3 ms·

That is not a fair take. Windows has multiple first party UI toolkits, Win32 simply being one of the oldest and most well known. The Windows ecosystem places a

That is not a fair take. Windows has multiple first party UI toolkits, Win32 simply being one of the oldest and most well known. The Windows ecosystem places a greater emphasis on binary and dependency level backwards compatibility compared to Unix style systems.

jchw 5y ago
The point I was making was that the distinction between native and non-native UI on Windows is very blurry, both by criteria one might define “native” UI (as windows UI libraries differ in how they are linked, distributed, and integrated with applications and the OS) and also by subjective criteria like look’n’feel. Even Windows itself can’t keep the story straight, and it isn’t improving dramatically in current Windows 11 previews, which feature a lot of different UI libraries and design languages across native apps. “First party UI toolkit” is a phrase that imparts some bias because it implies, in the frame of this discussion, that this is what makes a UI “native.” But even though that would be a workable criteria, it does have one serious problem: it’s utterly meaningless to the end user. It doesn’t imply almost anything about the user experience or the integration with the OS. It doesn’t really imply a whole lot to the developer anymore either. Compare this to the Linux desktop ecosystem, and it’s hard to tell much of a difference (other than the obvious fact that the Linux desktop is terrible :) — the UI toolkits feel similarly disjointed. Nothing feels “specifically” native. The only frame of reference is what your DE happens to use. Obviously, this all comes down to philosophy and I don’t mean to imply that this makes Windows worse except for in the more obvious ways (conflicting design language, look’n’feel, developer experience.) After all, even though I still believe macOS is ahead in this regard, I loathe to use macOS.
- ampdepolymerase 5y ago
  First party UI toolkit implies no bias. You are the one being biased by suggesting that open source/Linux-originated UI kits are somehow superior. The inability of the open source operating system ecosystem to deliver a coherent GUI is no fault of Microsoft or Apple. Ubuntu is going with Flutter, Google's answer to the GUI problem. The Linux foundation is to blame for the kernel not prioritising standardized systemland support for a consistent GUI. In commercial operating systems, the UI server/shell is not an after thought.

jchw 5y ago

The point I was making was that the distinction between native and non-native UI on Windows is very blurry, both by criteria one might define “native” UI (as windows UI libraries differ in how they are linked, distributed, and integrated with applications and the OS) and also by subjective criteria like look’n’feel. Even Windows itself can’t keep the story straight, and it isn’t improving dramatically in current Windows 11 previews, which feature a lot of different UI libraries and design languages across native apps. “First party UI toolkit” is a phrase that imparts some bias because it implies, in the frame of this discussion, that this is what makes a UI “native.” But even though that would be a workable criteria, it does have one serious problem: it’s utterly meaningless to the end user. It doesn’t imply almost anything about the user experience or the integration with the OS. It doesn’t really imply a whole lot to the developer anymore either. Compare this to the Linux desktop ecosystem, and it’s hard to tell much of a difference (other than the obvious fact that the Linux desktop is terrible :) — the UI toolkits feel similarly disjointed. Nothing feels “specifically” native. The only frame of reference is what your DE happens to use. Obviously, this all comes down to philosophy and I don’t mean to imply that this makes Windows worse except for in the more obvious ways (conflicting design language, look’n’feel, developer experience.) After all, even though I still believe macOS is ahead in this regard, I loathe to use macOS.

ampdepolymerase 5y ago
First party UI toolkit implies no bias. You are the one being biased by suggesting that open source/Linux-originated UI kits are somehow superior. The inability of the open source operating system ecosystem to deliver a coherent GUI is no fault of Microsoft or Apple. Ubuntu is going with Flutter, Google's answer to the GUI problem. The Linux foundation is to blame for the kernel not prioritising standardized systemland support for a consistent GUI. In commercial operating systems, the UI server/shell is not an after thought.