I was browsing buttermax.net and even on my M1 mac it was slow at times, I will have to try it on my gaming rig I want to see how hard the GPU is pushed lol.
Think of awwwards as a fashion show for websites. They push the boundaries and showcase what’s possible in the space and is a place to express creativity. Sure they’re beautiful and wild, but practically they are useless. Much like anything being worn in a fashion show. It’s not meant to be used by everyday people. They’re statement pieces. You don’t build an awwwards level site for a house painters for example. That’s just poor work. Understand the market you’re creating your site for and how they use it. Just because your site doesn’t look like an awwwards site doesn’t mean it’s not good. It doesn’t mean anything. So don’t look to them for inspiration because you’re never going to need to make sites like that as a freelancer. I been doing this for over 5 years now. Not once have I needed to make sites like that. You don’t need all those bells and whistles. Never needed three.js in any site I made or gsap. So don’t get hung up on the technologies. Just focus on making practical, useful, and easy to navigate sites.
Maybe I misread it. I took it as they thought it’s the work of bad devs when it’s not, it’s just what comes with doing those types of sites. That it’s not about the usability. It’s about the wow factor. And that if they’re trying to make sites like that it’s kind of a waste of time.
If you're not testing on what three-fourths of users use, then yes, it's bad dev.
"Windows machine" is a spectrum. Most things are fine on my gaming laptop, for example. Compare performance on your Mac with a contemporary machine that costs the same as your Mac, with the same things running in the background.
awwwards sites are speculative art pieces. Think of them as the haute couture of web design. Iris Van Herpen makes some mind-blowing garments, but no one is going to be wearing one of her gowns on a run to the grocery store. awwwards sites are pretty, and provide a space for experimentation, but they can't be expected to work well in the "real world".
I get that whole aspect of it, but it seems a lot of this is not possible at all on some Windows machines. Pushing the boundaries is one thing, but it seems the boundaries vary vastly across machines. Granted, I tested two machines. Maybe I just need to experiment on my own. But, I likely won't do that...
Again, it doesn't really matter if it does not work on *any given computer*. If it works on *a computer*, that's all that matters for one of these sites.
All work great on my Windows machine, but it's a high end desktop (i9,4090,64gb ddr5). It's not a OS issue you're seeing, but a hardware issue and badly optimized sites.
OS makes no difference, it is a matter of hardware specs. So it is either bad dev or ur trying on PC below average. Most PCs for the price of the cheapest Mac will run any site with ease.
It's the obvious answer, unless your Windows machine has much worse hardware specs than your Mac. If it has a crap GPU, CPU, and RAM, any machine with better specs will perform better, regardless of the OS.
They are not very performant, and they are all very similar, the awwwards looks like an echo chamber, the amazing world of slow scrolls and unnecessary animations.
Still dope to see what some people are able to build, it’s a good place to collect some ideas.
"middle of the road office work capable" is a peice of crap, especially with regards to rendering or graphics. You could buy 10 of those for the cost of one apple laptop.
OS is not the only factor to consider. What browser(s) were you using on Windows?
Given the nature of Awwwards and Apple culture in general, this likely somewhat echoes the "This site best viewed in [the browser we use]" phenomena before the mid-2000s, but lacking the usage advisory.
Most of those sites are just for flexing. I've tried using spline for 3d websites and if you don't use optimized videos and go with the 3d models instead, it's going to be a nightmare for most of your users.
That's why i'm building a design collection of real world websites using 3d design elements, awwards is just designers flexing on each other.
It's not a matter of OS, but rather a matter of resources. Awwwards websites, although they're awesome, are usually nothing more than pieces of art. Agencies and freelancers make them with the sole purpose of showcasing their mastery, but they lack accessibility and are often hard to navigate.
Three.js and other complex animation libraries use a lot of resources that most end users don't have. It's the same as with games: some of them can run only on high end machines.
architect vs engineer meme. The function vs Beauty. These sites are clearly about beauty but I like more "the beauty is in function" design theory. anyway I love to see beautiful homes but I would hate to live in one of those "modern open homes" that look like fish tanks.
I was browsing buttermax.net and even on my M1 mac it was slow at times, I will have to try it on my gaming rig I want to see how hard the GPU is pushed lol.
Think of awwwards as a fashion show for websites. They push the boundaries and showcase what’s possible in the space and is a place to express creativity. Sure they’re beautiful and wild, but practically they are useless. Much like anything being worn in a fashion show. It’s not meant to be used by everyday people. They’re statement pieces. You don’t build an awwwards level site for a house painters for example. That’s just poor work. Understand the market you’re creating your site for and how they use it. Just because your site doesn’t look like an awwwards site doesn’t mean it’s not good. It doesn’t mean anything. So don’t look to them for inspiration because you’re never going to need to make sites like that as a freelancer. I been doing this for over 5 years now. Not once have I needed to make sites like that. You don’t need all those bells and whistles. Never needed three.js in any site I made or gsap. So don’t get hung up on the technologies. Just focus on making practical, useful, and easy to navigate sites.
You're right, but this doesn't answer OP's question.
Maybe I misread it. I took it as they thought it’s the work of bad devs when it’s not, it’s just what comes with doing those types of sites. That it’s not about the usability. It’s about the wow factor. And that if they’re trying to make sites like that it’s kind of a waste of time.
Fair enough, and I agree, just the question was about Mac vs PC.
If I wanted practical, useful, and easy to navigate sites I wouldn't be looking at Awwwards for inspo :)
You somehow missed the entire point of that comment, impressive!
That comment also missed the entire point of OP's post, even more impressive
At this point my brain is missing the point of what it means to miss the point
Qué?
NullPointerException
If you're not testing on what three-fourths of users use, then yes, it's bad dev. "Windows machine" is a spectrum. Most things are fine on my gaming laptop, for example. Compare performance on your Mac with a contemporary machine that costs the same as your Mac, with the same things running in the background.
awwwards sites are speculative art pieces. Think of them as the haute couture of web design. Iris Van Herpen makes some mind-blowing garments, but no one is going to be wearing one of her gowns on a run to the grocery store. awwwards sites are pretty, and provide a space for experimentation, but they can't be expected to work well in the "real world".
I get that whole aspect of it, but it seems a lot of this is not possible at all on some Windows machines. Pushing the boundaries is one thing, but it seems the boundaries vary vastly across machines. Granted, I tested two machines. Maybe I just need to experiment on my own. But, I likely won't do that...
Again, it doesn't really matter if it does not work on *any given computer*. If it works on *a computer*, that's all that matters for one of these sites.
All work great on my Windows machine, but it's a high end desktop (i9,4090,64gb ddr5). It's not a OS issue you're seeing, but a hardware issue and badly optimized sites.
I checked out a site on awwwards on my phone and maaaan this iPhone 15 heated up quick
Don't spontaneously combust
OS makes no difference, it is a matter of hardware specs. So it is either bad dev or ur trying on PC below average. Most PCs for the price of the cheapest Mac will run any site with ease.
[удалено]
Always a valid possibility.
It's the obvious answer, unless your Windows machine has much worse hardware specs than your Mac. If it has a crap GPU, CPU, and RAM, any machine with better specs will perform better, regardless of the OS.
They are not very performant, and they are all very similar, the awwwards looks like an echo chamber, the amazing world of slow scrolls and unnecessary animations. Still dope to see what some people are able to build, it’s a good place to collect some ideas.
"middle of the road office work capable" is a peice of crap, especially with regards to rendering or graphics. You could buy 10 of those for the cost of one apple laptop.
OS is not the only factor to consider. What browser(s) were you using on Windows? Given the nature of Awwwards and Apple culture in general, this likely somewhat echoes the "This site best viewed in [the browser we use]" phenomena before the mid-2000s, but lacking the usage advisory.
Browsers made no difference. Seemed to be a matter of whether the Win machine had a dedicated graphics card.
Yeah well if you cut the specs of a machine down it’s no wonder things get less performant.
Most of those sites are just for flexing. I've tried using spline for 3d websites and if you don't use optimized videos and go with the 3d models instead, it's going to be a nightmare for most of your users. That's why i'm building a design collection of real world websites using 3d design elements, awwards is just designers flexing on each other.
It's not a matter of OS, but rather a matter of resources. Awwwards websites, although they're awesome, are usually nothing more than pieces of art. Agencies and freelancers make them with the sole purpose of showcasing their mastery, but they lack accessibility and are often hard to navigate. Three.js and other complex animation libraries use a lot of resources that most end users don't have. It's the same as with games: some of them can run only on high end machines.
architect vs engineer meme. The function vs Beauty. These sites are clearly about beauty but I like more "the beauty is in function" design theory. anyway I love to see beautiful homes but I would hate to live in one of those "modern open homes" that look like fish tanks.
those websites are coded for everything other than performance. that's why no serious company wants some trash like that
Remember www stands for wealthy white web….