Material 3 Expressive

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Visual Style and “Expressiveness”

  • Many see “expressive” as pastel-heavy pink/purple, duotone, jelly-like shapes—more “SaaS landing page” or “failed Linux rice” than professional UI.
  • Several commenters find the palette physically tiring or nauseating, especially combined with motion; others say it looks playful, modern, and in line with current fashion.
  • Some like that it’s less corporate and more fun, especially for younger users; others want a restrained, Bauhaus‑style, form‑follows‑function aesthetic.

Usability, Information Density, and the Send Button

  • The flagship example—giant circular Send button—gets heavy criticism:
    • Gains a fraction of a second on first‑time discovery but permanently reduces space for composing and reading content.
    • Moves the most dangerous action (send) closer to the keyboard and more accident‑prone.
  • People argue the same usability gain could be achieved with clearer affordances (labelled button, better contrast, placement) without “blowing up” controls.
  • Repeated concern that Material trends systematically reduce information density and prioritize first‑use metrics over long‑term efficiency and expert use.

Page Implementation: Cursor, Motion, and Performance

  • The demo page itself is widely called unusable:
    • Custom circular cursor with capture/“magnet” behavior feels laggy, fights OS settings, and often stutters, especially while scrolling.
    • Paragraph blocks animate independently when scrolling, giving some users motion sickness.
    • Mid‑page forced dark→light switch is described as a “flashbang” and as ignoring system color‑scheme preferences.
  • Many see this as ironic for a UX case study and as emblematic of overdesigned, JS‑heavy sites that perform poorly on anything but top‑end hardware.

Research, Metrics, and Demographics

  • The article’s quantified “subculture,” “modernity,” and “rebelliousness” scores are widely mocked as pseudo‑scientific marketing, with doubts about survey framing and statistical rigor.
  • Some UX researchers in the thread explain participant panels, power analysis, and demographic balancing, but admit panels skew young and certain groups (e.g., 70+ women) are hard to recruit at scale.
  • Several see the focus on first‑fixation time and vibe‑metrics as optimizing for short‑term “wow” rather than durable, everyday usability.

Comparisons to Other Designs (Material 1–3, Holo, iOS, etc.)

  • Many miss Holo and Material 1, which are remembered as clearer, denser, and more “future‑tech” or task‑oriented.
  • Material 2 and 3 are criticized for flatness, ambiguous clickability, toggle states, and sameness across apps.
  • Some think Material 3 Expressive is a modest step back toward clearer grouping, contrast, and animations with purpose; others see it as just more rounded, purple, and childish.
  • iOS is repeatedly cited as also having bad UX, but still the benchmark many executives actually use; some see M3E as a clumsy attempt to chase iOS aesthetics.

Developer Ecosystem and Tools

  • Frustration that Material Web components are in “maintenance mode” while the docs still point to them, leaving Angular Material and third‑party kits to fill gaps.
  • Flutter developers complain that Material changes propagate unpredictably (e.g., sudden pink apps), forcing flags like useMaterial3: false. Some want M3 Expressive as a separate opt‑in system.
  • Others still value Material’s comprehensive design kits, component specs, and accessibility guidance, seeing M3E as an incremental expansion of options rather than a wholesale redesign.

Broader Critiques of Modern UI and Product Strategy

  • Strong sentiment that contemporary UI trends favor “vibes,” branding, and attention‑retention over clarity, consistency, and efficiency.
  • Complaints about hidden actions (ellipsis menus, share sheets), ever‑larger tap targets, and white‑space bloat particularly affect power users, small screens, and seniors.
  • Several frame this as resume‑driven and metric‑driven churn: designers must keep changing things to justify roles, even when core principles (clear affordances, density, stability) are already well understood.
  • A minority welcomes movement toward more emotional, characterful interfaces, but even they often question whether M3 Expressive’s examples truly deliver that without compromising basic usability.