5 ms·

> When it says gtk is "really really ugly", is it referring to API or UI? Both? Mostly the former? Largely the latter (depending on plattform)?

• rumanator 7y ago
  Aesthetically speaking, GTK is not ugly. Check Ubuntu 18.04 which adopted gnome3, thus has a Gtk+ UI.
  • blattimwind 7y ago
    "(depending on platform)" ... you are naming the one platform Gtk+ properly supports.
    • rumanator 7y ago
      I've demonstrated that Gtk+ is not ugly, and you don't get to claim it is if you choose to develop ugly applications with Gtk+.
      • lilyball 7y ago
        If you're doing cross-platform GUIs, "it looks good on Linux!" is not a compelling argument.
  • Polyisoprene 7y ago
    GTK still has extreme padding and wasted screen real estate around texts, images, lists and other component. Making a slim version and better designed UIs would probably make a lot of difference.
    • i80and 7y ago
      That's due to the GNOME HIG, which I agree is ugly. But GTK+ itself will render whatever padding you ask for.
      • Polyisoprene 7y ago
        It existed before Gnome and I’ve not yet seen any GTK interface that doesn’t seem like a slightly better looking Motif UI.
    • vetinari 7y ago
      On you typical laptop 14" FHD display, exactly this padding and sizing looks great (at @1x), while at 14" 1600x900 it still looks very good. Sure, on 1376x768 it looks terrible.
  • timw4mail 7y ago
    With default theming, GTK+2 looks like a bad ripoff of Windows 9x. (It's quite ugly, but not quite as bad as FLTK) GTK+3 has much better default theming.
    • cosarara 7y ago
      GTK+2 has been obsolete for almost a decade now.
      • ChickeNES 7y ago
        Unfortunately there's still a lot of legacy apps out there, and others where the dev unfortunately picked GTK2 despite 3 being available. Not to mention some GTK3 apps not including the proper themes