I don't know if it is because this is a design-based project and not a development project, but I don't understand why people are complaining about the complainers. Just as many people ask why someone did something a certain way - or why they'd do something at all - in threads based on programming projects and I think it is just as valid here.
In my experience on HN, there aren't enough quality posts on design. In fact, a lot of the most upvoted ones promote poor practices. I've stopped basing whether or not I go into a design threads on the upvotes, because some of the most beautiful projects I've seen have collected dust here, while others thrive despite their rampant shortcomings.
This is basic UI design in the form of basic CSS. You would be seriously hardpressed to find a more generic branding standard than one that relies on simple solid blocks and white text, something that can be pulled off in decades-old browsers, and here we have a website that a) illustrates a lack of understanding of the UI itself and b) a lack of understanding CSS, which makes up the framework.
Honestly if I worked in a studio that was doing work for Microsoft and asked a designer to create these web assets, I would send them back to the drawing board if this is what they presented to me. I think that's why you're seeing a lot of these "negative" comments. It looks and works like a last-minute homework assignment, especially for something where everything is already defined for you in public branding documentation and on Microsoft's own websites.
How am I supposed to say that without coming off as a jerk?
In my experience on HN, there aren't enough quality posts on design. In fact, a lot of the most upvoted ones promote poor practices. I've stopped basing whether or not I go into a design threads on the upvotes, because some of the most beautiful projects I've seen have collected dust here, while others thrive despite their rampant shortcomings.
This is basic UI design in the form of basic CSS. You would be seriously hardpressed to find a more generic branding standard than one that relies on simple solid blocks and white text, something that can be pulled off in decades-old browsers, and here we have a website that a) illustrates a lack of understanding of the UI itself and b) a lack of understanding CSS, which makes up the framework.
Honestly if I worked in a studio that was doing work for Microsoft and asked a designer to create these web assets, I would send them back to the drawing board if this is what they presented to me. I think that's why you're seeing a lot of these "negative" comments. It looks and works like a last-minute homework assignment, especially for something where everything is already defined for you in public branding documentation and on Microsoft's own websites.
How am I supposed to say that without coming off as a jerk?