←back to thread

892 points todsacerdoti | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
sirwhinesalot ◴[] No.45289648[source]
We now live in a world where KDE looks nicer, more professional, and more consistent than the latest macOS. I don't know how that happened, and KDE isn't even particularly nice looking, but here we are.

For many years now KDE has focused on polish, bug fixing and "nice-to-have" improvements rather than major redesigns, and it paid off.

replies(29): >>45289995 #>>45290073 #>>45290151 #>>45290269 #>>45290300 #>>45290329 #>>45290339 #>>45290551 #>>45290730 #>>45290812 #>>45290839 #>>45290937 #>>45291184 #>>45291224 #>>45291767 #>>45292070 #>>45292195 #>>45293081 #>>45293115 #>>45293191 #>>45293540 #>>45295805 #>>45296420 #>>45296861 #>>45297073 #>>45297580 #>>45298444 #>>45298935 #>>45299011 #
GuB-42 ◴[] No.45290812[source]
KDE is, as its name implies, a desktop environment. And it hasn't been "infected" by the "mobile" virus.

I often wondered why desktop UIs became so terrible somewhere in the 2010s and I don't want to attribute it to laziness, greed, etc... People have been lazy and greedy since people existed, there must have been something else. And I think that mobile is the answer.

UI designers are facing a really hard problem, if not impossible. Most apps nowadays have desktop and mobile variants, and you want some consistency, as you don't want users to relearn everything when switching variants. But mobile platforms, with their small touchscreens are completely different from desktop platforms with their large screens, keyboards and mice. So what do you do?

In addition to mobile, you often need to target the browser too, so: native desktop, native mobile, browser desktop, browser mobile. And then you add commercial consideration like cost, brand identity, and the idea that if you didn't change the UI, you didn't change anything. Commercial considerations have always been a thing, but the multiplication of platforms made it worse, prompting for the idea of running everything in a browser, and having the desktop inferface just being the mobile interface with extra stuff.

replies(9): >>45291002 #>>45291374 #>>45291814 #>>45293739 #>>45294507 #>>45295079 #>>45297869 #>>45298577 #>>45299041 #
bigstrat2003 ◴[] No.45291374[source]
> But mobile platforms, with their small touchscreens are completely different from desktop platforms with their large screens, keyboards and mice. So what do you do?

You keep the UIs separate. Dumbing down desktop UIs to mobile capabilities is just as bad of a design as it was when people tried to jam a desktop UI into mobile. You have to play to the strengths of the platform you are on, not limit each one based on the other. Yes, it's more work, but it's well worth it to have a product which is actually good.

replies(3): >>45293441 #>>45294140 #>>45294678 #
wavemode ◴[] No.45294678{3}[source]
Web designers have been having this same debate for 15 years - what many call "mobile-first design" is actually just worsening the experience of desktop users so that things look nicer on phones and the makers don't have to do double the design work.
replies(4): >>45297099 #>>45297639 #>>45299753 #>>45301891 #
1. gspencley ◴[] No.45301891{4}[source]
It's not so much double the design work, it's double the code maintenance.

I'm of two minds on this. I agree with your complaint that "mobile first" (or just responsiveness in general) has tended to reduce the pleasantness of the Desktop experience. As a web application developer, the idea of having to maintain two separate codebases - one for mobile and one for desktop - is a big "no thank-you." So responsiveness tends to win on maintenance overhead.

replies(1): >>45305150 #
2. einpoklum ◴[] No.45305150[source]
> It's not so much double the design work, it's double the code maintenance.

Well, of course it is: Different UI, different UI code. If that's problem, the developers should not have both a mobile and a desktop app in the first place.

> has tended to reduce the pleasantness of the Desktop

understatement of the year :-) ... it often hampers functionality, significantly, and makes the experience rather painful.