3 ms·

Right now you can sit down in front of Maya, Houdini, or Modo and, knowing one of those packages, figure out how to navigate the UI in maybe 10 minutes. A few m

Right now you can sit down in front of Maya, Houdini, or Modo and, knowing one of those packages, figure out how to navigate the UI in maybe 10 minutes. A few months ago, firing up Blender, I had to go watch some YouTube videos to figure out how the hell the UI worked.

zokier 10y ago
Being different does not make it worse. You could argue that emacs ui is bad because vim user would struggle in it, or vice versa, but I think most people would agree that wouldn't make a lot of sense
- gcp 10y ago
  If there are standard UI interactions that are used by all programs but yours, then yes, being different is worse. For all the bad things you can say about it, IIRC the windows in Emacs (when running on X) behave like normal windows.
  - wtetzner 10y ago
    > If there are standard UI interactions that are used by all programs but yours, then yes, being different is worse. I disagree. You're basically saying the current UIs are the pinnacle of UI design, just because they're popular. Especially for software that will be used in anger day-in and day-out, it's much more important to have an efficient UI than one with discoverability or a shallow learning curve.
    - Pica_soO 10y ago
      No, they are not. He is arguing that you throw away years of user-experience for no apparent reason. Those people don't have the luxury to retrain for a same-function-framework just because some dev can dance. They are part of a pipeline, they have work to do, and insulting them as unwilling-to-learn, is simply missing the point.
      - wtetzner 10y ago
        There are plenty of people who are productive using Blender, and prefer its UI. Suggesting that it should be the same as all of the other packages seems pointless. If you want software that works like all of the other packages, just use one of those.
        Pica_soO 10y ago
        I do. Unfortunately some tools i use, only exist in blender. So every once in a while, i have to do the dantes journey thing and venture into the ux-underworld. I wouldnt waste so much time on this, if it werent for this wasting so much of my time.
- Pica_soO 10y ago
  Yes it does. Being different for no reason, makes it worse as in more work for no reason. Those commercial developers making every software they develop into another copy of office- do that for a reason. If you do not develop something new, as in never done before, and you are innovative- you basically throw away user-experience, and they will hate you for that- and they got the right too. If i would make a hidden C-Define into a compiler and forced you too use that, you would demand the compiler dev - of this UserInterface-UndefinedBehaviour to be hanged - but come a different audience, suddenly the standards can shift and dance.
  - zokier 10y ago
    If we are making programming analogues then I'd say this is more akin to hating LISP because it doesn't look like C.

zokier 10y ago

Being different does not make it worse. You could argue that emacs ui is bad because vim user would struggle in it, or vice versa, but I think most people would agree that wouldn't make a lot of sense

gcp 10y ago
If there are standard UI interactions that are used by all programs but yours, then yes, being different is worse. For all the bad things you can say about it, IIRC the windows in Emacs (when running on X) behave like normal windows.
- wtetzner 10y ago
  > If there are standard UI interactions that are used by all programs but yours, then yes, being different is worse. I disagree. You're basically saying the current UIs are the pinnacle of UI design, just because they're popular. Especially for software that will be used in anger day-in and day-out, it's much more important to have an efficient UI than one with discoverability or a shallow learning curve.
  - Pica_soO 10y ago
    No, they are not. He is arguing that you throw away years of user-experience for no apparent reason. Those people don't have the luxury to retrain for a same-function-framework just because some dev can dance. They are part of a pipeline, they have work to do, and insulting them as unwilling-to-learn, is simply missing the point.
    - wtetzner 10y ago
      There are plenty of people who are productive using Blender, and prefer its UI. Suggesting that it should be the same as all of the other packages seems pointless. If you want software that works like all of the other packages, just use one of those.
      - Pica_soO 10y ago
        I do. Unfortunately some tools i use, only exist in blender. So every once in a while, i have to do the dantes journey thing and venture into the ux-underworld. I wouldnt waste so much time on this, if it werent for this wasting so much of my time.
Pica_soO 10y ago
Yes it does. Being different for no reason, makes it worse as in more work for no reason. Those commercial developers making every software they develop into another copy of office- do that for a reason. If you do not develop something new, as in never done before, and you are innovative- you basically throw away user-experience, and they will hate you for that- and they got the right too. If i would make a hidden C-Define into a compiler and forced you too use that, you would demand the compiler dev - of this UserInterface-UndefinedBehaviour to be hanged - but come a different audience, suddenly the standards can shift and dance.
- zokier 10y ago
  If we are making programming analogues then I'd say this is more akin to hating LISP because it doesn't look like C.