4 ms·
You shouldn't. I wish all these apps had a dumb basic mode (like gmail html mode) that would just show the photos in a static fashion so it's not a pain to brow
by nostalgeek 8y ago
You shouldn't. I wish all these apps had a dumb basic mode (like gmail html mode) that would just show the photos in a static fashion so it's not a pain to browse on low end mobile. The article is interesting, but just like onedrive photo galleries, these UI are often slow to scroll in and even reset randomly so when you're in the middle of a 100 photo gallery and it happens it's a bit frustrating.
Remember the old picasa UI? it just showed the photos, that's it, nothing fancy, on complicated calculations in js...
Also off topic ... but medium UI is getting worse and worse, on a laptop, fixed heading + fixed message on the bottom (that can't be dismissed), really? not much real estate left for the actual content. And don't get me started on the pictures that take 10 seconds to load, because of "lazy loading" bound to the scroll position...
- romwell 8y ago>Remember the old picasa UI? Oh, how Google would want you to forget it. It still runs circles around anything that came to replace it, while running on a decade-old machine managing 100GB+ of photos in mixed formats.
- scrollaway 8y agoI must be the only one on HN who despised the old picasa UI. I've been making more and more use of Google Photos because of how easy to use it is. Maybe these statements should be qualified. I'm an average user in terms of photos: I take them sometimes, usually from my phone, I don't like having lots of duplicates in various devices and I don't care to manage all the backups by myself; I just don't want to lose them. I'm not a professional photographer and it feels like there's a world of difference in terms of what UI one might want if they are. Kinda like as a professional developer I don't care for my text editor's ability to print pages, I want it to syntax highlight.