5 ms·

Yup. GNOME/GTK is a lost cause in my eyes. Literally worse UX than Windows. The developers basically say "fuck you" if your use case does not perfectly align w

Yup. GNOME/GTK is a lost cause in my eyes. Literally worse UX than Windows. The developers basically say "fuck you" if your use case does not perfectly align with their "vision".

Gigachad 3y ago
Honestly I want the app to just set its look exactly. I really don't care if different programs look slightly different as long as its internally consistent in app. What I hate is installing a program that was designed for a KDE distro and because you run gnome all the icons are the same color as the background and alignments on things are whack. Package it all up in a flatpak so it looks and works exactly the same on all distros. One complete and verified experience.
- Pannoniae 3y ago
  "One complete and verified experience." These words sound sickening to me. None of these have anything to do with accessibility, or respecting the user. The user should be in control of his computer. That includes the programs on it. Locking it down so you can have "verified authentic design" is just straight-up user-hostile.
  - pseudalopex 3y ago
    Those words reminded me of Apple's 1984 commercial.
  - Gigachad 3y ago
    This is the main reason I switched to MacOS. Was sick of everything on Linux being contentiously broken out of the box with the excuse "Oh you are meant to just configure the icon colours and toolbar padding yourself" The programs can still be open source so you can recompile with whatever look you want, but they should bundle a working experiance by default. But linux users seem more obsessed with curating custom themes over having things actually work.
    - Pannoniae 3y ago
      I shouldn't have to recompile something to customise it. Make the defaults whatever you want sure, but even if you don't provide GUI config, provide an environment variable or a config file. "just recompile it" is incredibly user-hostile.
  - kaba0 3y ago
    And who will make sure that the program actually works properly in that one-off hacked up, “press spacebar to heat up CPU” configuration you have? Linux userspace is buggy, and I think this very-minimalistic approach sort of grown out from frustration about that. And they may be right, maintainers really don’t have the resources to do much better, especially when most frameworks they depend on has their own share of fatal, almost impossible to fix bugs.
- treyd 3y ago
  I disagree. The user has accessibility needs and preferences that the app developers necessarily can't know about. App developers shouldn't be trying to enforce styles/themes/icons on the user when they might be completely unusable depending on their needs. The inconsistencies between KDE and GNOME apps/themes are annoying, but that's a solvable problem.

Yup. GNOME/GTK is a lost cause in my eyes. Literally worse UX than Windows. The developers basically say "fuck you" if your use case does not perfectly align with their "vision".

Gigachad 3y ago

Honestly I want the app to just set its look exactly. I really don't care if different programs look slightly different as long as its internally consistent in app. What I hate is installing a program that was designed for a KDE distro and because you run gnome all the icons are the same color as the background and alignments on things are whack. Package it all up in a flatpak so it looks and works exactly the same on all distros. One complete and verified experience.

Pannoniae 3y ago
"One complete and verified experience." These words sound sickening to me. None of these have anything to do with accessibility, or respecting the user. The user should be in control of his computer. That includes the programs on it. Locking it down so you can have "verified authentic design" is just straight-up user-hostile.
- pseudalopex 3y ago
  Those words reminded me of Apple's 1984 commercial.
- Gigachad 3y ago
  This is the main reason I switched to MacOS. Was sick of everything on Linux being contentiously broken out of the box with the excuse "Oh you are meant to just configure the icon colours and toolbar padding yourself" The programs can still be open source so you can recompile with whatever look you want, but they should bundle a working experiance by default. But linux users seem more obsessed with curating custom themes over having things actually work.
  - Pannoniae 3y ago
    I shouldn't have to recompile something to customise it. Make the defaults whatever you want sure, but even if you don't provide GUI config, provide an environment variable or a config file. "just recompile it" is incredibly user-hostile.
- kaba0 3y ago
  And who will make sure that the program actually works properly in that one-off hacked up, “press spacebar to heat up CPU” configuration you have? Linux userspace is buggy, and I think this very-minimalistic approach sort of grown out from frustration about that. And they may be right, maintainers really don’t have the resources to do much better, especially when most frameworks they depend on has their own share of fatal, almost impossible to fix bugs.
treyd 3y ago
I disagree. The user has accessibility needs and preferences that the app developers necessarily can't know about. App developers shouldn't be trying to enforce styles/themes/icons on the user when they might be completely unusable depending on their needs. The inconsistencies between KDE and GNOME apps/themes are annoying, but that's a solvable problem.