5 ms·
Interesting, in my experience GTK3+ apps have worse usability issues (especially on touch screen devices.) EDIT: I can't reply to your comment so I'll write th
by exfascist 5y ago
Interesting, in my experience GTK3+ apps have worse usability issues (especially on touch screen devices.)
EDIT: I can't reply to your comment so I'll write the reply here. Yes, on paper GTK3+ sounds like it would be more touch device friendly. They make up for it with absolutely awful, huge, modal UIs with low information density (missing scroll gestures with Xinput2 don't matter if you're not having to scroll all the time.)
- throwaway82652 5y agoI don't understand this reply at all. Xt has no support whatsoever for touch devices or gestures. GTK3/4 actually has proper support for most of the XInput2 features.
- throwaway82652 5y agoTo respond to your edit, I still don't understand this reply. "High information density" is also terrible for usability, that's a great way to make a confusing and cluttered GUI. I would describe most complex Xt programs as being that way. If you want to reply to deeper comments you can click the "X hours/minutes ago" title on the reply.
- exfascist 5y agoThanks for the tip. I think the fundamental disagreement here is on the definition of usability. Perhaps something like the product of ergonomics and discoverability? Cluttered UIs are visually distracting and harder to learn but the lack of modality is, IMO more ergonomic. That tradeoff always exists and I think the Gnome devs pretty consistently lean too far towards the easy to learn side which results in less usable UIs for everyone but people just learning the software for the first time.
- throwaway82652 5y agoI don't know what that has to do with being modal. The most famous example of a modal UI for Unix is probably vi, which has an interface that's so bad and confusing and unapproachable that not being able to exit the program is a meme, but yet it seems to be loved by hardcore Unix geeks.