You can't "skill issue" yourself out from every situation : programmer

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 122 points 1 week ago (5 children)

The open source music notation software MuseScore used to be really, really bad. A musician and UX designer gave it a scathing review in a humorous YouTube video. And then the company behind MuseScore hired that YouTuber and spent a lot of effort doing a major redesign, and now it's actually quite good.

All it takes is for the people in charge of the project to put aside their hubris and trust that sometimes, programmers aren't the best designers, and to get people who are trained in designing and evaluating user interfaces to do the job. And to perform adequate user testing.

[–] pdqcp@lemmy.dbzer0.com 34 points 1 week ago

I was prepared to hear the story that the youtuber got sued into oblivion for defamation. Glad to hear they actually worked on improving it instead

[–] bluesheep@lemm.ee 25 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Love tentacrul. I re-watch that video from time to time just because it's so good. It was also really funny watching a later video of his where he just casually dropped that he was working on musescore.

[–] captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 week ago (3 children)

I want him to do FreeCAD.

load more comments (3 replies)

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

That whole series is absolutely brilliant, but it's hard to go past the Sibelius one if I'm gonna go back to one. And I say that as a long-time Sibelius user who can comfortably work much faster in it than in any of the alternatives.

[–] bluesheep@lemm.ee 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

The conclusion I got from the video was that, while it's very powerful software, it's very difficult for new users to start using the program due to unintuitive placement of options. That's how he, for a lack of better word, reviews each piece of software, from the eyes of a new user.

But on the other hand, the video is also 7 years old at this point so maybe sibbelius has fixed some of the stuff that he pointed out. I don't really compose music so I honestly wouldn't know.

load more comments (3 replies)

[–] ICastFist@programming.dev 11 points 1 week ago

Blender's UI overhaul from 2.7 to 2.8 was a much needed and very welcome update as well

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] otter@lemmy.ca 74 points 1 week ago (4 children)

There's a quote along the lines of "User error is not a thing, the system allowed for the error through bad design"

Which can be true depending on how far you stretch it. I'd say that if a chunk of the user base is having a problem, it's a design problem

[–] dfyx@lemmy.helios42.de 39 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

I recently had a case at work where you could move an object by holding the left mouse button and delete it with the right mouse button. If you deleted it while moving, you got an error message and the program would crash. It was an easy fix but afterwards I had a one hour discussion with our usability engineers if what I had fixed was a bug (my opinion) or a user error (theirs).

[–] Jesus_666@lemmy.world 32 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

That one's easy. Is the crash part of the program's design?

If not: It's an implementation bug, the program is not behaving as intended.

If yes: It's a design bug, crashes shouldn't be intended behavior.

[–] dfyx@lemmy.helios42.de 21 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

Their argument was along the lines of "The requirements and design don't specify what should happen if you move and delete at the same time so it can't be a bug. Behavior that doesn't violate the design but also doesn't lead to the result the user wanted is a user error". My argument was that we can't always specify the interaction between arbitrary features other than "If the user does two things at once, at least one of them should be executed, ideally both" and "the program shouldn't crash just because the user did something unexpected". Otherwise our design document would be ten times as long.

[–] nogooduser@lemmy.world 26 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I think that there is always an implied design requirement of the program shouldn’t crash.

[–] dfyx@lemmy.helios42.de 12 points 1 week ago (3 children)

You would think so, right? But that doesn't have a requirement ID so apparently it can't be referenced in the incident report.

load more comments (3 replies)

[–] Jesus_666@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Yeah, that's basically the kind of logic you use when designing a low-level programming language: If we didn't define what happens here then anything that happens is correct behavior and it's up to the user to avoid it.

Of course applying that logic to a GUI application intended for a comparatively nontechnical audience is utter madness.

[–] nous@programming.dev 17 points 1 week ago

That is the type of thinking that causes a massive amount of CVEs in those languages.

[–] mobotsar@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

That's the kind of logic people historically used when designing low level programming languages. It's not the kind of logic you should use or that people nowadays usually do use. Undefined behavior is widely seen as a Bad Thing in the programming language design community.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] nous@programming.dev 7 points 1 week ago

Hey, the design specs never said the program shouldn't blast out and air raid siren at full volumn every time the user clicks a button. Cannot be a bug, must be user error.

[–] Gyroplast@pawb.social 7 points 1 week ago

They were holding it wrong, obviously.

[–] exu@feditown.com 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

God really should get on that and fix the design issues with humans

[–] Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 week ago

I dunno, if we're really designed in that dudes image then I wouldn't trust him at all personally.

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] tauren@lemm.ee 44 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You can't "skill issue" yourself out from every situation

If you can't do that - that's a skill issue tbh.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] tatterdemalion@programming.dev 22 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

And here I am trying to convince my sales team that supporting a workflow where users run our app with sudo is a bad idea.

[–] kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone 21 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Users: I demand OSS devs and Maintainers do X

OSS Devs/Maintainers: Are you willing to contribute code or at least donate any money?

Users: Uhh its OSS, you should just do all the work for free with no funding. Also I demand that your software be as polished and complete as (premium proprietary software) I demand you do X, I demand you do Y, because im entitled to free software.

[–] MonkeMischief@lemmy.today 14 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I am sympathetic but also so damn tired of seeing what essentially translates to:

"Look, [megacorpo] bought out my school's ecosystem so that's all I learned. It's "industry standard", I can't believe this FOSS can't even do this one niche corporate-job feature, therefore it's objectively terrible / not ready / inferior / useless for job work."

Which can usually be further boiled down to:

"I tried it but it wasn't a carbon copy of my preferred corpo-ware without any strings attached so it basically sucks."

[–] Bimfred@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Counterpoint: Blender was the first 3d modeling tool I tried and I bounced off that UX so hard that I haven't touched it in nearly 20 years. Sometimes a bad UX is just bad UX.

[–] MonkeMischief@lemmy.today 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Sometimes a bad UX is just bad UX.

Totally can be! Absolutely!

Although Blender's amazingly usable now and has had lots of love in that regard! But it took a LOT of support to get this far.

Good UX is crazy important.

I think I'm more irritated at the people who seem to show up in so many FOSS discussions, expect FOSS alternatives to compete 1:1 with their billion-dollar corpo-ware of choice, demand the world of it, offer zero support, and then declare "it sucks and isn't ready for the real world" because it's not so perfect that Autodesk and Adobe are like "Well we've had a good run, guys." and give up lol.

I sympathize because I know where the frustration comes from. They're sick of their tools being held hostage by interests that constantly seek to screw them! But change requires flexibility, cooperation, and support.

I think a lot of people just don't want to say "I want Maya/Photoshop/Excel/Solidworks/Windows/etc...but free and without dark-patterns!" (Don't we all lol) Because they know that sounds unreasonable (yarr aside lol) , but people tend to get settled and comfortable with whatever got to them first.

But taking that out on the community isn't helping anybody.

Constructive criticism of UI/UX is absolutely essential though, and requires a lot more understanding of how humans interact with things than simply "Well, billion-dollar-ware has always done it this way." Haha

[–] kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 1 week ago

Absolutely this, you cannot expect Blender level UI/UX without blender level funding. The fundamental problem is that new users/inexperienced users/nontechnical users arent used to contributing bug reports or even proper constructive criticism.

Furthermore what people forget is that being a 1:1 carbon copy of a corporate software isnt inherently a good thing. For example Linux, I love Linux and I love the way it works. I use it not because its OSS but because I genuenly prefer it above Windows, I dont want Linux to be like Windows. I love tiling, I love Sway, I love Hyprland, and despite being in alpha I love the Cosmic Desktop. I dont care that tiling isnt immediately intuitive to Windows users, I absolutely love it.

While im at it I absolutely despise the idea that the Terminal is inherently not user friendly (especially with a shell like fish). The idea that just because somebody isnt used to something makes it bad. Or that having to use a wiki/look at the docs means its "not ready". All software is new to somebody at some point, that doesn't make it bad.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] LeninOnAPrayer@lemm.ee 20 points 1 week ago

This sadly excludes the majority of bad UX decisions that are done entirely to maximize users time inside of the app as well as display advertising.

So many functional apps are destroyed by these incentives. There is literally a "skill issue" but in the opposite direction. The design is either purposely malicious in a subtle way with "dark patterns" (something Amazon is insanely guilty of. Literally just go try and return and item.) or is purposely annoying trying to ensure the user purchases the "free trial" to actually make the app functional. Knowing a lot of users will be charged at least once for the free trial.

I guess my point is that there is so so so so much wrong with UX design today. But for the majority of people that's not because of a bad programmer with no design knowledge. It's on purpose in most cases.

[–] OmegaLemmy@discuss.online 20 points 1 week ago (4 children)

I like GTK and it's really simple to make good looking functional UI with GTK4, but apparently people have a hate boner for anything good looking, GTK or Gnome related

[–] arudesalad@sh.itjust.works 26 points 1 week ago (1 children)

From what I've heard about it, it's because the default gtk style only fits in with gnome, and gtk4 made it really difficult to customise it and is also really buggy on anything not gnome.

That's what I've heard anyway, I'm not a distro dev and the distro I last used is still on gtk3

[–] azertyfun@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Nowadays "buggy" is not how I'd describe it, though there were certainly teething issues at the beginning. By now other DEs have learned to deal with it.

However it's still true that the GTK4 design is ill-fitting, and very opinionated. Quite exemplary of this are the applications that hardcode the GTK file picker (like Firefox and chrome) even though it's inferior in every way to the Qt file picker and forces the infuriating GTK "design" choice of doing fuzzy search when you type in the file list instead of jumping to the relevant file. Very annoying when dealing with organized directories especially when no other file browser on my system works that way!

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

From what I've heard from devs who touched GTK/Gnome, that iskind of caused by the GTK devs.

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] ThePyroPython@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago (4 children)

cough Inkscape cough ...

Why are y'all looking at me like that?

[–] endeavor@sopuli.xyz 13 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Inkscape isnt bad, Ive used it and preferred its ux to that of adobes even 10 years ago.

now freecad...

[–] Kushan@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago (3 children)

There's no cad somewhere on this planet with good UX.

load more comments (3 replies)

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org 8 points 1 week ago

Inkscape's UX is horrendous. Looks alright, but it's unusable garbage.

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] neidu3@sh.itjust.works 16 points 1 week ago

Well, yes, just not on the users side.

[–] RedStrider@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago (2 children)

people always mention blender when talking about good ux in open source software, but i feel like the godot game engine doesn't get enough love. it's miles above of unity in terms of intuitiveness for me personally. plus it's entirely customisable since it's built in godot itself.

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] gadfly1999@lemm.ee 13 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

But it is a skill issue, just UI/UX design skill. Not software development skill.

[–] BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago

Every Microsoft product.

But also Gimp.

Programmer Humor

Rules