7 ms·

It is not "objectively god awful". I for one really like Blender's user interface and I have used both 3ds max and Maya before. Blender makes it so easy to swit

It is not "objectively god awful". I for one really like Blender's user interface and I have used both 3ds max and Maya before. Blender makes it so easy to switch views and only show things that are important to you. Granted, I also use Vim heavily. For both I head to read parts of the manual though. In my eyes, Blender is a production grade tool that can do really complex workflows. For tools like this I believe it is completely reasonable to ask users to read about the tool and its design decisions rather than making everything "intuitive".

knolan 8y ago
I love the 2.7* UI. The Vim comparison is extremely apt.
icelancer 8y ago
Vim is a perfect example of an insanely terrible user interface. That we all use it because it is powerful and also a shibboleth into devops/sysops/developers minds doesn't make it a good idea. It's just very convenient and powerful while also being the height of nerd cred. Also the OP is right from an objective POV, the Blender UI is absolutely brutal. I use a lot of tools in this industry for my job but my job is not specifically 3d work, so I am not expected to have deep mastery of any of the tools nor does it even help me, really. This is where a decent UI that is intuitive and helpful is important, and Blender for my colleagues and myself is practically unusable out of the box. It is, however, a great piece of software, as you all say. I totally agree there. But good lord the UI is horrific.
- nicoburns 8y ago
  Even with this new update?
- Joeboy 8y ago
  You've just described a subjective POV.
- tjoff 8y ago
  > and Blender for my colleagues and myself is practically unusable out of the box. You are confusing beginner friendly with user friendly. User friendly UIs are most often terrible for experts and expert UIs often have some learning curve. That said, I can not name a single application that has a better user interface than Blender. It is a masterpiece and I am in complete awe of whatever process and the people that created it.
  - iovrthoughtthis 8y ago
    Could you please identify the difference between beginner friendly and user friendly for me? I’m not convinced that there is one.
    - Joeboy 8y ago
      As in, you've never heard of it and suspect they've just made it up, or you're aware of the concept but have an unorthodox opinion about it? It's a very pervasive concept among UX people. If the former, try googling "learnability vs usability" or somesuch?
    - fao_ 8y ago
      "User Friendly" depends on the type of tasks that the user intends to accomplish, and the frequency of those tasks. The things that expert users intend to do are not necessarily the same things that beginner users intend to do. Essentially it is about the path-of-resistance between you and your goal. A beginner friendly UI might do X, Y, and Z. But complex tasks like scheduling X, Y, and Z, automating them based on other events, or even performing them rapidly in sequence, are likely to be given a higher path of resistance.
    - andybak 8y ago
      The key term to search for is "discoverabilty" although there are other important factors at play
    - jolmg 8y ago
      I think vim is user friendly but beginner unfriendly. For whatever task I want to do with text, vim will provide the easiest way to achieve it. However, to anyone that is not experienced with it, it will be the hardest way to achieve it. To put another way, it probably takes a couple minutes to learn and be proficient in windows notepad, and a couple months to learn and be proficient in vim. However, for a task that may take a couple months in notepad, it might take a couple of minutes in vim. I take beginner-friendly to be a more specific form of user-friendlyness. The usefulness of the concept is that it's common to see a UX and say it's not user-friendly, because it's not beginner-friendly. However, not all users are beginners. To someone that is proficient in both vim and notepad, vim is more user-friendly than notepad, because it is more friendly to him, the user, since it allows the completion of any task far easier.
- mikekchar 8y ago
  I often find that people conflate ease of use with ease of learning. Both Vim and Blender are very easy to use. Blender is astonishingly easy to use, in fact. I've been using it for video editing and it's ridiculously more efficient than anything else I've ever used. Both Vim and Blender are very hard to learn and discovery is extremely poor. There is just no way to figure it out without reading the manual. Even after you read the manual, you have to practice it frequently to get good at it. After that it's a dream. I don't really like characterising a UI as "good" or "bad" in a one dimensional perspective, because whether I will choose an easy to use or an easy to learn application depends entirely on what I'm going to be doing. For example, with video editing (and also code editing), I'm doing the same actions over and over and over and over again. I'm also combining actions in different ways and I want a kind of "UI grammar" that lets me efficiently express myself without searching around for some drop down or macro. I use these tools for hours on end, day after day. I don't really care about ease of learning -- I only care about easy of use and efficiency. For other things, I really care about ease of use. For example, I make New Years cards once a year. I want some software that helps me make a mailing list, print an image without screwing about, etc, etc. I don't want to spend more than about 30 seconds setting it. It needs to be intuitive. If anyone knows of such a thing for Gnu/Linux, I'd be very happy ;-). Frequently ease of use and efficiency are at odds with ease of learning. Best if you can do both, but often you have to compromise. Both Vim and Blender compromise a lot, but they are aiming at a particular niche. Not everybody likes them, but those that do love them. Some other applications compromise in other ways, and at least for my applications I don't find them appropriate. YMMV.
  - gregmac 8y ago
    I really like the contrast of ease of use vs ease of learning. However, I don't think designing an interface that is good for both is fundamentally difficult. The problem comes from evolution. In early versions, with only a few features, none of this requires a ton of thought. As features are added, it's rare that an overall UX re-design is undertaken, for a few reasons. For one, the people working on it and using it day to day are incrementally learning changes, and have time to adjust. In some cases they probably don't even notice the UX learning curve problem as it takes time to become apparent. For two, existing and power users will freak out if a new release changes shortcut keys or otherwise "moves the cheese". Think of the outrage if vim were to announce "we're changing all the commands to be fully consistent with each other, but it means every command you've spent years memorizing is now incorrect. Even for the most UX-focused team it's impossible to predict the feature set a product will have in 1, 2, or 5 years, so of course by the time you get there, the UX has issues.
- InGodsName 8y ago
  I'll give worst user interface to git.
  - yjftsjthsd-h 8y ago
    And I'll raise you CVS.
    - webmaven 8y ago
      RCS.
- ilaksh 8y ago
  Vim has modes because key combinations didn't exist on that computer it was invented on and neither did cursor keys. It was a decent design for the original context.
IshKebab 8y ago
Normally the fact that you had to read the manual is a sign that the UI is badly designed. Or at least that no effort has been made into making it discoverable. There is no conflict between usability and power. You can have very powerful interfaces that don't require a manual to use.
- TeMPOraL 8y ago
  No, for nontrivial software you can't, not without putting a manual in the UI, which is infeasible for advanced software and complex UI. You can max out on discoverability and consistently, but the user ultimately will have to learn, through reading or experimentation, how to use the program.
  - Farradfahren 8y ago
    I retract what i said - this is a remarkable release. The UI is execptionally readable now. They even replaced most of the icons with text- some profssional UI designer was at work here.
  - IshKebab 8y ago
    Yes that's exactly what you do. You effectively put the manual in the UI in the form of tooltips, "WhatsThis", first-use popups etc. Why would you think that is infeasible? Blender has even started improving on that front - after like 10 years of waiting it finally has tooltips! In what way are tooltips "infeasible for advanced software"?
    - Joeboy 8y ago
      > In what way are tooltips "infeasible for advanced software"? They aren't, and Blender has them. I think it's had them since I started using it, about three years ago I guess. Although they've definitely improved in that time.
      - IshKebab 8y ago
        Yes I mentioned they have finally added them. I've been using Blender a lot longer than 3 years and it is quite an embarrassment that it took them so long to add them. Looks like proper tooltips were added in 2014. Blender was first released in 1998! 1998! 16 years to add tooltips!
lostgame 8y ago
>> It is not "objectively god awful". That is, like, your, very rare, by my objective consensus, opinion, man. Honestly. Blender’s existence is a miracle. That it can exist at all, or has a serious user base compared to its commercial alternatives is baffling at best. I praise each and every one of the clearly dedicated developers who make it happen, and just because the following is true does certainly not mean I do not fully respect every ounce of effort that goes into it. Prior to this one, minor change, the UI/UX is actually one I display to my students (I teach UI/UX design on the side) as the single worst design in software history. The mouse click being one of the first of literally dozens of examples of undoing basic behaviour I’ve seen, practically ever. Case in point: I have seen at least a dozen of my students visibly cringe when they see the default UI/UX operations. Blender’s back-end is incredible. To call it’s front end a disaster would be far too high praise for it. It’s not awful, you’re right. It’s arguably the worst design in recent software history. In fact, I’d urge you to show me a worse-laid-out piece of widely-used software, so I may use it as the example instead.
- jake_the_third 8y ago
  I couldn't help but shake my head as I read your comment. Almost every single paragraph you wrote stems from your personal opinion. Not a single claim you made was substantiated by any sort of supporting data. Have you even preformed studies beyond "I don't like it and saw some students dislike it"? Have you studied how proficient users use it? As it stands, your comment is a long winded complaint that blender's interface design doesn't conform to your personal tastes. I, like GP, think Blender's interface is excellent given what it enables. The interface is consistently designed and well thought-out (mostly). The vast functionality of what blender can do is never one or two keystrokes away thanks to pan focus. Information is also grouped consistently and laid out clearly and logically. Pans allow you to easily arrange and rearrange your workspace according to the task at hand. Even menus and controls are (or can be) laid out clearly instead of being hidden deep somewhere because authors thought they wouldn't be used frequently. The interface was designed for serious long term users. It was not designed for casual or one-off users. I just hope you are also as eager to teach your students about interface design requirements inherent to heavily-used complex software as you are to share your objective opinions.

knolan 8y ago

I love the 2.7* UI. The Vim comparison is extremely apt.

icelancer 8y ago

Vim is a perfect example of an insanely terrible user interface. That we all use it because it is powerful and also a shibboleth into devops/sysops/developers minds doesn't make it a good idea. It's just very convenient and powerful while also being the height of nerd cred. Also the OP is right from an objective POV, the Blender UI is absolutely brutal. I use a lot of tools in this industry for my job but my job is not specifically 3d work, so I am not expected to have deep mastery of any of the tools nor does it even help me, really. This is where a decent UI that is intuitive and helpful is important, and Blender for my colleagues and myself is practically unusable out of the box. It is, however, a great piece of software, as you all say. I totally agree there. But good lord the UI is horrific.

nicoburns 8y ago
Even with this new update?
Joeboy 8y ago
You've just described a subjective POV.
tjoff 8y ago
> and Blender for my colleagues and myself is practically unusable out of the box. You are confusing beginner friendly with user friendly. User friendly UIs are most often terrible for experts and expert UIs often have some learning curve. That said, I can not name a single application that has a better user interface than Blender. It is a masterpiece and I am in complete awe of whatever process and the people that created it.
- iovrthoughtthis 8y ago
  Could you please identify the difference between beginner friendly and user friendly for me? I’m not convinced that there is one.
  - Joeboy 8y ago
    As in, you've never heard of it and suspect they've just made it up, or you're aware of the concept but have an unorthodox opinion about it? It's a very pervasive concept among UX people. If the former, try googling "learnability vs usability" or somesuch?
  - fao_ 8y ago
    "User Friendly" depends on the type of tasks that the user intends to accomplish, and the frequency of those tasks. The things that expert users intend to do are not necessarily the same things that beginner users intend to do. Essentially it is about the path-of-resistance between you and your goal. A beginner friendly UI might do X, Y, and Z. But complex tasks like scheduling X, Y, and Z, automating them based on other events, or even performing them rapidly in sequence, are likely to be given a higher path of resistance.
  - andybak 8y ago
    The key term to search for is "discoverabilty" although there are other important factors at play
  - jolmg 8y ago
    I think vim is user friendly but beginner unfriendly. For whatever task I want to do with text, vim will provide the easiest way to achieve it. However, to anyone that is not experienced with it, it will be the hardest way to achieve it. To put another way, it probably takes a couple minutes to learn and be proficient in windows notepad, and a couple months to learn and be proficient in vim. However, for a task that may take a couple months in notepad, it might take a couple of minutes in vim. I take beginner-friendly to be a more specific form of user-friendlyness. The usefulness of the concept is that it's common to see a UX and say it's not user-friendly, because it's not beginner-friendly. However, not all users are beginners. To someone that is proficient in both vim and notepad, vim is more user-friendly than notepad, because it is more friendly to him, the user, since it allows the completion of any task far easier.
mikekchar 8y ago
I often find that people conflate ease of use with ease of learning. Both Vim and Blender are very easy to use. Blender is astonishingly easy to use, in fact. I've been using it for video editing and it's ridiculously more efficient than anything else I've ever used. Both Vim and Blender are very hard to learn and discovery is extremely poor. There is just no way to figure it out without reading the manual. Even after you read the manual, you have to practice it frequently to get good at it. After that it's a dream. I don't really like characterising a UI as "good" or "bad" in a one dimensional perspective, because whether I will choose an easy to use or an easy to learn application depends entirely on what I'm going to be doing. For example, with video editing (and also code editing), I'm doing the same actions over and over and over and over again. I'm also combining actions in different ways and I want a kind of "UI grammar" that lets me efficiently express myself without searching around for some drop down or macro. I use these tools for hours on end, day after day. I don't really care about ease of learning -- I only care about easy of use and efficiency. For other things, I really care about ease of use. For example, I make New Years cards once a year. I want some software that helps me make a mailing list, print an image without screwing about, etc, etc. I don't want to spend more than about 30 seconds setting it. It needs to be intuitive. If anyone knows of such a thing for Gnu/Linux, I'd be very happy ;-). Frequently ease of use and efficiency are at odds with ease of learning. Best if you can do both, but often you have to compromise. Both Vim and Blender compromise a lot, but they are aiming at a particular niche. Not everybody likes them, but those that do love them. Some other applications compromise in other ways, and at least for my applications I don't find them appropriate. YMMV.
- gregmac 8y ago
  I really like the contrast of ease of use vs ease of learning. However, I don't think designing an interface that is good for both is fundamentally difficult. The problem comes from evolution. In early versions, with only a few features, none of this requires a ton of thought. As features are added, it's rare that an overall UX re-design is undertaken, for a few reasons. For one, the people working on it and using it day to day are incrementally learning changes, and have time to adjust. In some cases they probably don't even notice the UX learning curve problem as it takes time to become apparent. For two, existing and power users will freak out if a new release changes shortcut keys or otherwise "moves the cheese". Think of the outrage if vim were to announce "we're changing all the commands to be fully consistent with each other, but it means every command you've spent years memorizing is now incorrect. Even for the most UX-focused team it's impossible to predict the feature set a product will have in 1, 2, or 5 years, so of course by the time you get there, the UX has issues.
InGodsName 8y ago
I'll give worst user interface to git.
- yjftsjthsd-h 8y ago
  And I'll raise you CVS.
  - webmaven 8y ago
    RCS.
ilaksh 8y ago
Vim has modes because key combinations didn't exist on that computer it was invented on and neither did cursor keys. It was a decent design for the original context.

IshKebab 8y ago

Normally the fact that you had to read the manual is a sign that the UI is badly designed. Or at least that no effort has been made into making it discoverable. There is no conflict between usability and power. You can have very powerful interfaces that don't require a manual to use.

TeMPOraL 8y ago
No, for nontrivial software you can't, not without putting a manual in the UI, which is infeasible for advanced software and complex UI. You can max out on discoverability and consistently, but the user ultimately will have to learn, through reading or experimentation, how to use the program.
- Farradfahren 8y ago
  I retract what i said - this is a remarkable release. The UI is execptionally readable now. They even replaced most of the icons with text- some profssional UI designer was at work here.
- IshKebab 8y ago
  Yes that's exactly what you do. You effectively put the manual in the UI in the form of tooltips, "WhatsThis", first-use popups etc. Why would you think that is infeasible? Blender has even started improving on that front - after like 10 years of waiting it finally has tooltips! In what way are tooltips "infeasible for advanced software"?
  - Joeboy 8y ago
    > In what way are tooltips "infeasible for advanced software"? They aren't, and Blender has them. I think it's had them since I started using it, about three years ago I guess. Although they've definitely improved in that time.
    - IshKebab 8y ago
      Yes I mentioned they have finally added them. I've been using Blender a lot longer than 3 years and it is quite an embarrassment that it took them so long to add them. Looks like proper tooltips were added in 2014. Blender was first released in 1998! 1998! 16 years to add tooltips!

lostgame 8y ago

>> It is not "objectively god awful". That is, like, your, very rare, by my objective consensus, opinion, man. Honestly. Blender’s existence is a miracle. That it can exist at all, or has a serious user base compared to its commercial alternatives is baffling at best. I praise each and every one of the clearly dedicated developers who make it happen, and just because the following is true does certainly not mean I do not fully respect every ounce of effort that goes into it. Prior to this one, minor change, the UI/UX is actually one I display to my students (I teach UI/UX design on the side) as the single worst design in software history. The mouse click being one of the first of literally dozens of examples of undoing basic behaviour I’ve seen, practically ever. Case in point: I have seen at least a dozen of my students visibly cringe when they see the default UI/UX operations. Blender’s back-end is incredible. To call it’s front end a disaster would be far too high praise for it. It’s not awful, you’re right. It’s arguably the worst design in recent software history. In fact, I’d urge you to show me a worse-laid-out piece of widely-used software, so I may use it as the example instead.

jake_the_third 8y ago
I couldn't help but shake my head as I read your comment. Almost every single paragraph you wrote stems from your personal opinion. Not a single claim you made was substantiated by any sort of supporting data. Have you even preformed studies beyond "I don't like it and saw some students dislike it"? Have you studied how proficient users use it? As it stands, your comment is a long winded complaint that blender's interface design doesn't conform to your personal tastes. I, like GP, think Blender's interface is excellent given what it enables. The interface is consistently designed and well thought-out (mostly). The vast functionality of what blender can do is never one or two keystrokes away thanks to pan focus. Information is also grouped consistently and laid out clearly and logically. Pans allow you to easily arrange and rearrange your workspace according to the task at hand. Even menus and controls are (or can be) laid out clearly instead of being hidden deep somewhere because authors thought they wouldn't be used frequently. The interface was designed for serious long term users. It was not designed for casual or one-off users. I just hope you are also as eager to teach your students about interface design requirements inherent to heavily-used complex software as you are to share your objective opinions.