10 ms·

Your entire comment feels awfully dismissive and egocentric. The author presents valid and sensible issues with the state of theming on the GNOME platform. And

Your entire comment feels awfully dismissive and egocentric. The author presents valid and sensible issues with the state of theming on the GNOME platform. And the overarching topic is essentially User Experience. Even the slightest change in color can introduce friction between UI elements. Or to be more extreme, if a theme turns your entire app into a white blurry mess, you would get mad at the application, and not the theme. Although many of the same design principles are used in the making of either a chair or a graphical user interface, they are definitely not the same in any regard. On the topic of icons: just like language, they evolve over time. On top of that, icons can have different meaning depending on your background. Icons can be combined to form a composite icon, and now imagine one of those icons is not displayed as you intended it to be. The entire meaning can change because the design intentions are lost. On the topic of branding: it's not about your desktop being a billboard. It's about being able to recognize the brand across different operating systems, and it's also - more or less - the only thing about the product that is not designed for the purpose of user experience (but in a sense, they still are). And let's be honest: most apps we use in our day to day life have very tame brands and adhere to certain standards. That is because the apps we use are usually good, and we throw the bad, obnoxious ones away really quickly. All in all, the author presents valid concerns, especially if you don't project them on how you prefer your UI, but rather, how potential Linux / GNOME users could have additional difficulties because of theming issues.

loudtieblahblah 7y ago
The fact gnome people are so draconian in controlling my user experience is why I stopped using that ghetto desktop environment and any environment dependent on it. It's bad enough gnome depending on systemd was the thing that forced systemd down all our throat, no matter the distro. It's bad enough that they made it hard or removed options to endless apps and the only way you can theme is essentially via a hack. Now you all are arguing we shouldn't theme at all. Godwins Law and all you're all a bunch of nazis.
anoncake 7y ago
> Your entire comment feels awfully dismissive and egocentric. Actually, it's dismissive of the app developers' egocentrism. In so far as theming breaks usability, they do have a point. Distributions shouldn't make potentially incompatible changes to the default theme without QA. But it's not all the fault of distributions and not respecting branding is not a UX problem. Yes, I may be too harsh towards people voluntarily writing free software. Developers putting their branding and their "vision" before usability and user control is just a major pet peeve of mine. And diplomacy is not my strong point. > Even the slightest change in color can introduce friction between UI elements. Or to be more extreme, if a theme turns your entire app into a white blurry mess, you would get mad at the application, and not the theme. Actually I would blame the theme, but yeah, the average user would. Wrongly assigned blame is a broader issue with free software and the distribution system though. > On the topic of icons: just like language, they evolve over time. The XDG Icon Naming Specification does not actually specify the names of concrete icons, but of meanings. For example, there is no "looking-glass" icon, but there is a "system-search" icon. If you use the "system-search" icon to display a looking glass because that's the metaphor the icon theme you're testing with uses, your application may display the wrong icon with a different icon theme. If an application needs an icon that is not standardized, it can include it similarly to its own application icon. > It's about being able to recognize the brand across different operating systems No, it's about the user recognizing the application. Which they can. The Firefox icon the open letter used as an example is very much the Firefox icon, just in a different style. > it's also [...] not designed for the purpose of user experience (but in a sense, they still are) Exactly. User experience >>> branding.
- TheRealDunkirk 7y ago
  > And diplomacy is not my strong point. As someone who struggles with this too: The world doesn't care that you own it and admit it; they only care if you fix it, or at least work around it for them.
- tinus_hn 7y ago
  It’s the same mindset that gave us obligatory Web Fonts. I control my computer not some developer or website builder.
  - spronkey 7y ago
    Web Fonts are a bit different - it's still semantically just text, and you have the option to override with a user stylesheet. For many websites, web fonts have been an improvement, especially considering the sorry state of "web-safe" fonts back in the day.
- spronkey 7y ago
  Well said. The Firefox/Thunderbird example is absolutely ridiculous - it's not up to these application developers to decide what icon or colour the user sees. It's up to them to provide defaults. As you say, it's clearly still Firefox - but even if it weren't, there are several good reasons I can think of that a distribution might want to change it. What bugs me is the attitude that the solution is to reduce the usage of themes, as opposed to improve the theme engines and app dev toolkits. Why shouldn't the OS be able to impose a global stylesheet for colours, images used for semantic icons, sizes of common elements? If I, as a user, want to starting fiddling with my system theme, is it not likely that I might want all the apps on the system to play ball? Sounds pretty jarring to me to have one or two apps with their stubborn hardcoded "branding". (Oh wait, that's what we already have with Electron apps that don't respect the OS theme or conventions, and they suck!). Oh, apps can't be restyled without manual work they say. "Until this perception changes..." they say. NO! In an ideal world, applications could be built easily in such a way that allowed them to be themed without causing major UI bugs. The fact that this is such a large issue with GTK apps is surely further evidence that GTK has a bit of a problem - especially considering that other UI platforms are able to do a better job. Perhaps - and I'm really pushing it here (/s) - solving the root causes of issues arising from custom themes relating to sizing and spacing might actually have other benefits as well. Like better support for UI scaling. Maybe the scope of themes needs to be reduced a little so it's easier for application developers to support?
Zenst 7y ago
It's not so egocentric if you factor in the fashion aspect. Not everybody wears the same matching clothes. Then more crucial aspects of ability - such as eyesight being a major one. Some people can't see some colours that well, some need larger fonts. Things like that in which theme's are the saviour and for many a developer - how they cater for disability usage. Sure some theme's can break the UI, but to blame the user, which is the case here - now that's egocentric IMHO. As for branding - how many users care about that?
- pushpop 7y ago
  The letter is about distributions not end users. It says end users are allowed to do as they wish. So that accessibility concern is covered.
  - anoncake 7y ago
    It says distributions should not theme because it doesn't work. If theming doesn't work when a distribution does it, it doesn't work either when an end user does it for accessibility.
    - pushpop 7y ago
      Actually no that’s not what it said. Or at least not in the way that your terse paraphrased summary suggests. What it actually does is list a number of reasons why distro themes are bad (in their opinion). Some of those reasons amarettos equally true for end users theming and some of those reasons are not. The letter also does say that end users are welcome to theme themselves but they should do so under the knowledge that there be (potential) dragons. What it doesn’t say is that theming “doesn’t work” Personally speaking, I’m on the fence about whether I agree that distro theming is bad. However I do think their points are perfectly valid and that a considerable number of HN commentators have taken the letter completely out of context. Edit: and I’m also a little peeved that there is so much knee jerk down voting of comments on here. Particularly when those comments are quite literally correct. It’s a really pity you guys couldn’t be bothered to read the letter before abusing your right to moderate.
NeedMoreTea 7y ago
The only egocentrism I see is all in the pompous article requesting that users do not make perfectly reasonable choices on their own computers. Then attempts to justify on some absurdly contrived grounds. Neither reasonable nor sensible. Imagine if Apple asked users not to apply stickers to their laptop as it denies Apple the possibility to control their brand, or could make the laptop look broken, even unusable - shock I may even apply a sticker that shows a broken circuit board or simulates cracked aluminium. Apple's view is that applying a sticker to the case or keyboard render Appley documentation useless as they don't look like the pictures we screenshotted in moments. > Even the slightest change in color can introduce friction between UI elements Yeah, and? They might be the difference between unusable discomfort and usable, or allow ageing eyes to cope with arrogant and restricted developer choices, or missing sense of aesthetic. You might not like the colour car I buy or the decorating scheme I choose for my house. Mind your own damn business. > On the topic of branding Yeah, about that. It's branding that has led computer and phone makers to give highly limited theming capability. Firefox or my desktop is no longer my own to adjust and fiddle to unusability (sic) or perfection - as I see fit. Like the paint I use inside my house, mind your own damn business. I might LIKE my phone, Windows box and Linux box to all look highly distinct from each other for my own personal reasons. Mind your own damn business. It is not another surface on which to stimulate my neurons to be further programmed by the brand. Baa. Edit: Specifically on icons, I have been changing icons since the days of Workbench 1.3 in about 1986 or 87. I won't stop now. I've chosen wildly different icons for some apps at times - because they worked better for me. Icons as space for a logo is an entirely negative fashion to my mind as I prefer a hint, however vague, of what that a rarely used app does.
- detaro 7y ago
  It EXPLICITLY says that it does not talk about users changing things on their machines, but wants it to be something the user sets instead of a distro applying by default.
  - anoncake 7y ago
    Choosing a Linux distro with a specific theme rather than one using Adwaita or sticking with the pre-installed Windows is the user changing things on their machine.
no_identd 7y ago
The color change-inducing-friction complaint seems like an issue with lack of built-in theme sanity checking. There exist numerous partial solutions for this already, I'll link to the four best ones I know, albeit I wish someone would combine their approaches into one unified super-product: 1. http://www.hsluv.org/examples/ http://www.hsluv.org/examples/ These palettes will absolutely NEVER clash. But they might have contrast issues. Which brings us to: 2. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19800718 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19800718 Lyft primarily designed ColorBox.io to always reach WCAG 2.0 contrast ratios. Something I'd claim a ton of UX themes mess up. Unfortunately from what I can tell, it lacks the anti-clash guarantees of #1 3. Much less related, but still important, albeit only for very specific parts of any UX: The color map generation approach in Matplotlib: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xAoljeRJ3lU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xAoljeRJ3lU (btw.: Seaborn, as mentioned in #1, builds on top of Matplotlib.) For even more color madness, see this recent Hacker News comment by me as well as the other comments linked to there: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19983604 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19983604
- quotemstr 7y ago
  Thanks! Those are all super useful tools. I'm terrible at picking colors myself.
  - no_identd 7y ago
    Adobe also has a very interesting color picker: https://color.adobe.com/ https://color.adobe.com/ But, unfortunately, it too only serves as a partial solution (since, as far as I know—someone please correct me if I got that wrong—it doesn't address any of the matters discussed above), PLUS it seems highly likely that Adobe has software patents on it.
dleslie 7y ago
> Even the slightest change in color can introduce friction between UI elements. No two displays that I own produce the same colours. It depends on the hardware, the brightness, the daytime colour cycling I have, and so on. I feel like if slight changes to colour can wreck your app then your app leans too heavily on colour reproduction.
dleslie 7y ago
> Your entire comment feels awfully dismissive and egocentric. I've had this comment on my mind for about an hour now, and it strikes me as both correct and yet the behaviour you identify is inoffensive to me in this context. In particular, I don't disagree with users behaving in an egocentric manner regarding their desktop environment, the software they choose, and the way their hardware operates. That's an intimate and personal space where many spend most of their waking hours; they ought to feel empowered to control and operate it as they wish. And if that's the case, it may be warranted to have a dismissive attitude towards those who would undermine that power.
- bepvte 7y ago
  Did you read the original post? Its about distributions providing themes, not users who tweak their desktops.
  - dleslie 7y ago
    I did. Two things to consider: - Distributions are users - Users may choose a distribution that suits their desired aesthetic Not everyone who wants a custom desktop aesthetic is technically adept enough to undertake the customization themselves, or perhaps they simply don't want to expend the effort. That's where distributions come in to assist.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
quotemstr 7y ago
> Your entire comment feels awfully dismissive What's dismissive is this word "dismissive". Sometimes, a comment really is just a random low-effort personal swipe that don't engage with the substance of the subject. The GP did not write one of those comments. Instead, wrote a valid and substantive critique of the article, and you don't get to score rhetorical points by smearing that work with vague labels like "dismissive".
paulie_a 7y ago
The author presents valid concerns, but the user is still higher priority. The consistent theme across apps is more important than the developer's brand. Suggestions for a theme is useful, essentially ordering others how to use their app and theme should be outright dismissed.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
pmontra 7y ago
> And the overarching topic is essentially User Experience. Which is User experience and not Developer experience. As a developer I can agree with them but as a user I couldn't care less about their brand. Sorry if I sound rude. It's not as if they are paying me to keep their brand consistent among desktops. I theme a little my desktop because I like the general idea of the GNOME desktop but I don't like many of their graphical choices. Colors, scrollbars, margins are all wrong IMHO. I'm sorry that those developers are suffering and I know that somebody is thinking about reducing the ability to theme GNOME, but I'll keep doing it as long as I can and if I screw something (my emacs scrollbars) it's on me.

loudtieblahblah 7y ago

The fact gnome people are so draconian in controlling my user experience is why I stopped using that ghetto desktop environment and any environment dependent on it. It's bad enough gnome depending on systemd was the thing that forced systemd down all our throat, no matter the distro. It's bad enough that they made it hard or removed options to endless apps and the only way you can theme is essentially via a hack. Now you all are arguing we shouldn't theme at all. Godwins Law and all you're all a bunch of nazis.

anoncake 7y ago

> Your entire comment feels awfully dismissive and egocentric. Actually, it's dismissive of the app developers' egocentrism. In so far as theming breaks usability, they do have a point. Distributions shouldn't make potentially incompatible changes to the default theme without QA. But it's not all the fault of distributions and not respecting branding is not a UX problem. Yes, I may be too harsh towards people voluntarily writing free software. Developers putting their branding and their "vision" before usability and user control is just a major pet peeve of mine. And diplomacy is not my strong point. > Even the slightest change in color can introduce friction between UI elements. Or to be more extreme, if a theme turns your entire app into a white blurry mess, you would get mad at the application, and not the theme. Actually I would blame the theme, but yeah, the average user would. Wrongly assigned blame is a broader issue with free software and the distribution system though. > On the topic of icons: just like language, they evolve over time. The XDG Icon Naming Specification does not actually specify the names of concrete icons, but of meanings. For example, there is no "looking-glass" icon, but there is a "system-search" icon. If you use the "system-search" icon to display a looking glass because that's the metaphor the icon theme you're testing with uses, your application may display the wrong icon with a different icon theme. If an application needs an icon that is not standardized, it can include it similarly to its own application icon. > It's about being able to recognize the brand across different operating systems No, it's about the user recognizing the application. Which they can. The Firefox icon the open letter used as an example is very much the Firefox icon, just in a different style. > it's also [...] not designed for the purpose of user experience (but in a sense, they still are) Exactly. User experience >>> branding.

TheRealDunkirk 7y ago
> And diplomacy is not my strong point. As someone who struggles with this too: The world doesn't care that you own it and admit it; they only care if you fix it, or at least work around it for them.
tinus_hn 7y ago
It’s the same mindset that gave us obligatory Web Fonts. I control my computer not some developer or website builder.
- spronkey 7y ago
  Web Fonts are a bit different - it's still semantically just text, and you have the option to override with a user stylesheet. For many websites, web fonts have been an improvement, especially considering the sorry state of "web-safe" fonts back in the day.
spronkey 7y ago
Well said. The Firefox/Thunderbird example is absolutely ridiculous - it's not up to these application developers to decide what icon or colour the user sees. It's up to them to provide defaults. As you say, it's clearly still Firefox - but even if it weren't, there are several good reasons I can think of that a distribution might want to change it. What bugs me is the attitude that the solution is to reduce the usage of themes, as opposed to improve the theme engines and app dev toolkits. Why shouldn't the OS be able to impose a global stylesheet for colours, images used for semantic icons, sizes of common elements? If I, as a user, want to starting fiddling with my system theme, is it not likely that I might want all the apps on the system to play ball? Sounds pretty jarring to me to have one or two apps with their stubborn hardcoded "branding". (Oh wait, that's what we already have with Electron apps that don't respect the OS theme or conventions, and they suck!). Oh, apps can't be restyled without manual work they say. "Until this perception changes..." they say. NO! In an ideal world, applications could be built easily in such a way that allowed them to be themed without causing major UI bugs. The fact that this is such a large issue with GTK apps is surely further evidence that GTK has a bit of a problem - especially considering that other UI platforms are able to do a better job. Perhaps - and I'm really pushing it here (/s) - solving the root causes of issues arising from custom themes relating to sizing and spacing might actually have other benefits as well. Like better support for UI scaling. Maybe the scope of themes needs to be reduced a little so it's easier for application developers to support?

Zenst 7y ago

It's not so egocentric if you factor in the fashion aspect. Not everybody wears the same matching clothes. Then more crucial aspects of ability - such as eyesight being a major one. Some people can't see some colours that well, some need larger fonts. Things like that in which theme's are the saviour and for many a developer - how they cater for disability usage. Sure some theme's can break the UI, but to blame the user, which is the case here - now that's egocentric IMHO. As for branding - how many users care about that?

pushpop 7y ago
The letter is about distributions not end users. It says end users are allowed to do as they wish. So that accessibility concern is covered.
- anoncake 7y ago
  It says distributions should not theme because it doesn't work. If theming doesn't work when a distribution does it, it doesn't work either when an end user does it for accessibility.
  - pushpop 7y ago
    Actually no that’s not what it said. Or at least not in the way that your terse paraphrased summary suggests. What it actually does is list a number of reasons why distro themes are bad (in their opinion). Some of those reasons amarettos equally true for end users theming and some of those reasons are not. The letter also does say that end users are welcome to theme themselves but they should do so under the knowledge that there be (potential) dragons. What it doesn’t say is that theming “doesn’t work” Personally speaking, I’m on the fence about whether I agree that distro theming is bad. However I do think their points are perfectly valid and that a considerable number of HN commentators have taken the letter completely out of context. Edit: and I’m also a little peeved that there is so much knee jerk down voting of comments on here. Particularly when those comments are quite literally correct. It’s a really pity you guys couldn’t be bothered to read the letter before abusing your right to moderate.

NeedMoreTea 7y ago

The only egocentrism I see is all in the pompous article requesting that users do not make perfectly reasonable choices on their own computers. Then attempts to justify on some absurdly contrived grounds. Neither reasonable nor sensible. Imagine if Apple asked users not to apply stickers to their laptop as it denies Apple the possibility to control their brand, or could make the laptop look broken, even unusable - shock I may even apply a sticker that shows a broken circuit board or simulates cracked aluminium. Apple's view is that applying a sticker to the case or keyboard render Appley documentation useless as they don't look like the pictures we screenshotted in moments. > Even the slightest change in color can introduce friction between UI elements Yeah, and? They might be the difference between unusable discomfort and usable, or allow ageing eyes to cope with arrogant and restricted developer choices, or missing sense of aesthetic. You might not like the colour car I buy or the decorating scheme I choose for my house. Mind your own damn business. > On the topic of branding Yeah, about that. It's branding that has led computer and phone makers to give highly limited theming capability. Firefox or my desktop is no longer my own to adjust and fiddle to unusability (sic) or perfection - as I see fit. Like the paint I use inside my house, mind your own damn business. I might LIKE my phone, Windows box and Linux box to all look highly distinct from each other for my own personal reasons. Mind your own damn business. It is not another surface on which to stimulate my neurons to be further programmed by the brand. Baa. Edit: Specifically on icons, I have been changing icons since the days of Workbench 1.3 in about 1986 or 87. I won't stop now. I've chosen wildly different icons for some apps at times - because they worked better for me. Icons as space for a logo is an entirely negative fashion to my mind as I prefer a hint, however vague, of what that a rarely used app does.

detaro 7y ago
It EXPLICITLY says that it does not talk about users changing things on their machines, but wants it to be something the user sets instead of a distro applying by default.
- anoncake 7y ago
  Choosing a Linux distro with a specific theme rather than one using Adwaita or sticking with the pre-installed Windows is the user changing things on their machine.

no_identd 7y ago

The color change-inducing-friction complaint seems like an issue with lack of built-in theme sanity checking. There exist numerous partial solutions for this already, I'll link to the four best ones I know, albeit I wish someone would combine their approaches into one unified super-product: 1. http://www.hsluv.org/examples/ http://www.hsluv.org/examples/ These palettes will absolutely NEVER clash. But they might have contrast issues. Which brings us to: 2. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19800718 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19800718 Lyft primarily designed ColorBox.io to always reach WCAG 2.0 contrast ratios. Something I'd claim a ton of UX themes mess up. Unfortunately from what I can tell, it lacks the anti-clash guarantees of #1 3. Much less related, but still important, albeit only for very specific parts of any UX: The color map generation approach in Matplotlib: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xAoljeRJ3lU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xAoljeRJ3lU (btw.: Seaborn, as mentioned in #1, builds on top of Matplotlib.) For even more color madness, see this recent Hacker News comment by me as well as the other comments linked to there: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19983604 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19983604

quotemstr 7y ago
Thanks! Those are all super useful tools. I'm terrible at picking colors myself.
- no_identd 7y ago
  Adobe also has a very interesting color picker: https://color.adobe.com/ https://color.adobe.com/ But, unfortunately, it too only serves as a partial solution (since, as far as I know—someone please correct me if I got that wrong—it doesn't address any of the matters discussed above), PLUS it seems highly likely that Adobe has software patents on it.

dleslie 7y ago

> Even the slightest change in color can introduce friction between UI elements. No two displays that I own produce the same colours. It depends on the hardware, the brightness, the daytime colour cycling I have, and so on. I feel like if slight changes to colour can wreck your app then your app leans too heavily on colour reproduction.

dleslie 7y ago

> Your entire comment feels awfully dismissive and egocentric. I've had this comment on my mind for about an hour now, and it strikes me as both correct and yet the behaviour you identify is inoffensive to me in this context. In particular, I don't disagree with users behaving in an egocentric manner regarding their desktop environment, the software they choose, and the way their hardware operates. That's an intimate and personal space where many spend most of their waking hours; they ought to feel empowered to control and operate it as they wish. And if that's the case, it may be warranted to have a dismissive attitude towards those who would undermine that power.

bepvte 7y ago
Did you read the original post? Its about distributions providing themes, not users who tweak their desktops.
- dleslie 7y ago
  I did. Two things to consider: - Distributions are users - Users may choose a distribution that suits their desired aesthetic Not everyone who wants a custom desktop aesthetic is technically adept enough to undertake the customization themselves, or perhaps they simply don't want to expend the effort. That's where distributions come in to assist.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

quotemstr 7y ago

> Your entire comment feels awfully dismissive What's dismissive is this word "dismissive". Sometimes, a comment really is just a random low-effort personal swipe that don't engage with the substance of the subject. The GP did not write one of those comments. Instead, wrote a valid and substantive critique of the article, and you don't get to score rhetorical points by smearing that work with vague labels like "dismissive".

paulie_a 7y ago

The author presents valid concerns, but the user is still higher priority. The consistent theme across apps is more important than the developer's brand. Suggestions for a theme is useful, essentially ordering others how to use their app and theme should be outright dismissed.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

pmontra 7y ago

> And the overarching topic is essentially User Experience. Which is User experience and not Developer experience. As a developer I can agree with them but as a user I couldn't care less about their brand. Sorry if I sound rude. It's not as if they are paying me to keep their brand consistent among desktops. I theme a little my desktop because I like the general idea of the GNOME desktop but I don't like many of their graphical choices. Colors, scrollbars, margins are all wrong IMHO. I'm sorry that those developers are suffering and I know that somebody is thinking about reducing the ability to theme GNOME, but I'll keep doing it as long as I can and if I screw something (my emacs scrollbars) it's on me.