooo maaaaybeee we will face another tech soon and whole UX will reset to default, truly friendly to user.
Makes me think of stacking shelves at a supermarket. I'd get into a flow opening boxes and quickly stocking shelves. That flow would be interrupted when I would come across a specially designed "easy-to-open" box, since I'd have to spend time figuring out how to open it. These flashy UI techniques are the "easy-to-open" boxes of websites.
I personally would only use js for an application, any informational site like a portfolio or product showcase should be functional and redeable without CSS, HTML only. And it should not use js at all. This doesn't mean that it shouldn't use CSS, it should, but it should still look redeable without it. For web applications like e-commerce or other applications? js is fine, but it should be used with care and only for functional stuff, not to make stupid stuff pretty at the cost of performance. And the CSS should be minimal in a webapp.
i feel like one of the worst thing a site can do is make it so if you hit the back button on the site it just sends you back to it. you have to right click the history to go back to whatever page was before it.
Yeah where it loads a page that redirects to another page in an effort to essentially disable the back button? Yeah that can die in a pit of burning spiders.
A site that messes with the back button is an intant ban and boycott for me. I do not trust anyone that would dare touch such basic functionality. Dear dog I hate sites that use tricks like that. It really.. truly. Should be goddamned illegal to mess with the back button. Prison time equivalent to tax fraud on nation wide scale or something. F those sites...
As a pc, android phone, and slow ipad user, all these modern effects are terrible, and give me a degrading experience on many websites. I'm not even joking, these modern websites usually lag a whole lot on my ipad, which makes me click off the website. Horizontally scrolling is also the epitome of all evil, I mean, it's just super disorienting, especially on mobile. I mean, swiping up scrolls right? What kind of black magic is that? Plus, hijaking the scrolling, like stopping the scrolling to do some stupid animation that I don't care about is awful, and should never be done, because it makes me think I've hit the bottom of the page. Custom cursors are also terrible, especially if it's just an element that follows the mouse, because when it follows the mouse, it actually lags behind the mouse. Custom cursors are fine on game sites, but not on anything else. The biggest gripe I have is, it takes away any personalization that the user might have already done to make their experience better for them, for example, I made my cursor very large and black because I found it easier to find the mouse when it's that big.
YES! Websites can be done BEAUTIFULLY, for example, leetcode's UI is a mix of functional JS and great CSS, they don't use unnecessary JS and their UX is some of the best in town
God bless this new trend of entertaining, funny and informative web dev RUclipsrs. Hyperplexed and Fireship (and now you) are my go-to channels for dev-related content and I love your style of humour so please keep making more of these!
It's pretty crazy that almost every single site on awwwards look the same, and almost all have poor UX, or at least subpar UX. I honestly thought I was going crazy because "how could it win site of the month with bad UX?" Then after a few weeks of visiting I realized it's a design award site. Awwwards doesn't care about how intuitive a site is, or if it makes any actual sense for the end user. With that being said, the designs and efforts are very cool, and actually creating most of the effects is very impressive with vanilla JS, so I like to look for inspiration and try to recreate some design and features for the challenge
It’s like “Unixporn” or absurdly complex setups in your favorite editor or IDE. It’s nice to look at, it flashy, and you can make great RUclips videos with it. But in reality none of this is really usable.
Awwwards, Behance, Dribbble are like fashion shows for the creative industries, they're fun to look at sometimes and where we go to for inspirations. But honestly they're full of bad practices and things that should never be implemented in real products.
Most of those modern day website designs hurt my eyes. I don't know if it's just me, but I feel like simpler designs (with some occasional smooth animation or maybe a few effects) is better than a website with a ton of stuff going on
@@Aiden-ham on the mobile apple page the animations are tied to scrolling, I wish the non interactive portions became static after scrolling through the first time, it's really annoying to have that 'explore more' button and every horizontal scroller disappear and reappear with a whole animation when scrolling back and forth. Minus the animations the UI of the website is actually pretty good and very easy to read
I think of these designs as 'spices' to be sprinkled in moderation on top of a content-focused design. Imagine going to a restaurant and being served a chicken wing buried under 2 ounces of paprika powder. Some users will refuse to eat it, some users will patiently brush the powder off, but all users will feel discouraged from visiting your restaurant again.
Well there's is a Chinese dish where cooked chicken is burried in chili pepers and you dig through those to find the Chicken. It's a good dish served with beer. 😅
Using CSS to add "scroll-behaviour: smooth", I have no problem with - it's not generally considered scrolljacking and is actually helpful to help the user understand how far they have jumped when navigating. I don't particularly mind horizontal scroll, when used tastefully and for more visual/marketing-focused sites. But if you modify the scroll speed or change the scroll friction via JavaScript, it's a race to see whether I can complete my task before I abandon your site for poor usability. I'm a web developer, my browser is like a car, I know how I expect it to act and if you mess with the pedals and gearbox I will not be traffic on your site for long.
Horizontal scroll is often non-conforming with accessibility guidelines, specifically WCAG 2.1 SC 1.4.10 Reflow. "Content can be presented without loss of information or functionality, and without requiring scrolling in two dimensions for [vertical scrolling content at 320px width and horizontal scrolling content at 256px height". There are a few exceptions made for particular types of content like data-grids, but it's generally advisable for all content to fit in a single, vertically scrolling column.
@@TheBswan Horizontal scrolling breaks the flow of the page, users don't appreciate when they aren't in control. I think there are use cases where you want to display content in a horizontal fashion because it fits your layout. Sections like "recent blog posts cards", or "customers reviews". For those instances it makes sense to have overflowing rows as opposed to taking additional vertical space since the user is already familiar with the message of that content and would probably want to access the next sections, continue his navigation. But is horizontal scrolling necessary ? You could use carousels or Netflix-like sliders with navigation buttons. These should be prioritized.
One of the things I think needs to be focused more on are user preferences, such as "prefers dark theme" or "prefers reduced motion". Because making your website good for your taste is easy, making your website also respect the taste of your customers is a lot harder.
Its not just about the taste of the customer, its about accessibility. Moving images can make people nauseous and flashing images can give people seizures. Having a reduced motion mode where the motion is fully controlled by the end user (eg scrolling) benefits them and others.
Absolutely. And if your users have to scroll a meter to get to the end of the first sentence, this particular user will mutter "fuck this" under his breath and go to find a decent site with the same information. This is not unrelated to the tabs vs spaces argument. I say tabs on documents to be edited by multiple people, because people like them to be different sizes.
There's a lot of what I like to call Hipster UX Bullsh*t in these designs. I'd have a serious conversation if anyone on my team came to me with trying to pass off a lot of this as usable.
Bento boxes that load as you scroll are a right pain. They never load in time (even on decent Internet) before you've scrolled past them and then realise you've missed a chunk of content.
My hot take is that it doesn't matter how pretty your site is on the optimal viewing device if on Joe Schmoe's low-end laptop running your non-preferred browser (I've heard professional designers act as if Chrome is the only thing that exists) it looks and runs like a potato. I see so many design trends that people talk about as being great and I can't relate because my experience of them is how they lag, how they break other things, etc. My hobbyist web design work involved trying to optimize from the very beginning because of limited storage and I think it's a good habit to have gotten into.
The best are websites that just display NOTHING unless you start allowing stuff in NoScript. Bonus points when apparently the entire CSS is done via js, so it's just an unformatted mess without allowing the js to run.
Snazzy effects _definitely_ have their place. That said, for _most_ sites... less is most definitely more. Speed and efficiency is key, especially for ecommerce or any very content heavy websites.
Something that web designers SHOULD keep in mind is that laptops and touchscreens exist. Macbooks, Windows laptops with precision trackpads and touch screens can actually input HORIZONTAL scrolling, but several websites have horizontal elements that can ONLY be scrolled by clicking annoying buttons on each side of those elements, like the thumbnail rows in Netflix. The main page shows you several rows of thumbnails, one for each section, but scrolling those rows horizontally can only be achieved by clicking buttons in the far ends of each row even when I have an inout device that's perfectly capable of doing horizontal scrolling
I've been struggled for weeks building a website for my porfolio as software engineer... AND ALL THIS TIME I WAS DONIG A BENTO GRID WITHOUT KNOWING. Thank you sooo much! Now I know how to look for more inspiration and whatnot!
I am binging all of your videos right now. The editing, storytelling and simplicity in the explanations is just amazing. easily the best channel I have found that's related to frontend design , UI/UX
Faux pas for me: - smooth scrolling (I explicitly turned that off, and so do not override it) - large gaps of wasted space - zooming things in and out as you scroll - middle click not working to open new tab - preventing text selection
The worst thing ever is that smooth scroll still happens when i am clicking a section link, or even worse when i jump between text search results (ctrl+f). Nothing worse then, when looking for the right search result and therefore stepping through a dozen of them, spending half the time looking at this godawful scroll animation
Another thing about custom cursors is them not being done correctly. One that springs to mind is one of the minecraft wikis where the cursor is a sword, but instead of the tip of the cursor (the pixel that clicks on stuff) it was somwhere in the middle of the sword. (This is from memory it couldve been a different wiki or site but has definitly happened to me)
my method for loading bars, buttons, and other fancy effects is to make sure there's a no-javascript fallback and add a transition off the fallback if javascript manages to load (not everyone has it enabled!), for example replacing a static css animation with one that reacts to your mouse cursor
So many sites have literally no idea what subtlety means like IM NOT HERE FOR A LIGHTSHOW IM HERE TO HAVE YOUR SITE ACTUALITY *LOAD* WITHOUT SAFARI AUTO-RELOADING YOUR PAGE
Discord's desktop client loads 26 megabytes of JS when it starts, which is 80% of all resources. On my current laptop, the TTI can reach several minutes. I both love and hate JS, and I wish people would start using simpler and smaller libraries and style sheets Also, there's a ton of hidden potential in hand-written SVGs: I made infinitely scalable icons for a dashboard UI and pride flags with SVG, and all of them combined took up only a few kilobytes
You're right, and still JS itself might not be the problem in many cases. We can use lighthouse and optimize the page speed, and many sites with heavy scripts don't really do that. I think that's the main issue.
When I actually start putting content on my site it's going to be so simple. Near naked HTML with some limited CSS primarily for making sure images are in the right place on the screen without abusing tables.
Since I have a pretty puny laptop, every time I use an overdone site like this, my browser slows to a crawl and completely ruins the UX. I want nothing more than to close the site immediately. I really appreciate a well-crafted site that doesn't slurp up my CPU time.
I just started to learn UI/UX design and found this video and your channel. I really like your Fireship-style video with great content and practical instructions! Subscribed!
As a user I have javascript disabled by default. Loading screens make me leave the page, custom cursor is a no go, overriding scroll is also a no go. Sure its fun the first time hut i immediately get distracted and look what happens if i unlock my scroll wheel and spin it at 1000 revolutions per second. I also click any link with middle mouse button and never use the back navigation. If your page can handle all that then great
Grid implementation could be much improved at 3:22 - First of all, I’d make the entire thing a grid, then control how big each box is with grid-column/row (e.g if it should go across to columns it should be grid-column: span 2;) Also, you should use fr instead of auto, and you can do repeat(5, 1fr) instead of 1fr 1fr 1fr 1fr 1fr
@@YuriG03042 I disagree, the creator is showing this as the best way to make layouts like this, especially since these videos seem to be somewhat aimed at beginners (given all the tutorials)
A tip regarding buttons you left out: SHADE THEM! Make them look like a 3D object, not a flat-coloured rectangle. If there's one thing Microsoft got right in 1990s versions of Windows, it was making it clear what's clickable. Pity they forgot it when they made Windows 8 and brought back the flat UI from the 1980s.
Yeah. Microsoft and Apple have both fallen down the flat UI rabbit hole, and IMHO the usability of all their products has suffered as a consequence. :(
@@tookitogo And every clueless dolt playing follow-the-leader, which is by far the worst thing about it. About the only kind of program that bucks the trend is games.
For me, nothing screams ‘unseriousness’ more than funky hover effects on buttons. Whenever I see something like 5:27, I immediately think that the company spend 99% of its budget to design and implement this button, and nothing was left for the actual product. Only startups that _desperately_ need to sell you their stuff will do something like this :D
I think the effect is specifically useful for activities on an informal site/app where you want to reward a user for performing an action, and encourage them to do it more. For instance the RUclips like button shows the confetti and it gives the sensation you are performing a meaningful action that makes a difference.
I love how you include little how-to's whilst you're presenting. You're targeting multiple audiences such as myself. I just learnt about the image blend
Your RUclips channel is a great argument for quality over quantity (speaking about the low number of video). 21.6k subs after just 5 videos is pretty good growth
The loading screen I use is the browser loading images into the spaces already set out by CSS, just like the old days because that actually works from a UX standpoint
I mostly agree but the fact is that most of the websites that require these fancy JS UI tricks are not e-commerce, and therefore they don't need to be as performant as an e-commerce. They just have different targets and purpose.
I absolutely love the loading screen idea. It will most likely never appear because technology is just good but I still think it adds an immersive layer to the site.
I can't stand this meta of everything being HUGE... it's so obnoxious. Screens are so big these days, why only show 1 thing at a time? Why do I have to scroll..scroll..scroll..scroll..scroll..scroll.. until I find the info I want.
You totally killed me with the "vacuum cleaner" sound and JavaScript. As a software engineer myself, I'm still totally mind-blown as to why some modern sites ask so much memory that my 6-year old iPad just crashes trying to load them… hell, most websites these days need more RAM & CPU power that the Apollo mission needed to land on the moon 😅
Completely agree. These effects can look good in certain contexts, but overall, it is better to avoid them if you can't use them properly in a way that not only makes for a nice UI but also a nice UX.
As an average user, any time scrolling isn't moving the page up, like it suppose to, i instaclose the tab. Im not letting designers take away control from me. 😈
As a user, I just want to see the things that I visited the site for. Just give me the information in a way that is easy to read and doesn't require me to scroll if avoidable. When I am looking for a cooking recipe I just want to see the recipe and not 33 pictures, 17 titles and a story about the author. The less time the page needs to load, the better. EDIT: 90% of the time JS makes websites worse for the user imo
As a user with potato PC, I hate when I have to wait 4 minutes to load Microsoft Office dashboard (no joking) then click on something to wait another 30 seconds to do it's fancy stuff to actually get to information I wanted before 10 minutes.
Finally someone else who mentions this. Tried to look for a new library for some thing at work and the scrolling made the entire screen jump around like an action sequence. Imagine me and the other two software engineers just looking confused while thinking "so, what're the specs?", "did they show information during this slideshow that we missed?", "what just happened?". Plain, easy to read, and A SINGLE DIRECTION TO READ IN please.
personally I really hate it when websites make fonts too big. I want to see more than a sentence at a time!!! do you think I have the ram to remember information that gets catapulted off the screen immediately when I continue reading >:-/
Just thanks. I honestly was wondering if I'm gonna agree with you, and you literally show some examples I always criticize XD. Telling the bad ux is good, but you always take the time to explain the problems and gives come suggestion to how to do better. And this is peak content
As a completely normal user, my experience is, that the websites where I most quickly get what I want is the websites without any of these trends. Just give me the information I need and stop wasting my time and my computer’s resources!
Very nice video. I think a greatly under discussed part of these modern ui is the accessibility. Everybodys vision degrades, so taking into consideration readability, and making sure your website doesn't break when zooming in not only helps visually impaired people like myself, but it futureproofs for everybody. Accessibilty really needs to be improved, far more than trendy animations.
Just to comment out there are pretty easy to make Onscroll effects with framer motion. You basically just set what animation should trigger when the element passes the viewport
JS is good in moderation for a cool effect or two. When the whole site becomes dependent on it, I’m really not a fan… Great vid! I really like your style 👍
0:29 How is this meant to be an example of portfolios being bad? That looks 10x better than the modern examples, because you can actually see the information. The modern ones just look like a confusing mess that are a pain to try and get actual information out of.
This channel is insane , I am binge watching your stuff, interesting , educational , fun , useful and you ALSO include all the sources in the description , and on top of all of that you have a soothing voice?
What do you guys think about these trends? It's time to share some unpopular opinions. ✨
This just popped up in my recommended, this very much isn't my crowd, and since you asked I'm going to be a grognard about it.
To me, these things look like ads, because in most situations I see them in, they are, and ads annoy me.
In non-advertising-related contexts, these layouts and effects still invoke the intense annoyance that I feel towards advertising, and therefore on an emotional level they put me off whatever uses them long before I can be positively affected by any of their more practical merits.
That said, even when I push past that annoyance, I find that in the way I use the web, such designs prove more often an obstacle than a help. The most immediate reason I can identify for why is the frequent lack of a clear index in a conventional location.
My ideal interaction with a website is a lightning-fast affair: I quickly scan a complete and informative table of contents, open the one thing I came for in a new tab, and off I go on my merry way with the information I needed at my fingertips, never having to think about the rest of the website again. Anything that gets in the way of that process just accumulates as regret over choosing that particular website. Attempts by the site to "curate my experience" mainly surface the feeling of being manipulated, and that feels unpleasant and uncomfortable.
In my mind, a website should be an open book, unafraid to direct the user to what they came for in the most expedient way possible. Hiding the data behind cute animations and curated layouts seems to me as absurd as a dictionary in flowery prose.
That's not to say a site can't look beautiful. It can and as much as possible it should. Just please make that happen in a way that doesn't sacrifice usefulness. I'll drive an ugly car a thousand times if I have to, but I won't replace it with a beautiful statue of a car that doesn't get me to the office.
Actually, I tell an accidental lie. I just realized I am subscribed from the color picker video. That video was very good and very clever, and I am glad to be reminded of it.
The topic of this video just happens to be a compilation of everything that drives me up a wall about the modern web.
Awesome! Good to see those cool ui, especially the 3d stuff. Looking forward using some of them someday :)
Great job, thanks for sharing. Cheers!
Those "cool" websites are annoying to use. Even Apple's product presentations on their website are leaning too far into this kind of design.
Is there a course on this? My web pages are just bland 😞
As a user, I can't stress this enough: never ever ever highjack my scrollbar. I couldn't care less if it's boring or not to scroll, I just want all pages to behave the same. Don't do "smooth" scrolling, definitely don't switch from vertical to horizontal scrolling. Loading on demand / scaling during scrolling is fine, but those other effects are the worst of trendy effects IMO
I agree, as someone who can't do those effects now I have the reason not to do them. lol
what's wrong with horizontal scrolling? I think it's really cool
I really like smooh scrolling, but I do it without highjacking.
And also don't hijack the browser back button
@@anushgopalakrishnanI also don't get it 😂
As a legally blind person that works in IT, I’ll never understand tiny text on websites that then block test size manipulation, or apps that ignore system fonts, I’m all for the large text haha
Yes, I’m also visually impaired and don’t know why text is small
What work in IT do you do?
+1@@tomekk.1889
They probably use viewport based units for font-size. That's a very bad practice unless you at least tame it with a clamp
@@tomekk.1889 Infra and network engineering
Thing is, instead of adding useless loading animations or even loading screens, focus on building your application with a focus on performance and you won’t need any of this. I’m a professional software engineer and I guarantee you response times and loading times contribute more to the user experience than any fancy mouse cursor or useless scrolling animation. We spend so much time making things look “good” and completely forget performance implications.
Totally agree with you. Still, I think such projects mainly aim to 'look good', so unfortunately, they don't seem to care about 'users'.
@@juxtopposed that’s because and I don’t mean to be offensive, those projects are often written mostly by people without a good knowledge of the actual technology they use, or they just get pressured into ignoring it by project management. Often I see horrendous JavaScript code that just strings together libraries, without knowing what it actually does under the hood.
I agree with you, but it's still better to have, say, a progress bar that only shows up for half a second, than it does displaying nothing for that half a second.
Yes focus on performance and optimisations, but don't forget about informing the user what's happening
@@Stroopwafe1 of course just display a basic spinner and that's all you need. What I meant is theese interactive or special loading screens.
"I'm a *professional* software engineer"
👉Red flag. 🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩
Anyways, everything exists on a spectrum: you can't put a blanket statement on these techniques/trends and say they're all bad or useless.
As in all things that require taste you'll find more bad examples than good, just as there is more bad music being produced than good.
Saying that all these techniques are useless is just snobbism.
These sites winning awards are judged by people of very high artistic taste and technical competence.
And they're being pinned and bookmarked and collected by designers because they have something other sites don't. That's why people turn to them for inspiration.
So within their context or genre they're pushing the boundaries in exactly the right ways.
At the end of the day, differentiation is what really wins and sells.
As the legendary Tyra Banks teaches in her Harvard business school course: different is better than better.
Some food for thought.
PS: all this fuss about load times is nice, but have you ever gone to a nightclub, or to the launch of an anticipated product, or to a concert, or to the opening weekend of a summer blockbuster?
How long do you think people wait standing in lines?
Go figure right?
Actually one important thing: If you add lots of animations to your site, please make sure prefer reduced motion works.
Thanks
I agree, but I also say that you should just put a toggle on your page, instead of only relying on the browser, because for some reason, I can't find that setting on mobile, and websites that have a lot of animations, just lag so much on my ipad. I'd say the nintendo websites are a good example, except for their menus, they're terrible on mobile.
@@ego-lay_atman-baysettings>accessibility>motion
@@ego-lay_atman-bayyeah it's most of the times configured globally in your device, not in the browser. The browser then just picks that info up from your device settings.
As a web developer, I find that the more javascript you have to load, the worse it gets. Not only because of the overhead, but because CSS and html standards were carefully designed for usability and accessibility, and javascript is your escape from all that. As a user, I actually don't mind the snazzy CSS effects as long as I feel like I'm navigating a website
Largely true, except some UI components require javascript for accessibility (dropdowns, for example).
I seem to recall finding (or at least looking for) some css way to make dropdowns. Possibly some magic related to hover, like having different (and interactable) styling when its parent or itself is hovered over. I may be remember wrong, because I did end up not using it though, as it turned out to not be needed for the application anyway.
@@yonoseespanolthough a simple dropdown should only add a few hundred bytes of uncompressed JS, which is negligible because that load can also be deferred.
@@sorcdk2880 CSS-only dropdowns are possible, but are not accessible.
@@yonoseespanoli think you can make dropdowns using tag
Peak UI design is archived only by those old academic university websites that include a ~ (tilde) in the URL and contain no CSS or JS whatsoever. Usually they contain the information about which version of Apache webserver they are running on in the footer of the site. The best ones also contain "last updated on XX/YY/199X"
Even on dial-up, those were always blazingly fast.
Well said!!
No need for a search backend on those pages either, the whole page is a giant listing so Ctrl+F to find anything
pure html (or almost pure html, maybe with like 20 lines of css to center text, change the font, or whatnot) is the best website design paradigm; it's usually always good for the user experience (unless the content is just random bullshit, ex. time cube)
also imo all websites should work without javascript; disabling should just cause normally interactive elements (e.g. liking a video on youtube) to refresh the page. the small forum website Raddle is built with this mindset and it's so much better for it
@@thezipcreator This, 100%. I sometimes end up using Lynx, e.g. when I have problems with my main browser or I just happen to be in a terminal at the time, and it's really depressing how many websites fail to function without js. First they try to set about ten or fifteen cookies, then they load the page but the top half is the cookie advisory (obviously) and when you scroll down you have weirdly formatted header menus (sometimes duplicated), and then the body of the site but none of the links work.
Sure they're fast but they look like garbage. Websites from the 2000s look and work fine, and they would be way faster than most websites today. There was still a good chunk of people on dialup those days after all.
As a young developer, I used to cut my teeth on this kind of work. It was a showcase of my technical prowess. As a senior developer, I can't stand these sites anymore. None of them feel right. I always feel like I'm relearning how to use my computer just for this one context. Web Design tutorial content on RUclips doesn't help in this regard. They keep pushing this kind of flashy design without any consideration of the user experience.
Great point. I think this is like all of the trends in any field. That something was a trend and one technology rules but as a time goes by the visual demand is higher and higher because people tend to be "innovative" and creative and want to be remembered so when one tech replaced another the whole loop starts over. Sooo maaaaybeee we will face another tech soon and whole UX will reset to default, truly friendly to user.
Makes me think of stacking shelves at a supermarket. I'd get into a flow opening boxes and quickly stocking shelves. That flow would be interrupted when I would come across a specially designed "easy-to-open" box, since I'd have to spend time figuring out how to open it. These flashy UI techniques are the "easy-to-open" boxes of websites.
I personally would only use js for an application, any informational site like a portfolio or product showcase should be functional and redeable without CSS, HTML only. And it should not use js at all. This doesn't mean that it shouldn't use CSS, it should, but it should still look redeable without it.
For web applications like e-commerce or other applications? js is fine, but it should be used with care and only for functional stuff, not to make stupid stuff pretty at the cost of performance. And the CSS should be minimal in a webapp.
i feel like one of the worst thing a site can do is make it so if you hit the back button on the site it just sends you back to it. you have to right click the history to go back to whatever page was before it.
Yeah where it loads a page that redirects to another page in an effort to essentially disable the back button? Yeah that can die in a pit of burning spiders.
@@thegardenofeatin5965 that's unfair to the spiders, can't we just fill the pit with corium?
@@thegardenofeatin5965 what did the spiders do
A site that messes with the back button is an intant ban and boycott for me. I do not trust anyone that would dare touch such basic functionality.
Dear dog I hate sites that use tricks like that.
It really.. truly. Should be goddamned illegal to mess with the back button. Prison time equivalent to tax fraud on nation wide scale or something.
F those sites...
Wait, it's a thing they actively do? I just thought my internet is slower than usual. Holy fuck, that's actually evil
As a pc, android phone, and slow ipad user, all these modern effects are terrible, and give me a degrading experience on many websites. I'm not even joking, these modern websites usually lag a whole lot on my ipad, which makes me click off the website. Horizontally scrolling is also the epitome of all evil, I mean, it's just super disorienting, especially on mobile. I mean, swiping up scrolls right? What kind of black magic is that? Plus, hijaking the scrolling, like stopping the scrolling to do some stupid animation that I don't care about is awful, and should never be done, because it makes me think I've hit the bottom of the page. Custom cursors are also terrible, especially if it's just an element that follows the mouse, because when it follows the mouse, it actually lags behind the mouse. Custom cursors are fine on game sites, but not on anything else. The biggest gripe I have is, it takes away any personalization that the user might have already done to make their experience better for them, for example, I made my cursor very large and black because I found it easier to find the mouse when it's that big.
YES! Websites can be done BEAUTIFULLY, for example, leetcode's UI is a mix of functional JS and great CSS, they don't use unnecessary JS and their UX is some of the best in town
God bless this new trend of entertaining, funny and informative web dev RUclipsrs. Hyperplexed and Fireship (and now you) are my go-to channels for dev-related content and I love your style of humour so please keep making more of these!
finally hyperplex getting recognition he deserves
@@aryansoni57 hyperplexed has almost half a million subs, he's getting it! 😁
Dont worry, theyre gonna fuck themselves up like every fucking new trend
It's pretty crazy that almost every single site on awwwards look the same, and almost all have poor UX, or at least subpar UX. I honestly thought I was going crazy because "how could it win site of the month with bad UX?"
Then after a few weeks of visiting I realized it's a design award site. Awwwards doesn't care about how intuitive a site is, or if it makes any actual sense for the end user.
With that being said, the designs and efforts are very cool, and actually creating most of the effects is very impressive with vanilla JS, so I like to look for inspiration and try to recreate some design and features for the challenge
It’s like “Unixporn” or absurdly complex setups in your favorite editor or IDE. It’s nice to look at, it flashy, and you can make great RUclips videos with it. But in reality none of this is really usable.
Awwwards, Behance, Dribbble are like fashion shows for the creative industries, they're fun to look at sometimes and where we go to for inspirations. But honestly they're full of bad practices and things that should never be implemented in real products.
@@Linuxdirk those you do not force other people to use so I would say it is not a problem there
Most of those modern day website designs hurt my eyes. I don't know if it's just me, but I feel like simpler designs (with some occasional smooth animation or maybe a few effects) is better than a website with a ton of stuff going on
I don't think I've ever seen one of those pages where the animation progresses as you scroll that actually looks good
@@Aiden-ham on the mobile apple page the animations are tied to scrolling, I wish the non interactive portions became static after scrolling through the first time, it's really annoying to have that 'explore more' button and every horizontal scroller disappear and reappear with a whole animation when scrolling back and forth. Minus the animations the UI of the website is actually pretty good and very easy to read
I think of these designs as 'spices' to be sprinkled in moderation on top of a content-focused design.
Imagine going to a restaurant and being served a chicken wing buried under 2 ounces of paprika powder. Some users will refuse to eat it, some users will patiently brush the powder off, but all users will feel discouraged from visiting your restaurant again.
So true haha
thats a strangely fitting analogy
Well there's is a Chinese dish where cooked chicken is burried in chili pepers and you dig through those to find the Chicken. It's a good dish served with beer. 😅
just eat the chili@@solidad-29
@@solidad-29 Good counterpoint lol
Using CSS to add "scroll-behaviour: smooth", I have no problem with - it's not generally considered scrolljacking and is actually helpful to help the user understand how far they have jumped when navigating.
I don't particularly mind horizontal scroll, when used tastefully and for more visual/marketing-focused sites.
But if you modify the scroll speed or change the scroll friction via JavaScript, it's a race to see whether I can complete my task before I abandon your site for poor usability.
I'm a web developer, my browser is like a car, I know how I expect it to act and if you mess with the pedals and gearbox I will not be traffic on your site for long.
Couldn't agree more.
I consider sites forcing me to scroll how THEY want as hostile.
Horizontal scroll is often non-conforming with accessibility guidelines, specifically WCAG 2.1 SC 1.4.10 Reflow. "Content can be presented without loss of information or functionality, and without requiring scrolling in two dimensions for [vertical scrolling content at 320px width and horizontal scrolling content at 256px height". There are a few exceptions made for particular types of content like data-grids, but it's generally advisable for all content to fit in a single, vertically scrolling column.
@@TheBswan Horizontal scrolling breaks the flow of the page, users don't appreciate when they aren't in control.
I think there are use cases where you want to display content in a horizontal fashion because it fits your layout.
Sections like "recent blog posts cards", or "customers reviews". For those instances it makes sense to have overflowing rows as opposed to taking additional vertical space since the user is already familiar with the message of that content and would probably want to access the next sections, continue his navigation.
But is horizontal scrolling necessary ? You could use carousels or Netflix-like sliders with navigation buttons. These should be prioritized.
One of the things I think needs to be focused more on are user preferences, such as "prefers dark theme" or "prefers reduced motion". Because making your website good for your taste is easy, making your website also respect the taste of your customers is a lot harder.
Its not just about the taste of the customer, its about accessibility. Moving images can make people nauseous and flashing images can give people seizures. Having a reduced motion mode where the motion is fully controlled by the end user (eg scrolling) benefits them and others.
Absolutely. And if your users have to scroll a meter to get to the end of the first sentence, this particular user will mutter "fuck this" under his breath and go to find a decent site with the same information.
This is not unrelated to the tabs vs spaces argument. I say tabs on documents to be edited by multiple people, because people like them to be different sizes.
There's a lot of what I like to call Hipster UX Bullsh*t in these designs. I'd have a serious conversation if anyone on my team came to me with trying to pass off a lot of this as usable.
you gotta stop using the term hipster bro, it really dates you
@@hypelucas Agreed, that was the point. These design paradigms are dated.
Bento boxes that load as you scroll are a right pain. They never load in time (even on decent Internet) before you've scrolled past them and then realise you've missed a chunk of content.
My hot take is that it doesn't matter how pretty your site is on the optimal viewing device if on Joe Schmoe's low-end laptop running your non-preferred browser (I've heard professional designers act as if Chrome is the only thing that exists) it looks and runs like a potato. I see so many design trends that people talk about as being great and I can't relate because my experience of them is how they lag, how they break other things, etc. My hobbyist web design work involved trying to optimize from the very beginning because of limited storage and I think it's a good habit to have gotten into.
The best are websites that just display NOTHING unless you start allowing stuff in NoScript. Bonus points when apparently the entire CSS is done via js, so it's just an unformatted mess without allowing the js to run.
is this bait
@@rollinontheboard no, its called a joke :)
@@colly6022 i was just making sure because you should never feed the trolls
@@rollinontheboardYou sir are one clever and careful guy!
@@rollinontheboardI feel like asking if it's bait is in and of itself feeding the troll if it is bait, but that's just me.
I just discovered this channel and I am surprised by the quality of the content. It deserves a lot more recognition. Well done!
Snazzy effects _definitely_ have their place. That said, for _most_ sites... less is most definitely more. Speed and efficiency is key, especially for ecommerce or any very content heavy websites.
Something that web designers SHOULD keep in mind is that laptops and touchscreens exist. Macbooks, Windows laptops with precision trackpads and touch screens can actually input HORIZONTAL scrolling, but several websites have horizontal elements that can ONLY be scrolled by clicking annoying buttons on each side of those elements, like the thumbnail rows in Netflix. The main page shows you several rows of thumbnails, one for each section, but scrolling those rows horizontally can only be achieved by clicking buttons in the far ends of each row even when I have an inout device that's perfectly capable of doing horizontal scrolling
I've been struggled for weeks building a website for my porfolio as software engineer... AND ALL THIS TIME I WAS DONIG A BENTO GRID WITHOUT KNOWING. Thank you sooo much! Now I know how to look for more inspiration and whatnot!
I am binging all of your videos right now. The editing, storytelling and simplicity in the explanations is just amazing. easily the best channel I have found that's related to frontend design , UI/UX
Loading screens on websites should never ever be a thing. If it needs that much data to require one you are doing something wrong.
Faux pas for me:
- smooth scrolling (I explicitly turned that off, and so do not override it)
- large gaps of wasted space
- zooming things in and out as you scroll
- middle click not working to open new tab
- preventing text selection
The worst thing ever is that smooth scroll still happens when i am clicking a section link, or even worse when i jump between text search results (ctrl+f).
Nothing worse then, when looking for the right search result and therefore stepping through a dozen of them, spending half the time looking at this godawful scroll animation
That's a great point you mentioned
Ngl, The amount of high quality production in this video is amazing.
Another thing about custom cursors is them not being done correctly. One that springs to mind is one of the minecraft wikis where the cursor is a sword, but instead of the tip of the cursor (the pixel that clicks on stuff) it was somwhere in the middle of the sword. (This is from memory it couldve been a different wiki or site but has definitly happened to me)
my method for loading bars, buttons, and other fancy effects is to make sure there's a no-javascript fallback and add a transition off the fallback if javascript manages to load (not everyone has it enabled!), for example replacing a static css animation with one that reacts to your mouse cursor
So many sites have literally no idea what subtlety means like IM NOT HERE FOR A LIGHTSHOW IM HERE TO HAVE YOUR SITE ACTUALITY *LOAD* WITHOUT SAFARI AUTO-RELOADING YOUR PAGE
Discord's desktop client loads 26 megabytes of JS when it starts, which is 80% of all resources. On my current laptop, the TTI can reach several minutes.
I both love and hate JS, and I wish people would start using simpler and smaller libraries and style sheets
Also, there's a ton of hidden potential in hand-written SVGs: I made infinitely scalable icons for a dashboard UI and pride flags with SVG, and all of them combined took up only a few kilobytes
You're right, and still JS itself might not be the problem in many cases. We can use lighthouse and optimize the page speed, and many sites with heavy scripts don't really do that. I think that's the main issue.
Impressed by how many quality vids you're releasing! Great point about those 'award winning' sites usually being product or portfolio sites too
Websites that take over my scroll bar bother me irrationally.
depends on how its done. it can bemade right and cool but sometimes it might be confusing
The content quality is amazing! First I thought it's a channel with the millions of followers. Thanks for the video))
I'm still all for bringing back pure html and minimal css websites
Probably explains why Markdown is so popular. Nothing like an instantly appearing hierarchical document that gets right to the point.
When I actually start putting content on my site it's going to be so simple. Near naked HTML with some limited CSS primarily for making sure images are in the right place on the screen without abusing tables.
Since I have a pretty puny laptop, every time I use an overdone site like this, my browser slows to a crawl and completely ruins the UX. I want nothing more than to close the site immediately. I really appreciate a well-crafted site that doesn't slurp up my CPU time.
Your videos are so well-made and informational. Keep going like that, and you'll be in the top designer channels, for sure!
Thank you! ✨️
I just started to learn UI/UX design and found this video and your channel. I really like your Fireship-style video with great content and practical instructions! Subscribed!
As a user I have javascript disabled by default. Loading screens make me leave the page, custom cursor is a no go, overriding scroll is also a no go. Sure its fun the first time hut i immediately get distracted and look what happens if i unlock my scroll wheel and spin it at 1000 revolutions per second. I also click any link with middle mouse button and never use the back navigation. If your page can handle all that then great
This channel is a blessing for front end developers ❤
Love this. Definitely some good inspiration!
Grid implementation could be much improved at 3:22 - First of all, I’d make the entire thing a grid, then control how big each box is with grid-column/row (e.g if it should go across to columns it should be grid-column: span 2;) Also, you should use fr instead of auto, and you can do repeat(5, 1fr) instead of 1fr 1fr 1fr 1fr 1fr
yeah that’s what i was thinking as well. you don’t have to use flexbox cause the entire layout can be made with grid.
Was looking for this comment, thanks
it was just a simple example, it's not that deep
@@YuriG03042 I disagree, the creator is showing this as the best way to make layouts like this, especially since these videos seem to be somewhat aimed at beginners (given all the tutorials)
for real
A tip regarding buttons you left out: SHADE THEM! Make them look like a 3D object, not a flat-coloured rectangle. If there's one thing Microsoft got right in 1990s versions of Windows, it was making it clear what's clickable. Pity they forgot it when they made Windows 8 and brought back the flat UI from the 1980s.
Yeah. Microsoft and Apple have both fallen down the flat UI rabbit hole, and IMHO the usability of all their products has suffered as a consequence. :(
@@tookitogo And every clueless dolt playing follow-the-leader, which is by far the worst thing about it. About the only kind of program that bucks the trend is games.
@@Roxor128 Yup, totally agree.
Love the channel, congrats on the video!
For me, nothing screams ‘unseriousness’ more than funky hover effects on buttons. Whenever I see something like 5:27, I immediately think that the company spend 99% of its budget to design and implement this button, and nothing was left for the actual product. Only startups that _desperately_ need to sell you their stuff will do something like this :D
I think the effect is specifically useful for activities on an informal site/app where you want to reward a user for performing an action, and encourage them to do it more.
For instance the RUclips like button shows the confetti and it gives the sensation you are performing a meaningful action that makes a difference.
@@dhillazNo, that's why I don't bother doing it. RUclips is a corporation, they don't care. They just want you to think they care.
I just discovered your channel.. The quality is superb 👌
Great job!
This channel is gorgeous! Thank yooou!
I love how you include little how-to's whilst you're presenting. You're targeting multiple audiences such as myself. I just learnt about the image blend
I'm so thankful that none of the websites that I use have any of the elements depicted in this video
Your RUclips channel is a great argument for quality over quantity (speaking about the low number of video). 21.6k subs after just 5 videos is pretty good growth
This is a fantastic ad! Well done Spline3d!
Very informative! I'd noticed this tendency now toward extra large font, but not so much the fancy scrolling (thankfully).
I love that running button and will definitely use it.
Wow, I'm just a beginner to web design and this was such a comprehensive video!
The loading screen I use is the browser loading images into the spaces already set out by CSS, just like the old days because that actually works from a UX standpoint
I mostly agree but the fact is that most of the websites that require these fancy JS UI tricks are not e-commerce, and therefore they don't need to be as performant as an e-commerce. They just have different targets and purpose.
I'm pretty sure that I haven't seen this cat meme in such high quality before. Thanks!
Personally, I like to make a distinction between ordinary websites and interactive web apps.
Once again I feel the urge to express how FREAKING GADAMN AWESOME this channel is
this video is filled with alotta inspiration! thank you !!
watched your video for colour design, and now this one popped up too. amazing content you got:)
I absolutely love the loading screen idea. It will most likely never appear because technology is just good but I still think it adds an immersive layer to the site.
Really happy to have discovered your channel it is amazing, thank you for your work
Glad you enjoy it! ✨️
I can't stand this meta of everything being HUGE... it's so obnoxious. Screens are so big these days, why only show 1 thing at a time? Why do I have to scroll..scroll..scroll..scroll..scroll..scroll.. until I find the info I want.
this is incredibly valuable and underrated! looking forward to more :)
You totally killed me with the "vacuum cleaner" sound and JavaScript. As a software engineer myself, I'm still totally mind-blown as to why some modern sites ask so much memory that my 6-year old iPad just crashes trying to load them… hell, most websites these days need more RAM & CPU power that the Apollo mission needed to land on the moon 😅
Completely agree. These effects can look good in certain contexts, but overall, it is better to avoid them if you can't use them properly in a way that not only makes for a nice UI but also a nice UX.
As an average user, any time scrolling isn't moving the page up, like it suppose to, i instaclose the tab. Im not letting designers take away control from me. 😈
As a user, I just want to see the things that I visited the site for. Just give me the information in a way that is easy to read and doesn't require me to scroll if avoidable.
When I am looking for a cooking recipe I just want to see the recipe and not 33 pictures, 17 titles and a story about the author. The less time the page needs to load, the better.
EDIT: 90% of the time JS makes websites worse for the user imo
As a user with potato PC, I hate when I have to wait 4 minutes to load Microsoft Office dashboard (no joking) then click on something to wait another 30 seconds to do it's fancy stuff to actually get to information I wanted before 10
minutes.
Finally someone else who mentions this. Tried to look for a new library for some thing at work and the scrolling made the entire screen jump around like an action sequence. Imagine me and the other two software engineers just looking confused while thinking "so, what're the specs?", "did they show information during this slideshow that we missed?", "what just happened?".
Plain, easy to read, and A SINGLE DIRECTION TO READ IN please.
Wow the Quality of this video is incredible
personally I really hate it when websites make fonts too big. I want to see more than a sentence at a time!!! do you think I have the ram to remember information that gets catapulted off the screen immediately when I continue reading >:-/
The worst part is that they often somehow manage to destroy zooming, I zoom out, text stays the same
The video is very cool! And I'm surprised how many people in the comments share the same feelings of wanting a simpler web! Let's do more of that!
Dude I love this one! Nice video. Subscriber earned
Old basic plain html/css is the way I like it
Just thanks. I honestly was wondering if I'm gonna agree with you, and you literally show some examples I always criticize XD.
Telling the bad ux is good, but you always take the time to explain the problems and gives come suggestion to how to do better. And this is peak content
As a completely normal user, my experience is, that the websites where I most quickly get what I want is the websites without any of these trends. Just give me the information I need and stop wasting my time and my computer’s resources!
Didnt release a video for a month then releases two straight after I recommend this channel to a friend. Am i the messiah
Wow super insightful! Keep these videos coming!
scroll hijack should be a crime
100%
Very nice video. I think a greatly under discussed part of these modern ui is the accessibility. Everybodys vision degrades, so
taking into consideration readability, and making sure your website doesn't break when zooming in not only helps visually impaired people like myself, but it futureproofs for everybody. Accessibilty really needs to be improved, far more than trendy animations.
these are some cool tips, might use some when i code my website
i love the content of this channel
My god, this videos are AMAZING. Good info, learned a few things, thanks :D
oooooooh nice
it's basically a summary of all the things I hate
all I want is mid-2000s web (minus Flash)
(your video is super cool, I'm just old)
Voice, Style, Humor, CONTENT
Liked n subscribed ❤
Great video, instant sub
Love your content, keep up the great work :D
Just to comment out there are pretty easy to make Onscroll effects with framer motion. You basically just set what animation should trigger when the element passes the viewport
2:20
Custom catsor... that was great🤣
JS is good in moderation for a cool effect or two. When the whole site becomes dependent on it, I’m really not a fan…
Great vid! I really like your style 👍
0:29
How is this meant to be an example of portfolios being bad? That looks 10x better than the modern examples, because you can actually see the information. The modern ones just look like a confusing mess that are a pain to try and get actual information out of.
Damn cool video! It’s so well made and explained!
u are so cool for showing ac iv bf loading screen :D
This channel is insane , I am binge watching your stuff, interesting , educational , fun , useful and you ALSO include all the sources in the description , and on top of all of that you have a soothing voice?
loved your video!! keep up with this fabulous channel