Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 23rd Sep 2007 13:43 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 273794
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-04-20
I quite agree. My eyes always glaze over when I see people trying to justify the bad design of one application by comparing it to another application with similar design flaws and saying "look, they do it too, it mustn't be all that bad". Windows suffers greatly from UI inconsistencies, OSX less so, but this should be a call for other OSes to get their shit together and make something better. Linux would be much better off if it used a unified toolkit or API for applications, rather than the fragmented mish-mash of GTK, QT and "other" that currently exists. The libraries that drive the UI should conform to consistent standards so that applications will behave and look the same across the board, regardless of which implementation of the standard is used or how the end user configures their UI.
Some people are happy jumbling a pile of different things together; others (like me) have aesthetic sensibilities that value form of equal importance as function.