2 ms·

> The Linux desktop can't even run applications in a consistent style. Now that I'm actually using Windows again on a regular basis, it really baffles me that

by pxc 4y ago

> The Linux desktop can't even run applications in a consistent style. Now that I'm actually using Windows again on a regular basis, it really baffles me that people say this. Like, turn dark mode on and have fun getting blinded when random parts of the builtin Settings app are actually links to Control Panel, which just doesn't support dark mode at all and uses totally different widgets. Or try to fight a headache when some Java app has really blurry font rendering for some reason, even though the toolkit looks semi-native for Windows apps from 10 years ago. And have fun with all the Electron apps that completely ignore the native look and feel. There is no OS where all apps have visual consistency. Idk why people pretend this is uniquely a freedesktop problem.

jeroenhd 4y ago
It's far from uniquely a freedesktop problem. There's one platform I know of whose applications, with the exception of Electron junk, mostly follows system design guidelines and that's macOS. It's far from perfect, but it's the best out there at the moment. Windows used to have about the same level of consistency in the Vista and 7 age. I think Microsoft has ruined their design uniformity the day Windows 8 came out. Windows 8.1, then 10, then 10 again, and now 11, all added their own little inconsistencies to a system that hadn't been fully ported to the new UI yet. However, in my opinion the inconsistencies are rarely ever by design, except for Electron/Tauri/etc. applications because web developers consider themselves above concepts like "consistency" and "using system standards". The move from native to specialised, slightly outdated browsers has been a regression in usability in many aspects and the proposed solutions seem to be to switch to a dedicated, up to date browser rather than to look for consistency. I usually run most Electron apps in my browser instead because the "native" part of the application never seems to add anything, really, though sometimes developers don't port features to the web version. Qt can copy the native look and feel quite easily but GNOME chooses not to expose a usable native look and feel unless you port the entire thing over to GTK+. In return, GTK+ doesn't even try to come close to a native look and feel. If Qt and Wine applications don't look entirely native, that's because of technical challenges or a lack of free time to invest in platform behaviour. In these opinionated desktop environments and SDKs, the problem is actually a conscious choice: "our system looks better than your so suck it" rather than "we don't have time to make our UI look perfect on your system". When developers choose frameworks that don't look consistent that's either because of cost effectiveness, lack of knowledge of native languages, or sometimes simple laziness. Those reasons can be annoying but they're understandable. The real problem lies with the platforms themselves for not exposing easy methods to gain consistency. That's why I blame Electron more than Spotify or Slack, and why I have such a dislike of Java's GUI libraries, GTK+, and GNOME.
- pxc 4y ago
  GTK+ apps usually look okay on Plasma, at least for GTK3. The only one I routinely run these days is Firefox. Did they break the integration approach the KDE folks use for getting GTK+ apps to look good with GTK4? I know there were other changes to how theming works that caused some controversy.

by pxc 4y ago

jeroenhd 4y ago

It's far from uniquely a freedesktop problem. There's one platform I know of whose applications, with the exception of Electron junk, mostly follows system design guidelines and that's macOS. It's far from perfect, but it's the best out there at the moment. Windows used to have about the same level of consistency in the Vista and 7 age. I think Microsoft has ruined their design uniformity the day Windows 8 came out. Windows 8.1, then 10, then 10 again, and now 11, all added their own little inconsistencies to a system that hadn't been fully ported to the new UI yet. However, in my opinion the inconsistencies are rarely ever by design, except for Electron/Tauri/etc. applications because web developers consider themselves above concepts like "consistency" and "using system standards". The move from native to specialised, slightly outdated browsers has been a regression in usability in many aspects and the proposed solutions seem to be to switch to a dedicated, up to date browser rather than to look for consistency. I usually run most Electron apps in my browser instead because the "native" part of the application never seems to add anything, really, though sometimes developers don't port features to the web version. Qt can copy the native look and feel quite easily but GNOME chooses not to expose a usable native look and feel unless you port the entire thing over to GTK+. In return, GTK+ doesn't even try to come close to a native look and feel. If Qt and Wine applications don't look entirely native, that's because of technical challenges or a lack of free time to invest in platform behaviour. In these opinionated desktop environments and SDKs, the problem is actually a conscious choice: "our system looks better than your so suck it" rather than "we don't have time to make our UI look perfect on your system". When developers choose frameworks that don't look consistent that's either because of cost effectiveness, lack of knowledge of native languages, or sometimes simple laziness. Those reasons can be annoying but they're understandable. The real problem lies with the platforms themselves for not exposing easy methods to gain consistency. That's why I blame Electron more than Spotify or Slack, and why I have such a dislike of Java's GUI libraries, GTK+, and GNOME.

pxc 4y ago
GTK+ apps usually look okay on Plasma, at least for GTK3. The only one I routinely run these days is Firefox. Did they break the integration approach the KDE folks use for getting GTK+ apps to look good with GTK4? I know there were other changes to how theming works that caused some controversy.