Shared publicly  - 
New Visual Proportions for the iOS User Interface
Since I have begun designing iPhone app interfaces last year, I have been deeply in touch with the nuances of the interfaces of native and non-native apps. As a designer who is also adept in print des...
Sampo Karjalainen's profile photoHulya Erciyas's profile photo
I think: overdoing the grid. Bars & tabs are not 2D. Uneven division of content area is actually good: hints scrolling.
Good study but I agree with you Sampo. Uneven division in general is a good thing. In all my research and by all my experience, I came to learn a little unevenness is easier on the human eye. It's easier to see the difference when alternative is displayed next to the original. Divisions too neatly organized turn into visual blocks. On the iPhone's screen of 460 pixels not being divisible by 11 is a plus, so the designer does exactly on what we two agree on, allow a little unevenness. Still, it's a good study to challenge the conventional. Thanks for sharing, it's really interesting.
Aen explained the new grid with "Instead of an arbitrarily-designed electronic interface, it now feels more like a physical document cleverly typeset to typographical principles."

I find it beneficial that it doesn't look like a physical document. In all of the examples the content area is scrollable, but bars and tabs stay still. Physical documents don't behave that way, so it's good that it doesn't look like a document. The bars and tabs are chrome to the content and the different proportions make the distinction more clear. I agree that a good grid in the content area makes content much more readable. But it's also useful that some of the cells are cut at the bottom of the view (due to uneven division): it's a hint that there's more and that the view is scrollable.

Hulya, what type of research have you done in this area?
On Aen's design... His grid, like the original, is neat but not aesthetically pleasing to the eye. I admit I haven't explored typography for smaller devices. It's difficult to express but I'm saying corrupt is pleasing to the eye, why not add the corrupt "surplus" for the bar? Aen not only wants elements and intervals in content area to abide to the rhythm but the whole of contents like status bar and tabs. Those can be independent of the content, well to some degree. My point is Aen is right that that rules of print don't apply to screen, but even rules in print are not perfect, at times too structured for human perception that is "inborn preference". I'd even go as far ar changing elements' ratio of repetition and alternations from 44 to 43, shift the menu from 1 pixel up within the major rhythm. The second point is, referring to the tab bar in black, a designer can't expect the average user to be as tech savvy as themselves. We know what to look for and where. The color guides those who don't know and those who don't see as well. Also looking at the proposed rhythm, why is there not a div line under the last song name too. My final thought would be, despite all knowledge and research, I believe design is a manifestation of personal taste and interpretation. More would be surpassing my knowledge on this subject and unfair to Aen.
Add a comment...