Why is open-source so bad at UI design?
>>51560707
Maybe designers don't like working for free?
I can't be bothered looking for it, so pretend I posted an image of the four or five different context menu styles in Windows, followed by a snappy comment about inconsistency.
i don't see anything wrong with any of those uis, care to explain your grievance?
>>51560707
they do it for free and most people use tools in the terminal for scripting purposes
>>51560727
My thoughts exactly but anon is onto something, the UI design is beyond shit tier for a lot of things.
Audacity is passable. It may not look pretty, but it doesn't hurt use.
Gimp on the other hand is just bad it hurts productivity.
Why do freetards suck at everything when it comes to design? Like the logo for Linux is fat ugly penguin.
>>51560773
Been using GIMP for 15 years and it works just fine for me. You must be doing something wrong.
>>51560805
>I've never used anything else other than Gimp so it must be as good as it gets!
>>51560820
Are there any other comparable free software image editors? I know about krita.
>>51560805
Gimp is fucking awful and you shills need to fuck off
It's fuckhuge sliders that take up half your god damn screen and can't be moved to a reasonable place like the top are a fucking disgrace to GUI's and the "designers" should be fucking ashamed
>>51560870
you're right, they should just remove 99% of all the UI elements and make a "clean mobile-friendly" design
>>51560926
Photoshop's interface is cleaner and more useful
>>51560926
dumb strawman
>>51560707
>Why is open-source so bad at UI design?
Because UI design is hard and closed source aesthetics is just as bad.
Just look at how awful Symantec stuff is or what happened to the Control Panel in Windows 8 through 10.
>>51560870
https://git.gnome.org/browse/gimp/
Here is the code free for the hacking, if you don't like it the design then you are the only one who is to blame
>>51560965
>Bloat: The UI
>cleaner and more useful
topkek
>>51561002
You're just like those faggots who defend shit bethesda games with LE MODS WILL FIX IT XDDD
Programmers aren't UI designers.
>>51561002
>I'll just laugh and I'll be right!
Same reason all of GNU's official webpages look like dogshit from the mid-90s
>>51561027
Fuck off retard.
>>51560707
5 rupees have been deposited to your Paypal account
>>51561042
nah :^) keep sucking that stallman cock faglord
>>51561027
But that analogy sucks because bethesda games are proprietary and therefore always shit.
>>51561030
Are you seriously saying photoshop is not a bloated piece of garbage?
>>51561066
>this dog shit over here is WAAAAY different from this dog shit over here!
>>51561066
>Having features make it bloated
Meanwhile gimp has completely fucking useless features like layer boundaries that can't be turned off, is missing basic features like masks, and the UI takes up the entire screen leaving you no room for the actual image
>>51560707
>synaptic
>bad UI design
Have you ever used it? It's great.
>>51560773
Audacity's major problem is using a cross-platform UI toolkit instead of having a native UI on each platform.
>>51560794
>Like the logo for Linux is fat ugly penguin.
It's more personable than Steve Ballmer.
>>51560707
Well you've either got like 50 people working on a project all with different design concepts, or one fag who does it for free and can't design for shit.
>>51561088
https://git.gnome.org/browse/gimp/
If you want those features, then get to work
>But I don't want to, coding is too hard and it takes too long!
Maybe GIMP users are fine without those features then and they aren't actually as important as you think?
>>51560794
they value functionality over aesthetics. If you value aesthetics over functionality, Apple will be happy to sell you something.
>>51561149
>It's not the programmers fault they're too lazy to make a decent program! You do it!!!!
Freetards, everyone
>>51561147
this. also good ui design takes a lot of time and effort and designers need money
>>51561149
>Maybe GIMP users are fine without those features then and they aren't actually as important as you think?
but then it's still important to me, and ergo I pick the program that has that feature, because that's kind of how program selection works
>Open source
>>51560848
openpdn
>>51561174
With free software, everyone is a developer. The only lazy person here is you, you want the program to appease you but don't want to do anything about it besides complain.
>>51560707
It feels to me like most open-source projects were maintained UI-wise by UNIX veterans inspired by CDE/4dwm and other motif UIs. Back then they looked very professional and usually had reasonably consistent design and icon sets. Then the project leaders thought they weren't "trendy" enough to appeal to the migrating XP kiddos and told them to add gradient-laden shitty OSX wannabe icon sets and awful, XP clone UIs.
>>51561227
It's shit so I don't use it
Why would I waste my time shining a turd instead of using a real program?
I'd say audacity has one of the most well designed UIs. Very transparent and intuitive. Looks a bit simple / unpolished, but polish wouldn't make it more usable.
>>51561243
>real program
>pic related
>>51561243
What is a real program in your mind?
>>51561227
>you but don't want to do anything about it besides complain.
...no, I just go and use the program that does all of those things without my input???
/g/, you are some funny little creatures
>>51561261
Photoshop, obviously
You get what you paid for. When comparing PS with GIMP, you also have to compare the price. Clearly without a doubt, of course PS is better. You get what you pay for, and you paid SHIT for GIMP.
Same thing with LibreOffice, Avidemux, etc, they're all Chinese counterfeit-level quality compared to the real stuff.
>>51561316
>>51561316
Or just pirate Photoshop and Office
>>51560707
Nice pre-historic image.
>>51561002
>don't like it? here take our massive, complicated spaghetti code, learn the language it's written in if you don't know it, familiarize yourself with every line of it and then fix our problems for us! it's still not our fault!
God, I love free software shills on /g/.
"Someone else will fix it if they don't like it" is no excuse for a shit product, and just fucking lazy and dumb.
>>51561337
Enjoy your malware.
>B-b-b-but there are lots of comments that's totally not from the same person that says it's safe
>B-b-b-but you have to be mentally challenged to get malware
>B-b-b-but my virus scanner didn't catch anything
>B-b-b-but I browse /g/ so I'm an expert at computers
>>51561221
Eh, I like GIMP better. I was forced to use Photoshop for a while. Ew.
>>51561221
it seems like half "nobody cares about the interface, just add more cool filters!" plus half desperate attempt to make themselves look like something other than a blatant photoshop clone.
>>51561403
woah buddy, wanna cool it with the projecting there friend?
>>51561243
>>51561271
And so you go use the proprietary shit that has been marketed towards you and nothing ever improves and Adobe continues to assrape you.
>>51561359
GIMP is not a "product," it is a program that you can run, modify, and distribute. It also has a community that you can join. You can choose to fix those "problems" for yourself or for the community. It's really up to you and therefore the only person who's "fault" it is is you.
>>51561403
>Can't even pirate photoshop
Holy fucking shit I knew /g/ was stupid but this is next level shit
>>51561427
>nothing ever improves
And yet it's still miles ahead of Gimp
>>51561446
But it's actually miles behind because of the outdated development style and proprietary license.
>>51561283
>proprietary shitware that exists solely to lock you in
>"real program"
No.
>>51561464
not everything has to be open source, just because you're too poor to afford the real deal doesn't mean everyone else should have to suffer with outdated design and a terrible gui.
>>51560707
Synaptic isn't good, but it isn't bad.
GIMP fails on a bunch of levels.
Audacity is fine. Completely fine.
dunno what that QT program is in the top right, it looks ugly but I've never used it
>>51561210
the users who need those features gave up ages ago and just use Photoshop, no point in waiting when there's an alternative
>>51561494
>I DON'T LIKE IT SO IT'S BAD
Go back to school
>>51561506
>too poor
I'll fix your UI issues on GIMP, for $100
>>51561427
>GIMP is not a "product,"
It is. A product isn't necessarily something you have to pay for.
>You can choose to fix those "problems" for yourself or for the community.
You and I both know that this is incredibly unrealistic and not a way to "win" this argument, it's not the fucking '70s anymore, a good total UI revamp of GIMP is not a plausible thing to expect from the average "community developer" especially when better options present themselves that are easy to access. You can whine about "proprietary malware" all you want, but as you can see, people don't give a shit about an ideology or the government bogeyman when they want to use their life improvement tools as life improvement tools.
Ultimately, something non-trivial like this is best left to the established team that maintains the project, and for people like you who try to shill the software at every opportunity to get people to choose it over proprietary alternatives, no, it is not their fault that you and the software you are peddling is incompetent.
>all those triggered freetards
top kek
GIMP is shit you subhuman NEETs
>>51561002
>photoshop
>bloat
holy lel
>>51561506
>thinks I'm poor
>doesn't realize that buying proprietary software is always a bad business investment
![lMiKP1p[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/zLvdcew.png "lMiKP1p[1].png")
actually, rather than continuously argue over why you should do everyone else's work, let's try to show off times free software had good UIs.
>simple, universal UI
>actively cleaner + simpler than the proprietary alternative
>all the obvious choices are up-front so rando imbecile anon #123 can set it up immediately, but doesn't ditch any in-depth setting that someone more experienced can use
>as a result, pretty much rolled over any of xsplit's stream share within only a few years
OBS is free software done right
>>51561531
but then it wouldn't be FOSS, now would it? :^)
>>51561520
I don't like or dislike it, it's just bad period.
>>51561550
>2+GB install size for an image editor
>not bloated
>>51561580
No, it still would be. You're not paying for the software, you're paying for the labor, which is very much a pro-FOSS thing
>>51561568
>using fucking gimp professionally
nigger please
>>51561568
>any business
>using GIMP
>>51561591
>>2+GB install size for an image editor
>>not bloated
A whole 2GB
>>51561572
Good OSS
>OBS
>Old Firefox
>Audacity
Terrible OSS
>Gimp
>Inkscape
>>51561592
what if i'd rather pay adobe for all the labor they put into photoshop?
>>51561568
>thinks the cost of technology means jack shit to any established corporate entity
Buying a couple PS licenses is paltry for companies that routinely dump $250,000 on a single server.
>>51561591
>It's bad >:(
>My network connection has limited data and mean old Adobe wants 2 whole gigs
>>51561534
>people don't give a shit about an ideology or the government bogeyman when they want to use their life improvement tools as life improvement tools
Projection. Just because you are too lazy to care about your rights being shit on does not mean everyone else is. Why do you use whatever bullshit has been marketed towards you without thinking about the ramifications?
>>51561626
You're not paying for labor, that's already been paid for by Adobe
>>51560870
I really like the kind of sliders many 3D editing tools have where you get to slide your mouse over the screen multiple times and stuff and it jumps to the other side of the screen like pacman. It's so nifty.
I wonder why more applications don't do that. It can't be that hard.
>>51561653
how are the devs gonna get payed if adobe's not making money?
>>51561596
>>51561608
>not working for a glorious free software business
shills pls go
>>51561631
>thinks it's okay to make bad investments even if it's not that much money
And this is why most people are poor and why most businesses fail
>>51561677
>working for free
because open source is for programmers
designers don't do open source they only work for money
>>51561613
>>51561640
>hurr it doesn't matter if our software is bloated, just buy more drive space, the solution to everything is to spend more money
You are the problem with society
>>51561677
>>not working for a glorious free software business
Name one that actually is an actual professional business
>>51560727
That is not a UI design flaw, but the lack of good UI integration, caused by the good backwards compatibility Windows has, followed by the problems they had during the maturity of the Metro interface.
Also, it seems that the Office team doesn't give a fuck about design standards, although they can make good designs by their own.
What OP points is the usability and overall design of the UI controls. Yes, its worse on Linux because besides Gnome, they don't have any design standards or guidelines.
>>51561676
They've already been paid. Even if nobody gave Adobe a cent ever again, Photoshop would still exist. It may not be getting updates, but it works, is usable, and you paying for it or not paying for it will never change that
>>51561066
>photoshop is not a bloated
but it is :^)
>>51561704
>2GB is bloated!
>p-please understand!
fucking ridiculous
>>51561704
2GBs is not big fuck off
>>51561650
>projection
It's demonstratively reality, dumbass. Windows, OS X and the many proprietary titles that run on them control 99% of desktop computing.
>Why do you use whatever bullshit has been marketed towards you without thinking about the ramifications?
>y-you just use it because of the marketing bogeyman!
Glad to see you're running out of legitimate points. No, nobody really gives a shit about the trivial "ramifications" because the benefits far outweigh them.
>>51561088
Photoshop has layer boundaries, but they're not as much apparent as they are in Gimp. The way it works int Gimp actually hinders work. Photoshop goes around this to some degree so you don't notice them.
>>51561704
>being this autistic about 2 GB
Skipped your meds?
>>51561127
How is that a problem?
>>51561704
Even in the '90s most software like this was fucking huge, 2GB is literally nothing.
>>51561677
But free software that kills productivity due to a lack of features and a shit UI is a bad investment, anon, that's why few people actually use it on the desktop in a professional setting.
>>51561787
Nice meme image, facebookfag.
>>51560707
You're upset at a window manager theme. All of that can be changed super quick. Why are Windows users so fucking retarded basic concepts like desktop environments and windows managers confuse them?
>>51561817
Amending open source programs isn't as easy as you might think. Many projects reject damn near everything unless you are part of the cool kids club, hence why things are so often forked.
Because the fork rarely has the same manpower as the upstream project, the lone developer is often forced to maintain a shitty git branch that they hope gets adopted into mainstream some day, or give up and comply with the overlord.
It is a lot like the struggle to edit a wiki, actually. Even if your changes are correct there are politics involved.
>>51561693
And thats why most of you /gd/ fags will always stay shit haha
>>51560707
they probably don't care about making it look pretty, they care that it works and works well.
>>51561760
>>51561743
>>51561721
>>51561719
It was 2GB the last time I checked years ago, it's probably a lot more now.
Also yes that is a lot when you have a machine with a relatively small SSD. Storage required to do our jobs should be getting smaller and cheaper, not larger and more expensive.
Also you are forgetting that this is an image editing program, not the fucking library of congress. There is no reason it should be larger than a few MBs.
>>51560726
>Maybe designers don't like working for free?
This is it right here. Seriously people are trying to get free shit from them. I'm not working for free and neither are they.
>>51560820
Exactly.
>>51561805
Lack of features is actually good for productivity because it forces you to focus on the necessities. Software bloat is bad for everyone, don't buy into it. Boycott Adobe.
Also graphical user interfaces are generally low tier. Text or command based UIs are usually superior.
>>51562077
>Also graphical user interfaces are generally low tier. Text or command based UIs are usually superior.
lol
>>51562013
free as in freedom, not free as in price
come on anon, this is basic, you should know this
>>51561705
redhat
apache
wordpress
>>51562106
It's true though. GUIs are a good teaching tool but once you get familiar with them they become a burden that actually limits your creativity.
>>51562106
One evening, Master Foo and Nubi attended a gathering of programmers who had met to learn from each other. One of the programmers asked Nubi to what school he and his master belonged. Upon being told they were followers of the Great Way of Unix, the programmer grew scornful.
“The command-line tools of Unix are crude and backward,” he scoffed. “Modern, properly designed operating systems do everything through a graphical user interface.”
Master Foo said nothing, but pointed at the moon. A nearby dog began to bark at the master's hand.
“I don't understand you!” said the programmer.
Master Foo remained silent, and pointed at an image of the Buddha. Then he pointed at a window.
“What are you trying to tell me?” asked the programmer.
Master Foo pointed at the programmer's head. Then he pointed at a rock.
“Why can't you make yourself clear?” demanded the programmer.
Master Foo frowned thoughtfully, tapped the programmer twice on the nose, and dropped him in a nearby trashcan.
As the programmer was attempting to extricate himself from the garbage, the dog wandered over and piddled on him.
At that moment, the programmer achieved enlightenment.
>>51561002
>Here is the code free for the hacking, if you don't like it the design then you are the only one who is to blame
If I'm the only one to blame...lawsuit incoming, these feminist software faggots have stolen my work.
It's almost as if companies that drop millions on interface design alone can do it better than hobbyists. Crowd sourced takes longer to do the same job, naturally.
>>51562077
>>51562148
>the text is actually better than graphical interfaces meme
No, no, no. That bait stops here.
Textual interfaces and graphical interfaces both have their respective strengths, and I would not choose the former for graphical work such as word processing or image editing, nor the latter for batch operations or in-depth system configuration.
>>51561958
Not everyone uses a 50GB SSD, faggot
>>51562257
>word processing
>graphical work
>>51561140
>It's more personable than Steve Ballmer.
I see you just awoke from a coma. It's November 2015 and things have changed.
>>51562278
>not inserting relevant images into essays/newsletters/term papers
MPC-HC is nice.
>>51562278
Yes, there's a reason software like Wordstar and Wordperfect evolved or died soon after Windows hit the mainstream. People tend to prefer WYSIWYG editors outside of specific circumstances where LaTeX is used instead.
>>51560707
Gee sorry everything doesn't look like itunes or the fucking app store.
We'll be sure to fag up all open source programs by your next update.
>>51562396
>le apple bogeyman
Why do freetards compare people with standards to macfags despite having no standards themselves to unironically think Apple's cheap aluminum fetish is actually good looking?
>>51561027
>/v/tard not getting the difference between a proprietary paid game made by a single company and free program made by a community
Back to r/PCMR
>>51561221
you can make the left column narrower.
>>51562579
Now the right column is too cluttered
You can't even look at layers and tool properties like that because it takes up too much space
Even in that configuration there's still a scroll bar in the tool properties because everything's fucking huge
