Just realized: One of the reasons why I don’t like “flat UIs” is that they look broken to me. Like the program has a bug, missing pixmaps or whatever.

Take this for example:

https://movq.de/v/8822afccf0/a.png

I’m talking about this area specifically:

https://movq.de/v/8822afccf0/a%2Dhigh.png

One UI element ends and the other one begins – no “transition” between them.

The style of old UIs like these two is deeply ingrained into my brain:

https://movq.de/v/8822afccf0/b.png
https://movq.de/v/8822afccf0/c.png

When all these little elements (borders, handles, even just simple lines, …) are no longer present, then the program looks buggy and broken to me. And I’m not sure if I’ll ever be able to un-learn that.

(#5u7y23a) @movq@www.uninformativ.de Yes, flat UIs are broken! I’m used to that by now, but it’s still more work to recognize than when there are borders around buttons, etc.

These are lists in your Inkscape example, right? (I’m too lazy to start Inkscape myself and look at it. And writing this took longer than just seeing for myself, but here we are. I met up with one of my best schoolmate this morning and it’s fucking hot already. So I blame the heat.) Nested tabs are probably an own death sin in itself. I know, I know, the upper ones can be made into windows and dragged around, but still.

(#5u7y23a) @lyse@lyse.isobeef.org

These are lists in your Inkscape example, right?

The font stuff? Yeah, that’s a scrollable list where you can select the current font.

(#5u7y23a) @movq@www.uninformativ.de I first wondered how the lists could be ever improved, but then b.png shows the better approach with the inset boxes on the left. No surprises there. Very clearly communicated.