A quick experiment in dumb (Chrome)
-
@BC_Programmer said:
It's sort of ironic in a way, since it pretends to look similar to Windows Aero appearance on every OS by default, but can't seem to get it right on the only one that it's supposed to look like that on. MS themselves learned the whole "do NOT fuck with the window manager or you'll look like shit later" thing with Word 95. Because an italicized Titlebar was simply THAT important at the time.
At least Microsoft seems to be moving in the direction all PC software is going: No OS chrome at all.
I mean, games have been doing it for over a decade, so why not non-game software?
-
@MiffTheFox said:
I mean, games have been doing it for over a decade, so why not non-game software?
Because games have terrible usability?
-
@blakeyrat said:
Because games have terrible usability?
Seriously. Far Cry 3 could have its own TDWTF subforum.
-
@BC_Programmer said:
It's sort of ironic in a way, since it pretends to look similar to Windows Aero appearance on every OS by default, but can't seem to get it right on the only one that it's supposed to look like that on.
Please explain how this is trying to look like Aero. Granted, it is breaking some of the UI rules on my platform (lack of title, tab intruding on window header) but it sure as hell doesn't look anything like Aero to me.
[url=http://postimg.org/image/uejm9nmmp/][img]http://s24.postimg.org/uejm9nmmp/Screen_Shot_2013_05_22_at_11_40_17_PM.jpg[/img][/url]
-
To be honest Aero glass is trying to be OSX's brushed metal.
-
@MiffTheFox said:
To be honest Aero glass is trying to be OSX's brushed metal.
Which itself is just trying to steal the sweet 8-bit look of fvwm.
-
While not the same issue as blakey was having, it did prompt me to see if there were any other WTFs related to Chrome's layout that I could easily find.
Turns out, you can't horizontally resize the window near the top-left side, but can near the top-right.
-
@Salamander said:
Turns out, you can't horizontally resize the window near the top-left side, but can near the top-right.
How could the people behind Go create a browser with so many mistakes?
-
@Salamander said:
Turns out, you can't horizontally resize the window near the top-left side, but can near the top-right.
Works on my machine™.
-
@MiffTheFox said:
Works on my machine™.
A little more digging and it appears to only affect the browser when you have a theme which changes the appearance of the tab bar; default theme works as you'd expect it to.
That just raises more questions IMO.
-
@Salamander said:
While not the same issue as blakey was having, it did prompt me to see if there were any other WTFs related to Chrome's layout that I could easily find.
Turns out, you can't horizontally resize the window near the top-left side, but can near the top-right.
I don't understand. Could you use an icon for a reference point?
-
@morbiuswilters said:
@MiffTheFox said:
And notice how the icon for PPP is different from Telnet, NcFtp and Netscape.To be honest Aero glass is trying to be OSX's brushed metal.
Which itself is just trying to steal the sweet 8-bit look of fvwm.
But what the heck was going on on that terminal top left?
And red color for "Connected" connection status? Hmm...
-
@dynedain said:
@BC_Programmer said:
It's sort of ironic in a way, since it pretends to look similar to Windows Aero appearance on every OS by default, but can't seem to get it right on the only one that it's supposed to look like that on.
Please explain how this is trying to look like Aero. Granted, it is breaking some of the UI rules on my platform (lack of title, tab intruding on window header) but it sure as hell doesn't look anything like Aero to me.
Interesting. I've never seen it run on OSX, but it tries to look the same on XP, and non-Aero Vista/7 as well as every Linux Distro I've run it on (in one I was able to toggle a setting and make the title and caption buttons puke green instead of Blue). I just extended that to OS-X thinking that if nothing else Google would at least be consistent. Evidently that was not the case, which actually raises even more questions- like if they can do it properly (more or less) for OSX, why try to look Vista-esque everywhere else?
-
@BC_Programmer said:
Interesting. I've never seen it run on OSX, but it tries to look the same on XP, and non-Aero Vista/7 as well as every Linux Distro I've run it on (in one I was able to toggle a setting and make the title and caption buttons puke green instead of Blue). I just extended that to OS-X thinking that if nothing else Google would at least be consistent. Evidently that was not the case, which actually raises even more questions- like if they can do it properly (more or less) for OSX, why try to look Vista-esque everywhere else?
I'll repeat what I said with a more serious slant on the idea. OSX was the first mainstream OS to do the whole "window border melds into the window" thing. Vista picked it up next. Chrome's UI was based on Vista's (it was originally for Windows only) so it used the Aero "melding". It ran on XP too, but XP didn't have any similar concept, so they reimplemented Vista-style windows.
When it came time to port Chrome to OSX, they did a similar "melding" into the brushed metal windows (forget the name for their style). When porting Chrome to Linux, however, they had to support every WM, even if any of them supported such windows at the time. Therefore, they took the least common denominator option of making the Chrome window draw its own border, probably with the same code as on Windows XP.
I have no idea what Chrome OS is like since I can't find a real screenshot of it (just reskinned Windows and Chrome OS concept art).
-
@MiffTheFox said:
"window border melds into the window"
I have absolutely no idea what this means.
OSX has no window borders. Vista has super-thick borders.
-
@dhromed said:
@MiffTheFox said:
"window border melds into the window"
I have absolutely no idea what this means.
Well he's right that the OS X "metal" look does that, but he's wrong about Aero.
-
@blakeyrat said:
@dhromed said:
That did not help dhromed (I assume) and me at all.@MiffTheFox said:
"window border melds into the window"
I have absolutely no idea what this means.
Well he's right that the OS X "metal" look does that, but he's wrong about Aero.
I'm thinking it means it looks like the client part of the window was drawn on top of a solid rectangle where only the borders are visible, rather than look like the window borders are a thin frame surrounding the client window. Is that it?
Either that or "part of the window looks like it's an extension of the titlebar in some specific applications".
-
@blakeyrat said:
@dhromed said:
@MiffTheFox said:
"window border melds into the window"
I have absolutely no idea what this means.
Well he's right that the OS X "metal" look does that, but he's wrong about Aero.
The statement makes no sense!
-
@dhromed said:
@blakeyrat said:
@dhromed said:
@MiffTheFox said:
"window border melds into the window"
I have absolutely no idea what this means.
Well he's right that the OS X "metal" look does that, but he's wrong about Aero.
The statement makes no sense!
In my opinion, all windows should be rectangular with a uniform solid color border along the sides and all the buttons should be square with little icons on them and they should all be gray or grey depending on preference.
-
@dhromed said:
The statement makes no sense!
Ok you're probably right.
I *took* it to mean a window that, instead of having established borders on every edge, simply has a single background texture behind every widget. Since there are no borders, the window can be dragged from any part of the background texture that's visible, and resized from a special widget added to the bottom of the window. I think that rather accurately describes the "metal" look in OS X.
The problem with Miff's statement is that *only* describes the "metal" look in OS X. Aero is nothing like that, not appearance-wise, not functionally, ... not even close. So I think Miff's just putting his foot in his mouth again.
He seems to have an interesting mental view of the world that just doesn't happen to correspond well to reality. And he utterly lacks the ability to think, "oh wait, before I post that, should I check whether it's actually true?"
-
I'm going to assume that you're all misinterpreting what I say intentionally because from others here I obviously don't need a B.A. in communications to post here.
I know about as much about OSX as Blakey knows about Linux*. I didn't realize that the only part of the "frame" that actually exists is the title bar. I'm assuming from what's said here that on OSX software has to opt out of having the metal background, whereas on Windows apps have to opt in (for backwards compatibility). Someone want to tell me that this doesn't look like an OSX application:
![[Windows Sidebar Gadget Gallery]](http://i.imgur.com/6EDp6Sy.png)
Zecc got what I was trying to describe right though:
@Zecc said:Either that or "part of the window looks like it's an extension of the titlebar in some specific applications".
I'm going to have to hire them if I ever need a press release or something.
* Unlike Blakey though, my job doesn't involve OSX and I don't use it at home so I can get away with not knowing about it.
-
@MiffTheFox said:
I'm going to assume that you're all misinterpreting what I say intentionally because from others here I obviously don't need a B.A. in communications to post here.
You don't need to get a B.A. in communications from other posters here before posting? Well duh.
Maybe the problem is you type nonsense. Like that sentence.
@MiffTheFox said:
Someone want to tell me that this doesn't look like an OSX application:
That looks nothing like an OS X application.
It also looks nothing like a Windows Aero applications. And yes, I know it's in the Windows 7 Control Panel, but that doesn't change the fact that it's a horrible eye-sore that horribly mis-uses the Aero elements.
@MiffTheFox said:
* Unlike Blakey though, my job doesn't involve OSX and I don't use it at home so I can get away with not knowing about it.
Since when did my job involve Linux? You mean because idiot co-workers keep handing me Linux bullshit even though I'm totally unqualified to run it, and I have to deal with it for a few weeks until I can offload them to some other idiot?
-
@blakeyrat said:
I think that rather accurately describes the "metal" look in OS X.
Yes it does.
@blakeyrat said:
The problem with Miff's statement is that *only* describes the "metal" look in OS X. Aero is nothing like that, not appearance-wise, not functionally, ... not even close.
Also yes.
-
@MiffTheFox said:
I'm going to assume that you're all misinterpreting what I say
Yes.
@MiffTheFox said:
intentionally
No. Your statement was really nonsensical and at odds with reality.
@MiffTheFox said:
Someone want to tell me that this doesn't look like an OSX application:
I agree, it kinda does. But those applications are really rare (both in OSX, windows, and I presume any other OS), and I have never seen the application in your screenshot. Explorer comes kinda close, but it's really still clearly a client area, some thick borders and a title bar.
Just think of Notepad, and that's how most applications look. In windows, that's three thick borders. In OSX, there'd be no border at all; frameless save a tool/titlebar, and a resize widget in the corner.
-
-
@dhromed said:
Just think of Notepad, and that's how most applications look. In windows, that's three thick borders. In OSX, there'd be no border at all; frameless save a tool/titlebar, and a resize widget in the corner.
Yeah, like I said, I'm not familiar with OSX. Just assume that by the window border on OSX I meant the title bar.
-
-
@BC_Programmer said:
MS themselves learned the whole "do NOT fuck with the window manager or you'll look like shit later" thing with Word 95. Because an italicized Titlebar was simply THAT important at the time.
You made me do this:
I hope you're happy.
-
Not that the lastest versions of Windows couldn't do that all by their own, without any help from misbehaving programs. Try to switch back to "classic style" in Vista or anything more recent and be amazed.
When GTK on windows looks better than the native shell, you should start to worry.
-
@BC_Programmer said:
MS themselves learned the whole "do NOT fuck with the window manager or you'll look like shit later" thing with Word 95. Because an italicized Titlebar was simply THAT important at the time.
They did? Because looking at Visual Studio 2012, I think they forgot
-
@PSWorx said:
When GTK on windows looks better than the native shell, you should start to worry.
Classic shell on Vista+ is horrible shit. Why are you tauting its awesomeness?
-
@dhromed said:
@MiffTheFox said:
Just assume that by the window border on OSX I meant the title bar.
WHY?!
BECAUSE NOBODY MYSELF INCLUDED FUCKING USES OSX!
-
Read my post again :)
-
@PSWorx said:
Read my post again :)
I don't know what you're talking about, "classic shell" (not a shell, a skin) works fine for me™.
-
@JoeCool said:
@BC_Programmer said:
MS themselves learned the whole "do NOT fuck with the window manager or you'll look like shit later" thing with Word 95. Because an italicized Titlebar was simply THAT important at the time.
They did? Because looking at Visual Studio 2012, I think they forgot
Well what I mean is, Look at the Image of Word 95. Ender appears to be running it on windows 8, but the titlebar is like some crazy mishmash of 8 and win95. On windows 95, it looks more 'native, all they did was change the text and add a pointless gradient. They met halfway, in that they defer some of the drawing to the window manager but also assume it works a certain way, and it looks pretty terrible.
VS2012 doesn't fuck with the window manager, it simply discards it entirely (in terms of window decorations). Of course this means it will still look the same in the future as it does now, but since it's not deferring to the Window manager for things like the caption buttons it won't look any more (or less) ugly than it does now.
That said, I can't explain IE9.
-
@BC_Programmer said:
Well what I mean is, Look at the Image of Word 95. Ender appears to be running it on windows 8, but the titlebar is like some crazy mishmash of 8 and win95. On windows 95, it looks more 'native, all they did was change the text and add a pointless gradient.
The window border actually changes shape - sometimes it's round, and other times it's not. The minimize/maximize/close buttons also can't decide in which style to show. (also, IIRC, the colour mishmash already happened with Windows 98, which introduced gradients to titlebars).
I also noticed a strange bug: every time the document window is restored (unmaximized), the last menu in the menubar disappears.
![http://s24.postimg.org/uejm9nmmp/Screen_Shot_2013_05_22_at_11_40_17_PM.jpg[/img][/url]](http://s24.postimg.org/uejm9nmmp/Screen_Shot_2013_05_22_at_11_40_17_PM.jpg%5B/img%5D%5B/url%5D){kind=link}
