I'm not sure I fully agree with his argument against using materials and textures to humanize a software interface. I do know that it requires a designer who's execution is better than average, but I don't think it's as much of a distraction as they proclaim. I also think it largely applies to the type of software one is designing. For example, the stock Notes app is fine but for Cultured Code's Things, it would not fit since task management is a much deeper interaction.
Anyhow, this article wasn't really informative, seems to be mostly opinion driven and the message is scattered. I showed the iPad to my parents this weekend, they were enamored by it because it was easy to relate with compared to their clunky Windows-based "laptops" -- a UX that's cold and impersonal.
Did you read the full article? Doesn't seem like it, since "it requires a designer who's execution is better than average" is exactly what it says. And not just that, it also defines the criteria for using metaphors and textures.
Anyhow, this article wasn't really informative, seems to be mostly opinion driven and the message is scattered. I showed the iPad to my parents this weekend, they were enamored by it because it was easy to relate with compared to their clunky Windows-based "laptops" -- a UX that's cold and impersonal.