Why is Dark Mode Taking Over?
The Surprising Science Behind Our Love for Low-Light Interfaces
Introduction
The increasing popularity of dark mode in various applications and websites has prompted many users to wonder why it is becoming more prevalent. The dark mode is a display mode that swaps the traditional white or light background with a black or dark-coloured one.
It has become a popular design trend among mobile and desktop applications and websites, and it has even been implemented by major operating systems such as Android, iOS, and macOS. In this article, we will delve into the science behind dark mode and explore its advantages and disadvantages.
The Science behind Dark Mode
The human eye is sensitive to light and darkness, which is why dark mode has become popular. In the absence of bright light, the eyes’ photoreceptor cells, rods, and cones are less stimulated, reducing the need for your eyes to adjust to bright light.
Additionally, the blue light emitted by electronic devices can interfere with our sleep cycle by inhibiting the production of melatonin, a hormone that regulates sleep.
Advantages of Dark Mode
- Reduced Eye Strain and Fatigue
One of the most significant advantages of the dark mode is that it reduces eye strain and fatigue, especially when used in low-light environments. When a device’s brightness is lowered, dark mode reduces the contrast between the display’s brightness and the surrounding environment, thereby reducing the strain on the user’s eyes.
- Energy Efficiency
Dark mode is also more energy-efficient than light mode, especially for devices with OLED or AMOLED screens. The pixels on OLED or AMOLED screens can turn off completely in dark mode, resulting in significant energy savings.
- Improved Readability and Focus
Dark mode can also improve the readability of text and enhance the user’s focus on the content. The black background reduces glare, making it easier to read text on the screen.
Additionally, the dark mode can make certain colours stand out more, providing a more visually appealing user interface.
Disadvantages of Dark Mode
- Reduced Legibility for Some Users
One of the main disadvantages of the dark mode is that it may not be suitable for some users, especially those with visual impairments or colour vision deficiencies. Dark mode may make it harder for these users to read text, navigate interfaces, or interpret information.
- Limited Applicability
Dark mode may not be suitable for all applications, especially those that require high contrast between text and background. Additionally, some applications may require a bright interface, such as photo and video editing software, where the colours and brightness levels are essential.
User preference
User preference is a crucial factor in the design and implementation of dark mode. While some users prefer dark mode for its aesthetic appeal and reduced eye strain, others may find it challenging to read or navigate through dark interfaces, especially those with visual impairments or colour vision deficiencies.
Therefore, designers and developers must consider the diverse needs and preferences of their users when implementing dark mode. User research and feedback can help identify user preferences and guide the design of dark mode interfaces that are accessible and usable for all users.
To conclude, Dark mode has become a popular design trend among mobile and desktop applications and websites, and its popularity continues to grow.
Dark mode’s advantages, such as reduced eye strain, energy efficiency, and improved readability, are essential for many users, especially those who use electronic devices for long periods. However, dark mode’s disadvantages, such as reduced legibility for some users and limited applicability, must also be considered.
By taking into account user preference and feedback, designers and developers can create dark mode interfaces that are not only visually appealing but also functional and inclusive.
About the Creator
Keep reading
More stories from writers in FYI and other communities.
A Failed Artist, A Disillusioned Poet, An Underpaid Game Show Host
I took my son and niece to Gori, a small town in Georgia where Joseph Stalin was born. They talked me into visiting the Stalin's Museum, the largest in the post-Soviet space. I had resisted going there because I just can't stand the monster and know enough about him, or so I thought.
By Lana V Lynx20 days ago in FYI
Minister Told Armoured Vehicle Which Left Soldiers Vomiting Was ‘Safe’
A growing controversy has erupted after revelations that a government minister was assured an armoured military vehicle was “safe”, despite reports that soldiers using it later suffered severe nausea, dizziness, and vomiting. The incident has sparked serious questions about military oversight, equipment testing, and whether frontline troops are being adequately protected by those responsible for their safety. As details continue to emerge, the issue has become a flashpoint in debates over accountability within defence procurement and soldier welfare. What Happened Inside the Vehicle According to reports, the armoured vehicle was deployed during routine military operations and training exercises. Soon after extended use, multiple soldiers began experiencing intense physical reactions, including vomiting, headaches, and disorientation. Medical evaluations suggested that the symptoms were consistent with poor ventilation, exposure to fumes, or mechanical issues inside the vehicle’s sealed environment. In armoured vehicles designed to protect occupants from external threats, airflow and internal safety systems are critical—and failures can quickly become dangerous. Despite these warning signs, the vehicle had reportedly been cleared for use following assurances provided to senior officials. Ministerial Assurance Under Scrutiny At the heart of the controversy is the claim that a minister responsible for defence matters was told the vehicle posed no safety risk. This assurance reportedly influenced the decision to continue deployment without immediate suspension or further investigation. Critics argue that this raises troubling questions: Were safety reports properly reviewed? Were soldiers’ complaints taken seriously? Did bureaucratic pressure outweigh on-the-ground realities? Opposition figures and military advocates have called for transparency, demanding to know who approved the vehicle, what data was used to declare it safe, and whether warnings were ignored. The Human Cost for Soldiers For serving personnel, the issue goes beyond politics. Soldiers trust that the equipment they are issued has been thoroughly tested and meets strict safety standards. When that trust is shaken, morale and confidence suffer. Several affected soldiers reportedly required medical attention, and some expressed frustration that their symptoms were initially dismissed as minor or unrelated. Military families and veterans’ groups have voiced anger, saying that troops already accept enormous risks—and avoidable equipment failures should never be one of them. Procurement and Testing Concerns The incident has reignited long-standing concerns over defence procurement processes. Modern military vehicles are complex systems, often developed through private contractors and approved through layers of bureaucracy. Experts note that problems can arise when: Testing conditions do not reflect real-world use Feedback from soldiers is delayed or filtered Cost or deadlines take priority over safety If early warning signs were overlooked in this case, it could indicate a broader systemic issue rather than an isolated error. Official Response and Calls for Investigation Following public backlash, officials have stated that the issue is being reviewed and that soldier safety remains a top priority. Some authorities have pledged to examine ventilation systems, internal sensors, and maintenance records for the vehicle. However, critics argue that internal reviews are not enough. There are growing calls for an independent investigation to determine: Whether the “safe” assessment was accurate Who provided the assurance to the minister Whether protocols were followed Without clear answers, confidence in military leadership risks further erosion. A Broader Debate on Accountability This incident highlights a recurring tension in defence policy: the gap between decision-makers and those directly affected by their decisions. When assurances made at high levels conflict with lived experiences on the ground, accountability becomes essential. Transparency advocates argue that admitting mistakes is not a weakness—but failing to address them is. For many observers, the key question is not just whether the vehicle was unsafe, but how warnings were handled once problems emerged. Conclusion: Safety Should Never Be Assumed The controversy surrounding the armoured vehicle serves as a stark reminder that safety cannot be declared—it must be proven, continuously tested, and reassessed. Soldiers rely on trust: trust in their equipment, their leadership, and the systems designed to protect them. When that trust is compromised, restoring it requires honesty, accountability, and meaningful reform. As investigations unfold, the outcome will likely shape future defence decisions and determine whether lessons are truly learned—or repeated.
By Fiaz Ahmed 3 days ago in FYI
Rage
Content Warning: Domestic Violence, Assault Rage D. A. Ratliff “Who did this?” My voice echoed through the house. All I wanted was a cup of tea, but one of the twins, running through the house like maniacs, knocked it over. My nerves tingled, and every muscle in my body felt coiled like a spring. Survival seemed out of reach.
By D. A. Ratliff6 days ago in Fiction
The Blue Ridge Stalker
Tom had left the Ford down the way, its spark plugs finally exhausted and no mechanics for a dozen miles back through the foothills to Strossburg. No matter, he had worn his boots—almost as if he planned for this to happen. The puzzle he sought to solve emanated from the woods clinging to the slopes above; the valley behind held no mysteries.
By Stephen A. Roddewig4 days ago in Fiction
Comments
There are no comments for this story
Be the first to respond and start the conversation.