4 ms·

So, you're saying [1] and [2] look like Windows 95? They're built with Qt. [1] https://itunes.apple.com/de/app/auto-motor-und-sport/id366444729 https://itunes.

So, you're saying [1] and [2] look like Windows 95? They're built with Qt. [1] https://itunes.apple.com/de/app/auto-motor-und-sport/id366444729 https://itunes.apple.com/de/app/auto-motor-und-sport/id36644... [2] https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/mens-health-fitness-trainer/id542656239 https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/mens-health-fitness-trainer/...

zerr 10y ago
Honestly speaking, I find "Win95" look and controls much more intuitive and easy to use.
- abrkn 10y ago
  The glorious days before flat ui
  - noir_lord 10y ago
    Flat can be fine with shadows (though if it has shadows is it flat?) and other hints but yes I think the desktop UI in particular reached it's peak with Win2k, everything since has been different but not better. These days I use XFCE with http://www.noobslab.com/2016/03/vivacious-colors-gtk-theme-suite.html http://www.noobslab.com/2016/03/vivacious-colors-gtk-theme-s... and it's nice.
nardi 10y ago
Nope, those look much better. I guess just...don't use the widgets.
- creshal 10y ago
  I'm fairly sure it's the same widgets, just with a better theme overlaid.
  - sho_hn 10y ago
    No, it's Qt Quick vs. QWidget. QWidget was created in the pre-mobile days, and while still very useful to make high-quality work horse desktop apps, the mobile platforms are much better served by Qt Quick in terms of theming, animation and touch support. This fragmentation is frustrating sometimes, but in the end what counts is whether the framework has solutions to your problems, and it usually does. (Meanwhile, Qt Quick is improving on the desktop over time.)
    - pjmlp 10y ago
      This is why on an application I have done back in the 5.3 days, I decided to throw Qt away and rewrite it using standard C++ for the logic, with Java and C++/CX for the UI. I was much more productive and I had much better integration with the respective OS APIs.

zerr 10y ago

Honestly speaking, I find "Win95" look and controls much more intuitive and easy to use.

abrkn 10y ago
The glorious days before flat ui
- noir_lord 10y ago
  Flat can be fine with shadows (though if it has shadows is it flat?) and other hints but yes I think the desktop UI in particular reached it's peak with Win2k, everything since has been different but not better. These days I use XFCE with http://www.noobslab.com/2016/03/vivacious-colors-gtk-theme-suite.html http://www.noobslab.com/2016/03/vivacious-colors-gtk-theme-s... and it's nice.

nardi 10y ago

Nope, those look much better. I guess just...don't use the widgets.

creshal 10y ago
I'm fairly sure it's the same widgets, just with a better theme overlaid.
- sho_hn 10y ago
  No, it's Qt Quick vs. QWidget. QWidget was created in the pre-mobile days, and while still very useful to make high-quality work horse desktop apps, the mobile platforms are much better served by Qt Quick in terms of theming, animation and touch support. This fragmentation is frustrating sometimes, but in the end what counts is whether the framework has solutions to your problems, and it usually does. (Meanwhile, Qt Quick is improving on the desktop over time.)
  - pjmlp 10y ago
    This is why on an application I have done back in the 5.3 days, I decided to throw Qt away and rewrite it using standard C++ for the logic, with Java and C++/CX for the UI. I was much more productive and I had much better integration with the respective OS APIs.