dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
uniqs
10

trparky
Premium Member
join:2000-05-24
Cleveland, OH
·AT&T U-Verse

1 edit

3 recommendations

trparky to Mike

Premium Member

to Mike

Re: Flat UI design? WHY!?!?


Windows 7 Notepad
 

Windows 8 Notepad
OK, here are two examples. The notepad program on Windows 8 and Windows 7. Which one is more esthetically pleasing? Which one looks nicer to look at? The one with some color and rounded corners or the one that's boring, blue, and with sharp corners?

If you ask me, the top one; the one from Windows 7 is better looking and nicer to look at especially if you spend much of your time in desktop land as versus fugly Metro.

nwrickert
Mod
join:2004-09-04
Geneva, IL

nwrickert

Mod

said by trparky:

OK, here are two examples. The notepad program on Windows 8 and Windows 7.

You labeled both "Windows 7".
said by trparky:

Which one is more esthetically pleasing? Which one looks nicer to look at? The one with some color and rounded corners or the one that's boring, blue, and with sharp corners?

If I am using Notepad, then I am looking at the space where I am typing in. I'm not wasting my time admiring the decorations.

NoOneCares
join:2000-09-16
Portland, OR

1 recommendation

NoOneCares to trparky

Member

to trparky
When people are asking for better and better battery life, then by using a flat design is less processor intensive than drawing those 3-D affects. To me, I'd rather save battery than look at purely visual candy that serves no real purpose.

trparky
Premium Member
join:2000-05-24
Cleveland, OH

trparky

Premium Member

But it looks hideous.

Mike
Mod
join:2000-09-17
Pittsburgh, PA

Mike to trparky

Mod

to trparky
I disagree. Give me solid basic color. It's an application, not an entertainment device.

I'll take the Windows 8 notepad anyday... if I used Windows.
BlitzenZeus
Burnt Out Cynic
Premium Member
join:2000-01-13

1 recommendation

BlitzenZeus to trparky

Premium Member

to trparky
I'm not going to presume, but have you used linux? Many of the guis available are quite grey, it's like a return to 9x, or 2k. They also use memory closer to the amounts of 9x, and 2k also, otherwise less. With no swap usage my linux can load in less than 256MiB of memory, but opening a popular browser you've just used say 100 MB right there alone.

I don't mind flat as long as it's not fugly, and I changed my bars in win 8 to grey since I didn't care for colors you might also see on neon hot pants on my titlebars.

trparky
Premium Member
join:2000-05-24
Cleveland, OH
·AT&T U-Verse

trparky

Premium Member

Yes, I've used Linux in the past for experimentation. I've used Linux Mint (with the Mate desktop). It too looks very... bland. I always chalked it up to the fact that most Linux distro projects don't have enough cash on hand to hire a team of UI developers and artists.
BlitzenZeus
Burnt Out Cynic
Premium Member
join:2000-01-13

BlitzenZeus

Premium Member

Click for full size
XP with Zune theme
I really don't want to get into the entirety of it, but linux is not a gui centric os, however does have many gui and effects packages options that can reach the level of religious debates. Most of the distros want their live cd to work on most systems, but their effects packages will use your gpu also. Some even notify at the lack of 3d support for effects, and have two versions 2d and 3d.

I think that xp's gui is better than Win 8 overall, and it was a nice balance even if some people called it eye candy over 2k. Then again some people will still love their transparency with Vista/Win 7. Depends if you're a form over function, or function over form person.

darcilicious
Cyber Librarian
Premium Member
join:2001-01-02
Forest Grove, OR
·Ziply Fiber

darcilicious

Premium Member

said by BlitzenZeus:

some people will still love their transparency with Vista/Win 7. Depends if your form over function, or function over form person.

Except that a) the two are not mutually exclusive and b) the "form" of Windows 7 areo/transparency never got in the way of its "function".
BlitzenZeus
Burnt Out Cynic
Premium Member
join:2000-01-13

BlitzenZeus

Premium Member

Yes, they were just secondary effects that could be disabled.

OverBurn
join:2004-02-21
Greenwood, IN

OverBurn to trparky

Member

to trparky
said by trparky:

OK, here are two examples. The notepad program on Windows 8 and Windows 7. Which one is more esthetically pleasing? Which one looks nicer to look at? The one with some color and rounded corners or the one that's boring, blue, and with sharp corners?

If you ask me, the top one; the one from Windows 7 is better looking and nicer to look at especially if you spend much of your time in desktop land as versus fugly Metro.

One of the many reasons I despise Win8.

Ctrl Alt Del
Premium Member
join:2002-02-18

Ctrl Alt Del to trparky

Premium Member

to trparky
The titlebar text (the "Untitled - Notepad" part) is a bigger font and much easier to read in Windows 8. The Windows 7 titlebar is both smaller and uses a terrible blur behind the text for contrast. That's flair for the sake of flair at the expense of useability.

Mike
Mod
join:2000-09-17
Pittsburgh, PA
·Verizon FiOS

Mike to OverBurn

Mod

to OverBurn
just use classic shell with the windows 7 button

»www.askvg.com/download-c ··· ndows-8/

Windows 8.1 is not the boogy man.
BlitzenZeus
Burnt Out Cynic
Premium Member
join:2000-01-13

2 recommendations

BlitzenZeus

Premium Member

Classic shell doesn't solve all the problems, that's just the start menu, but we also shouldn't need 3rd party to fix their glaring issues.

You can only customize the titlebar background color, or their high contrast themes actually break applications while still only offering a few limited options to customize. Nothing like all the options available even back in 9x.

I recall Steve said something along the lines of "You'll get used to it", but that's like living near a paper factory. You might not notice the smell when indoors after a while, but it still blasts you in the face when you step outside.

You can't even change the titlebar text to white, and the background to black without the buggy high contrast themes or 3rd party.

You can also bug out the gui using the high contrast themes, and create a transparent titlebar, however it will ghost all over your desktop. This problem existed in 8.0, and still exists in 8.1

OverBurn
join:2004-02-21
Greenwood, IN

OverBurn

Member

said by BlitzenZeus:

Classic shell doesn't solve all the problems, that's just the start menu, but we also shouldn't need 3rd party to fix their glaring issues.

You can only customize the titlebar background color, or their high contrast themes actually break applications while still only offering a few limited options to customize. Nothing like all the options available even back in 9x.

I recall Steve said something along the lines of "You'll get used to it", but that's like living near a paper factory. You might not notice the smell when indoors after a while, but it still blasts you in the face when you step outside.

You can't even change the titlebar text to white, and the background to black without the buggy high contrast themes or 3rd party.

You can also bug out the gui using the high contrast themes, and create a transparent titlebar, however it will ghost all over your desktop. This problem existed in 8.0, and still exists in 8.1

What he said.
dave
Premium Member
join:2000-05-04
not in ohio

dave to Ctrl Alt Del

Premium Member

to Ctrl Alt Del
said by Ctrl Alt Del:

The Windows 7 titlebar is both smaller and uses a terrible blur behind the text for contrast. That's flair for the sake of flair at the expense of useability.

Title bar font and size are configurable, at least they have been from Windows 2000 to Windows 7 inclusive.