Does anyone else feel that gtk4 adwaita looks significantly worse than gtk3?
they seem to have simply removed the gradients and it just looks half baked with only flat colours
they seem to have simply removed the gradients and it just looks half baked with only flat colours
Look at GTK1: https://gtk-gnutella.sourceforge.net/images/shots/092/gnutel...
It looks good. Sharp fonts, good use of space, clearly recognizable widgets, application doesn't treat users like idiots.
What do we have now? Fuzzy-ass fonts (except on phones where DPI>400), huge margins, barely recognizable widgets, GNOME applications written for people in comas.
Mac OS X Server/Rhapsody v, where they basically mixed NeXTSTEP and Mac OS 9, and early Mac OS X releases (before brushes metal) were also nice. All downhill from there… now get off my lawn! ;)
So many modern UIs are so damn space inefficient. Drives me mad. It’s like designers think everyone is an 80yo with Parkinson’s and bad eyes. Massive screen waste; white space everywhere; blah blah.
I hates it.
People just don't because, well its not very usable.
Way too many random vertical and horizontal lines going everywhere. A mix of text way too close to other controls right next to whitespace controls. Outlines intersecting with the text they're highlighting when there's plenty of space around them. Drag&drop bars that attract way too much attention with how textured they are.
I personally like the modern, simpler designs better. The aesthetic of late 90s UI were great but their designs were often a hodgepodge of whatever control the developers could fit onto the screen, with resize bars placed to let the user overcome the crammed design on demand.
I don't know what your working system looks like, but my fonts aren't fuzzy. The margins are visually pleasing and the widgets are quite intuitive because they're used consistently.
Feel free to go back to the old ways with Chicago 95 and LXDE. It's not exactly Windows 95, but it's pretty damn close. But please don't bring back the jank of overcrammed late 90s UI design, you'll only scare people away.
I find modern UIs much more aesthetically pleasing than that GTK1 pic, by far.
- The applications-places-system menu. As said in other post the other day, it was so clever to have all the stuff in your computer categorized in those three categories. You knew at first sight, even if you've never ever used GNOME2 before, where to send your mouse when reaching something, it wasn't a guess game like in Mac or that cram-everything-in-one-button like the Windows start menu - not to talk about the 'moving around your mouse through the whole screen to launch an app' like GNOME3/4 itself.
- Clearlooks was the pinnacle of theming in Linux. Easily readable/scanneable and beautiful by default, 'themeable' up to the tiniest detail with a readable CSS-like syntax (I'm fuzzy on the details but seem to recall it wasn't a feature exclusive of Clearlooks). I concede Adwaita inherited visual inspiration from Clearlooks, but now with GNOME4 they decided to ditch it altogether. For some reason.
- Technological aspects aside which I won't talk about because you people know much more than me on that, but restricting the user to customize their GNOME install was an double-edge sword they seem didn't thought much through. GNOME2 had an almost perfect balance between simplicity and customization capabilities; whereas with GNOME3 upwards it is up to devs decide many things (and it seems those decisions are based much on their criteria rather than their users...). That brought the unfortunate consequence of frustrating users with every unexpected change with releases, something didn't happened with GNOME2 (or maybe even before than that).
I really appreciate team GNOME's commitment to wayland, but outside of that, they have released a completely unfinished product which pales in comparison to the feature set of its previous incarnation.