diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'org/blog/articles/the-software-design-crisis.xml')
| -rw-r--r-- | org/blog/articles/the-software-design-crisis.xml | 99 |
1 files changed, 99 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/org/blog/articles/the-software-design-crisis.xml b/org/blog/articles/the-software-design-crisis.xml new file mode 100644 index 0000000..7e31b9a --- /dev/null +++ b/org/blog/articles/the-software-design-crisis.xml @@ -0,0 +1,99 @@ +<article> + <p> + <b>Warning: this is more of a roast if anything</b> + </p> + <p> + Have you ever had an update for a piece of software that removes features + without any usable replacement or way to get it back? What about options + being pulled from the setting? Don't get me started on desktop software + using mobile UI design. + </p> + + <h3>Mobile UI design leaking into desktop space</h3> + <p> + Mobile phones are operated with touch screen, and have screens that are + small and taller than they are wide. Desktops are operated with a keyboard + and mouse, and have large screens that are wider than they are + tall. Because of that, its quite safe to say that <b>software optimized for + one platform isnt't so great on another</b>. Are you still following? + Likely not, but if you are consider this: why do many modern desktop + programs look like mobile apps? Some of them are mobile apps ported to + desktop though many of them don't even work on mobile. The answers are + modern UX, the web, and <i>GNOMEism</i>. + </p> + + <h3>Modern UX</h3> + <p> + <b>Modern UX isn't about making professional software. It's about making + software that looks like it was made by a professional.</b> This means flat + interfaces and lack of customization. Modern developers are like super + entitled chefs. "How dare you put table salt on a meal that is already + perfect", "ketchup? what are you a picky eater?!"... They act like your + lucky for even getting a dark and light mode when the toolkits they use + have themeing. Yes, I know adding more options makes it difficult to debug + but hear me out: all the basic things can be in the settings menu while + everything else can be in a config file or interface similar to + <i>about:config</i>. The normies get their easy settings while power users + can change what they want. For separate mobile and desktop interfaces use a + <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model%E2%80%93view%E2%80%93controller" + target="_blank">model-view-controller</a>. <b>The UI is nearly how the + user interacts with the program, not the program itself.</b> MVC allows you + to isolated different parts of your program making it more flexible. Before + you go saying MVC is too difficult I had a teacher who made us use MVC in a + beginner course with some students who never programmed before. By the end + we were all able to design and make software this way. What do you tell + users on closed source platforms that actively make development harder? + <b>Go fuck yourself.</b> + </p> + + <h3>The web</h3> + <p> + The web uses html, css, and javascript. The first two being usable + standards for creating webpages, and the third being a buggy programming + language integrated into the first two. Many developers decided to use + those to make software since its cross platform and doesn't require the + user to install their software. Though web apps have issues with bandwidth, + security, and integration into operating systems. They encouraged mass + produced slop. Web architecture has spyware built in by design by + governments and corporations. The fixes include disabling javascript, + cookies, webrtc, webgl... Though these are things web apps depend + on, <b>because its spyware by design</b>. This website doesn't depend on + those things. All it needs is html and optional css. This ties into modern + UX design since web developers like to define new standards that are worse + than the long standing ones. What about new standards that are better than + the old ones? Web developers never do that. This is because <b>web + developers aren't software engineers yet their choices effect the software + development world since they create much of the software normies use which + creates expectations for what modern software should look like</b>. + </p> + + <h3>GNOMEism</h3> + <p> + Gnome is a desktop envirtment that is pretty much standard on linux. A + while back they said <a href="https://stopthemingmy.app/" target="_blank"> + please don't theme our apps</a>. Sounds a lot like the entitled chef thing + I brought up rofl. Someone made + <a href="https://webb.is-a.dev/do-not-resize/" target="_blank"> + do not resize our windows</a> + as a parody of gnome. People thought it was real because <b>it strangely + sounds like something gnome developers would actually say</b>. Gnome tries + to strike a fine balance between mobile and desktop platforms and ends up + failing at both. Want to know what linux desktop has the most amount of + forks? Its gnome! Sure that's a given since its the most common desktop but + just compare it to kde forks for a sense of scale. + </p> + + <h3>Accessibly</h3> + <p> + This isn't really something most developers think of yet is one of the most + important things in software development. You software developers are all + dumb fucks but please stay away from doing anything hacky on the UI + side. It can really fuck over things like screen readers. <b>The UI is + nearly how the user interacts with the program, not the program itself.</b> + Just pick a UI toolkit that fits your needs and use it in a sane manner and + things will work correctly. Software developers a lot like web developers + but not to the same degree create problems for themselves that once fixed + created two more problems. When accessibly is already low on their list and + that is how they work things will for sure be a shit show. + </p> +</article> |