As you might have guessed, today we will talk about frameworks for creating sites that are based on “material” design.
This design appeared thanks to Google on June 25, 2014. The design idea is in cards that are everywhere, with beautiful animations and soft shadows. Also, Google designers decided that there can be no sharp corners anywhere, cards between themselves should switch smoothly and almost imperceptibly.
The first to receive this design were Android Lollipop and some built-in applications, and then Google and Android sites. This solution for web pages people really liked, and they decided to write the site themselves, as they thought, in a material style. But then failure awaited them. The problem is that they did not read the Google manuals, which describe in detail the principles of design. As a result, they got a clumsy flat mixed with metro and a “pseudo-material” design.
Fortunately, there were web design experts who perfectly studied the work of Google and made an excellent framework that was different from everyone else and looked as much as possible like a website in a material style. Then a more advanced framework was created, which easily outdid its competitor, and then others appeared.
Let's get down to business. Let's look at the top 7 (in my opinion) frameworks in the "material style"
Pretty nice, pretty framework. There is a bit of smooth animation in it, such as in checkboxes and in switches. But, unfortunately, this is where the beauty ended. A lot of things have not been done yet, some elements do not have animation at all, and the shadows look slightly stiff. I have nothing more to say. We move on to the next place.
You may wonder why the site, which is recommended to be used even on Wikipedia, was in 6th place? Everything is very simple. Firstly, the pages of the framework themselves are partially made not in the “material” style, and secondly, in some places there is no Roboto font, which is a design feature. There are a bit more functions here, but it is more complicated and complicated. At first it seemed to me beautiful and perfect, but as I studied it, I began to realize that I was wrong.
This framework was written by the all-knowing Google. You can believe it, you can not, but I got a lot of joy when I saw the news about the release of the official Google framework. At first, everything was normal, unusual. But then some curved elements began to catch my eye. Here we compare the loading band on their framework and in the fifth Android-e. They are different, and the site is made very crooked. This is sad, because I expected to see something worthwhile. But the mobile version looks pretty nice and beautiful.
A framework with such an “original” name is distinguished by its beauty and simplicity. I was pleased with the right sliding panel, although it could be combined with the left. Pretty pretty and smooth animation. I really liked the loading of content, which is presented on the main page. I was also surprised by the download bar, just like in Google Now. But there is only one minus. The animations on the drop-down lists are similar to opening applications in Android Kitkat. And so an excellent and convenient framework.
At first glance, nothing special. But knowing it closer, you can understand that it is almost perfect. Perhaps this is the first framework on which I would write my site. There are a lot of functions, everywhere smooth animation. Even the drop down list looks perfect. The best part is that there are 3 features: date selection, time selection and the ability to change the theme to a dark one (well, just like in Android M). Also pleased with the adaptation for mobile devices. It seems that you are not using the site, but the native Android application. But it is still difficult to master, the pages of the site look somewhat awkward.
Really almost the best framework. Many functions, beautiful tabs, bottom drawer, beautiful drop-down lists. Pleased animation progress, especially horizontal. Unlike other frameworks, there is real buffering animation here. But there are a few but. Firstly, if the real Lollipop checkbox animation was present at the most imperfect frameworks, then it isn’t here. Secondly, there are almost no different types of website headers, although one can be dispensed with. In general, the framework is excellent, but not perfect.
Very beautiful, convenient, easy to learn framework. There are many interesting features. This is an increase in images, hover effects on cards, different types of tables, drop-down lists, beautiful modal windows, icons and much more. It was on this framework that I made my site. I’ll tell you that its only drawbacks are the incompleteness of the mobile version, in which the text may go beyond the card, and the infrequent release of updates, which sometimes requires rewriting some pages. For example, icons. Previously, they were a separate font that the creators of Materialize made and the icons had to be inserted in one way. They changed position last month by switching to the Google font. Later I had to change the code a bit so that the icons would work correctly.
To summarizeMany tried to create their own frameworks, but few managed to do something worthwhile. This article personally describes my opinion and, if you do not agree with him, I am ready to listen to yours. Every man to his own taste.