Material Design 2 vs. 3: Breaking Down the Evolution of Google's Design System | #24

Google’s Material Design is a comprehensive design system aimed at creating consistent, user-friendly experiences across platforms. Launched in 2014, Material Design brought structure to app development with clear rules for typography, color, layout, and interaction.?Over the years, it evolved to meet the needs of users, designers and developers. Culminating in the polished Material Design 2 and now the personalized Material Design 3, also known as Material You.

The transition from Material Design 2 to Material Design 3 isn’t a dramatic overhaul but rather a thoughtful evolution aimed at enhancing customization, accessibility, and adaptability. Here’s a closer look at the key differences, with a focus on UI and UX.

Color Systems: From Static to Dynamic M2

Relied on a manual, fixed color system where designers predefined primary, secondary, and surface colors. The palette worked well for consistent branding but required more effort to accommodate dark modes and diverse user needs. It is more straightforward to implement since palettes are fixed and predictable.

M3: Introduces dynamic color. This system ensures harmonious light/dark modes and accessibility-compliant contrast ratios. While visually engaging, M3 adds complexity to development, and careful consideration is required to provide color legibility across varying themes. While tools like the Material Theme Builder streamline the process, developers must test extensively to ensure their app maintains readability and aesthetic appeal across various themes.

Typography: Emphasis on Accessibility

M2 provided a predefined set of typography styles, including specific categories like Headline, Subtitle, Body, and Caption. The fonts were limited to fixed font weights like bold, regular, and light. Accessibility in typography was achieved through adherence to fixed contrast and size guidelines, but manual adjustments were required to ensure compliance.

M3?refines categories with adaptive typography. It takes accessibility further by emphasizing type scaling and dynamic line heights. The new system adapts to various user settings, ensuring text remains legible in different contexts, such as when users enable larger text sizes or use dark mode.

Components

M2?provides a well-structured framework for building UI components, but it has certain limitations in flexibility and scalability compared to Material Design 3.

M3 aims to improve designers' workflows. Figma, one of the most popular design tools, seamlessly integrates M3 principles, making it far more comfortable and efficient for designers to work with. M3 introduces design tokens, reusable variables for colors, typography, spacing, and more.?

Accessibility and Inclusivity

M2: Accessibility features were strong but less dynamic, relying on manual adherence to guidelines.

M3: Prioritizes inclusivity through adaptive typography scaling and enhanced focus states, ensuring compatibility with diverse user needs. This shift reflects a broader emphasis on building universally accessible products.

Developer Considerations

While M2 to M3 migration is designed to be incremental, developers must account for new systems like design tokens and dynamic theming. Tools like the Material Theme Builder help streamline this process by generating compatible color and typography assets.?

Verdict

Material Design 3 is not just an upgrade to Material Design —it’s a forward-thinking design system that addresses modern challenges while preserving the core strengths of its previous version. Where M2 excels in stability, consistency, and brand-focused design, M3 redefines the playing field with a more adaptive, user-centered approach, emphasizing personalization, accessibility, and versatility across devices. Choosing between them depends on your app’s goals. You can explore the migration resources on the?Material Design?website for further details.

Karolina Galczak - UX/UI Designer at Mood Up