freac
freac copied to clipboard
enzo1982
Windows UI is UGLY
I mean the defaq is this thing? It could use some improvements on Windows so it doesn't look like some pice of garbage :)
Well, yeah, it's certainly not the most beautiful. It looks especially ugly on Windows 7 with the thick frame and the old-style caption, though. Even more so with the black accent color. It's slightly better on Windows 10, I think:
Be aware that I'm developing this software as a single developer in my spare time. There are many areas I'd like to improve if I could invest more time. But time is scarce, so my focus is on improving functionality, which is why the UI is lacking a bit.
If it really was unbearable, though, someone could go ahead and implement a more beautiful look. It's all open source after all and if there was a compelling re-design, I might even add it to the official version.
If that doesn't happen, however, the UI looks will have to wait until everything else is finished. ;)
well, I wouldn't go so far as to say it's ugly ... I mean, I don't really care. it's a utility app, so it doesn't need to be beautiful. But what I WOULD like to see is the ability to adjust font size and stuff. I'm getting to the point in my life where I can't correct my vision for up-close, computer distance, and far distances with the same piece of eyewear. So if I want to be on the PC and watch TV at the same time, one of them is going to be hard to see! ;)
I seriously do appreciate the work you have put into this app. I think the quality and dependability is right up on the level with one I'd expect to be asked to pay for.
UI scaling and font size can be adjusted with the --scale:n.n argument. The default scaling since version 1.1.2 is 1.125x which results in 9pt font size (Windows standard at 100% font size setting). In previous releases the default in fre:ac was 8pt, which really was a bit too small for lots of users.
For even bigger fonts, pass a higher value to the --scale argument when starting fre:ac. E.g. --scale:1.5 for 12pt fonts. If you have a link to fre:ac in the Start menu or on the desktop, you can add this argument in the link properties and fre:ac should always start with your custom scale setting.
I think fre:ac v1.1.x looks quite nice & visually accessible in Windows 10 (dark theme) on a 1920x1080 laptop screen. Screenshot below for reference:
There is a strange bar above the titlebar, but this is not a deal-breaker. (For comparison, as seen on Windows 8.1 by another user: #123)
The font size is OK (larger since v1.1.x) -- even for someone with poor vision: severe myopia in both eyes (more than -10.00 diopters per eye), moderate astigmatism in both eyes (+2 to 4 diopters, with axis of several hundred degrees), plus clip-on reading glasses (+3.00 diopters) for looking at the laptop screen.
Personally, I don't like designs that use metro-style GUI with giant flat icons/buttons & lots of wasted space.
Thank you for your feedback!
That small bar above the caption is the top window border and is kind of forced there by Windows (the other window borders are transparent). I have yet to figure out a good way to hide it while maintaining resize functionality and compatibility with the UI framework. May have another look at it for some future 1.1.x release.
i'd like to comment and moan about the ui too. its not really that it looks ugly (as it is ugly) but more that certain buttons and especially the window controls are just tiny. Why doesnt this follow like every other windows app? i often misclick on the tiny buttons.
i do hope the ui can be made to look better too eventually. i see the window controls being tiny as a way bigger issue.
There's an old adage:
Here, we do 3 types of jobs;
- Fast
- Cheap
- Quality
You may choose any 2.
In software, that would be something like; you may choose any 2 of:
- Cross-platform
- functional & performant (fast, reliable, stable, capable, features, etc.)
- beautiful
Let's not have Fre:AC go down the crApple route of pretty-but-klunky. crApple designs from the UI inward, which has a bunch of inherent flaws (hence they adopted POSIX for MacOS v10 (which I'd call AppleBSD)), instead of the approach of especially POSIX which is engine/infrastructure outward.
What good is a car with a custom paint-job, if the engine is beyond repair? Whereas an ugly car which actually runs (especially if reliably), is infinitely more useful.
I, personally, like Fre:AC because it does the job I need, and does that job well.
Given that I have a clue about UI/UX design, a few comments on Fre:AC's UI, in support of @enzo1982
- generally, for all that Fre:AC does, the UI is actually fairly sensible, in terms of usability
- especially the main window UI, for the basics, is pretty good (though, only quibble would be that the toolbar buttons need to be clearer / more distinct)
- the configuration dialogue is fairly well organised, given how many parameters/variables there are
- overall, the design of interface (and interaction) for each of configuration (before use) and monitoring progress (during a transcode or CDDA extraction) is sensible, and could be a whole lot worse
- big picture; especially for a one-man-band, I think enzo1982 has done a good job of making a usable UI
- usability trumps beauty, every time
- personally, folks should be thankful than there is a GUI at all, rather than only a CLI (which would be simpler and more efficient)
I'd actually suggest that Fre:AC become even more modular; make the core of it CLI-only, but designed to be scriptable, so that it may be driven by any (suitable) GUI, in configurator–actor topology. See Eric Raymond's excellent The Art of Unix Programming for further explanation. This way, enzo1982 can focus on functionality, while others can make a plethora of GUIs as they wish.
If you liked @eric-s-raymond's book about software design/architecture, then you may also like The Art of Unix Usability. I can recommend (many) other materials on usability, too, if people wish.
