Where did UI design go so wrong?

Where did UI design go so wrong?

back then computers didn't have a lot of processing power. so UI designers had to make due with what was available to them. That is why they were so shitty.

Minimalist ruining good UI to save 10px

Everything wrong with computers comes down to people asking whether or not they can do something rather than whether they should.

Funny how minimalist designs actually have a lot of useless padding.

Windows had the best font rendering even then, it seems.

That's because it's all in the kernel :^)

In your head

Except it never had.

It has excellent Mouse acceleration curves tho. The best.

UI wise, NT4 was even better than windows 2000.

I quite liked Riscos 4 when I was at school. Looks a bit excessive now, though.

Did horizontal menus rape millennials or something? I genuinely don't understand why people want them gone.

They are used to phones, so they want bring phone UI aspects to desktops.

Flat UI happened.

Why it wasn't a problem in 80s?

Because the ancients were actually good at designing

Except it does, as evident by the OP pic.

Mobile + old people.

It's called 'white space' and the goal is to create a savannah effect that lowers unconscious stress levels.

Funny; for me, it increases my conscious stress levels because I have scroll 3x the amount I had to on the "old web", and have to stare at 45px sans-serif webfonts that take 3 seconds to load in.

kek

If you're talking about that whole "I see you have a wide monitor, but I'm going to capitalise on 1/3rd of the screen space in the middle to display content"-shit then I agree with you.

It's a lazy trick ORIGINALLY used before people clocked on to modern responsive UI techniques to basically make a webpage work no matter the monitor size, and I don't like it myself.

Like if Sup Forums looked like that...

>savannah effect
never heard that term before

There is no reason to use the entire width of a widescreen monitor to display a single document aside from "muh scrolling" autism.

I like that. A more narrow page is more readable.

kek kek

I feel like the only one who actually prefers unsmoothed fonts

The hypothesis behind it is that humans, having evolved in the open plains of Africa, feel safe when there are wide, open spaces because it's much more difficult for something to sneak up and murder you in such a scenario.

This has translated into UI that attempts to flank the main point of focus (in this example; a tree), with wide open areas of little to nothing.
Some will even literally use an actual picture of something savannah-like.

>shading
>flat

ya na

>Where did UI design go so wrong?
Pic related was the beginning of the end.

Well shit, maybe I should make a script / custom CSS...

I actually wish Sup Forums had a more readily accessible API like twitter so custom UI's would be easier to create.

That narrow design has its roots in UX-science, but i dunno, the whole 'bootstrap everything ever all the time' thing is starting to bore me.

These are the things that kills the UI

ribbons are better

Shadeless enough now?

They look better on pixel-based screens.

We have vector-based screens now?

Graphics were a mistake.

I still see drop shadows...

oh yeah, having to type in a bunch of arcane commands with who knows what flags and inputs are associated with what just to do simple shit like move files around how great

>tar --help

>arcane commands with who knows what flags and inputs

Or you could type in "help" or RTFM?

This shit is why graphics were a mistake.

Not, this was

>Or you could type in "help" or RTFM?
or just drag 'n drop :P

man, how can something be so pretty and yet so ugly at the same time.

This
It looks so cool
But I can't love it

It also might just be the rule of 3rds

Following that rule the content should take up 60% of the screen

I feel like you nostalgia fags havnt used macOS. it is the pinnacle of UI design, yesterdays and todays.

It looks as awful as modern UIs do.

No, W10 has a better UI.

...

tar xzvf file wew that's hard I haven't even used linux in years

It didn't. It's much better than it used to be, almost monumentally better.

Is that picture supposed to be a rebuttal? That's the same thing that exists now, just more primitive.

If you have some kind of intelligent rebuttal for why UI design used to be better I'd be happy to hear it but there's a 99% likelihood this is just you being a hipster pseudo-intellect and thinking you're being profound for saying that old things are better when you're just biased for stupid reasons like nostalgia.

Imagine actually believing this.

Run into traffic and bring your friends

Low risk material design. You'd think that with more pajeets on fiverr we would get something more halal, something ethnic with more depth than a wall of a single solid color.

At least give us postmaterial postCyberpunk ala Ghost in the Shell or Lain.

I keep clicking on that ad in the bottom right but it doesn't work. What do?

not an argument guys...

OSX is good, but it has a few critical flaws like Finder and the way minimized apps are handled with the dock

>:P
>drag and drop

Is bait also going down the path of UIs?

oops, you're dead

My workplace provides macs as the standard development machine.

I had never used a mac before, and I used to hate them because of the meme without really knowing what I was talking about. About a year of using a mac full-time really opened my eyes.

MacOS is literally the most stinking pile of shit that has ever been tried to get passed as a """"UI"""". The only reason I bear with it is because I can spend 99% of my time typing in my code editor and/or my terminal without interacting with the OS's UI.

For instance, I unironically do all my file management from the command line, just because it's so much easier and better than using that hellspawn that is the Finder.

>the way minimized apps are handled with the cock
this

Win/Aero (7,8,10) > Tiled layout with multi-desktop (i3, awesome) > OSX > linux compositing/stacking """"""""DE"""""""""s

Seriously, tachikoma fonzi buddies when

There is no situation where a weird or questionable design choice on OSX means it's worse than Windows.

Windows' UI design is so bad in so many different ways on so many different levels that I can't justify it quickly. If OSX were 1/10th as shitty as Windows Sup Forums would be memeing it into oblivion.

The only truth

>150 GHz
We are around 3 GHz for ten years now.

>1TB of RAM
>2034

2001- 200MHz / 24Mb?

1GHz processors came out at the start of 2000. 2001 you could probably get a 1.4GHz athlon thunderbird. 128Mb was pretty standard at that time, too.

>2017
>8GB

Maybe like 4 years ago, but it's been a while since I've seen anything less than 16GB.

there can be only one

when they run out of cores they'll have to replace the material with graphite or something like that which can be clocked to massive speeds

>when they run out of cores

No, GPUs will completely replace CPUs by 2030

Something that doesn't really make sense to me in Mac is the way they put the menu of a program in the task bar. So the task bar changes depending on which program is selected. I feel the way windows does it is much more logical.

we're talking strictly aesthetics here. OSX is objectively better than windows.

having an OS handle minimized apps differently isn't an argument either. and whats wrong with finder? its the best GUI based file manager available.

>The hypothesis behind it is that humans, having evolved in the open plains of Africa

I'm white, though

That the command line works on such a variation of hardware is why I'll always defend it as a viable alternative to graphical programs. Especially now that graphical software is getting more and more bloated and heavy.

are you saying that gui's don't work on a variety of hardware?

The exact same GUI? No. For example, a Windows 98 PC couldn't run modern software intended for a GUI, but it could run modern software intended for a TUI.

>finder
>the best GUI managed available

>a file manager that isn't even better than dolphin

Damn son

Doesn't necessarily look bad if done right, modern day Flat UI is shit though

>My workplace provides macs as the standard development machine.

mine does too, but I still think W10 is better in the UI department

The fact that OSX needs to rely on multiple desktops is alone an example of how the UI design just does not work

>having an OS handle minimized apps differently isn't an argument either

Yes it is, it handles them terribly! Especially compared to the sensible way Windows has been doing it since 7

>unironically using tabs in a file browser
lol kys

I'm just happy that macOS doesn't exit a program entirely when you close the window. When will Windows be able to do this?

nothing wrong with this other than being different.

Windows also improved Expose into something actually useful that helps in this regard, too.

>os 9

there is literally nothing that prevents windows 10 from running on a windows 98 era pc

uhhh

it is except on your computer because your setup is trash.

>nothing wrong with this other than being different.

Yeah there is something wrong with it. A program running shouldn't be dependent on a window being open. That's fucking dumb.

why

I blame pajeets

UI was straightforward and damn practical in these days, because of the limited resources.

Now everything has to look fancy and glossy, functionality comes later

>Sup Forumstrash pipes up with a worthless comment

you would

""""User Experience""""

but the whole point of "flat" design is it removes extraneous details from the UI

t. Parjeet

t. Pajeet poo in loo

Exactly when developers were no more designers.