Subscribe to
NSLog(); Header Image

XPlat Look and Feel

From a gentleman named Thanh Ly, who's sticking up for his use of Qt on a mailing list:

I hear a lot of people saying that Cocoa is much better, etc. It's all
subjective. Well, no one can deny that it's better in the sense that
it's native to OS X. Same goes for UI look and feel issues. People have
different opinions on that. I rather like the way Qt apps behave and
they seem to have brought that behavior with them to OS X. A consistent
UI look/feel for cross platform apps is essential.

I'll agree with him righ up until that last part, the "consistent UI look/feel for cross platform apps is essential." Bzzzt: wrong. Leveraging each platform's look and feel is the better way to give your app an edge. Mac users are very keen: if your app feels at all like a Windows app, they'll hang you in the center market. Mac users appreciate the style, grace, and elegance that its developers have brought to the table.

8 Responses to "XPlat Look and Feel"

  1. I disagree. If Adobe were to noticeably create different UI's for any of their major apps, eg. Photoshop, I think their user base would revolt. Now, I can agree that certain portions of each OS (notably OS X) should be used in each OS, like save sheet vs. save window, for example. Other than that, the UI's should match perfectly.

    This isn't to say that all cross-platform apps should be relegated to the "Windows" standard; rather, let's reverse it. Let OS X's interface be the standard UI model, and the Windows version can mimic that. I think the overall model for UI guidelines is better for OS X, and that Windows apps could simultaneously benefit from a better inferface and an exact likeness to their Mac counterparts.

  2. "other than that"? It's that about which I'm talking! That is a loooooong list.

  3. I agree. There does have to be some consistancy, but Photoshop is different on Windows than on mac. Sure for the most part the ui is the same, but both leverage the design of the system. Now take Macromedia, Dreamweaver is designed for windows, and the mac version is a poor port of that design. I would use Dreamweaver a lot more, but simple things like hot keys that even Microsoft got don't work in Dreamweaver. The whole interface is crap. I switched to the mac platform cause I wanted something better. I want the programs I use to exploit the strengths in the system I use.

    Obviously for portability and ease of maintaining the ui is going to be similar across the different systems, but that doesn't mean you can't exploit the resources available on different operating systems.

  4. I believe UIs should always follow the old NeXT UI guidelines. Consistency should be preserved throughout the operating system. If there's a good reason to keep it different, that's ok (e.g. Launchbar), which is an extremely useful app but never kept to the UI guidelines set forth by NeXT.

  5. I see some interesting statements in this thread. I just want to state that as someone who has used graphic design tools on both mac and windows i have always despised the mac UI for its inefficiency and overcomplicated means aof going about simple task. Dreamweaver is the icon of that idea to me. Dreamweaver is made in a completely counter windows style when it comes to interfaces. It consistently uses too many floating toolbars that junk up your space. This to me was always the mac way. compare it to frontpage (not to start an argument about code efficiency or program options just think interface) where all of the tools are nicely locked (though w/ an option to move if you want) giving you maximum workspace and access to everything you need at once with the convenient preview tab and frontpage has be far the superior working interface. mac interfaces to me always became highly cluttered and applications flowed over into one another and the desktop in a confusing manner that had you accidentally bringing after effects forward when you wanted photoshop.

    i had also always thought this to be a rather truthful article on the subjest of platform interface components. its from haxial, which makes crossplatform software and who both support and began their applications on mac. i found it very reasonable.

  6. dobesov, as I said in my other post, do not post here if you're going to spread stupid FUD. The Mac is elegant and I find Windows is the OS that makes you jump through more stupid hoops just to get simple things done.

    So again: don't post here if you're going to post drivel. I'm all for the sharing of opinions and ideas, but please do some research and share only useful, correct information, not FUD and opinions and, well, "crap."

  7. since you believe that the only opinion in the world that can be right is yours, i will retract from these forums. i did not post any untruthful statement in my last post and any incorrect statement I had made previously I had retracted and was misinformation from other sources, not an insidious attempt to undermine your forum. the point of my posting was to add a little diversity to the thoughts going through these forums which I just happened to fall across while looking for 3rd party benchmarks on the G5.

    It’s all fine if you find yourself a like minded group where everyone can agree that what you say is right, but you will very soon and easily forget or pass over the things that are wrong. i know it takes a little effort, a little humility maybe some restraint to live on the same planet as people with opinions and ideas that are not yours, but man, that’s humanity. i have not been inflammatory, i have not sent posts like "you guys suck! PEE CEEs rule, bill gates is your dad!" or “Linus Torvalds owns your mom!” that’s not the kind of person i am. Frankly I hate those people. if you think statements like the mac OS GUI is cumbersome or confusing (with an explanation of why) is inflammatory, you have major priority problems. Heck, I am willing to bet that that is a good part of the reason why the interface has hardly changed since 1984 with the addition of a “dock” into OSX and another button. I own mac classic and a signed WOZ edition Apple IIgs that still works. That IIgs was my favorite computer and I would probably still be using Apple computers today if they had not dropped everything (including compatibility) for the Mac line. Apple was a good and innovative company, it created the home computer, but it lost its way and its soul when it lost Steve Wozniac. It stagnated through the 1990s without either of its founders. Then Jobs came back (a man who still knows nothing about computers, a ruthless ass of a business man who in extreme 1980s style has always been more concerned with packaging than anything else) and Apple, unable to innovate themselves, used a PC OS at the end of the century and dressed it up like it was 1984 again. Every feature in new Macs are features that everyone else in the world had since 1995, whether it was windows, some UNIX or the emerging linux. They are all number crunching machines and in the end they all do the exact same thing, math. so goodbye, I wont post again, the Mac OS is the end all of interface design you can drink your cocoa and relax, because in 100 years you know, people will still be using Mac OSX, version10.3560. You can go back to your cozy little microcosm of the world where everything you think is right and the outside world doesn't exist, or is obviously evil. In that fuzzy place of comfort where nothing will change and nothing will evolve, so say hi to Darwin for me.

  8. dobesov, say what you want, but some of your facts are wrong, some of your opinions are very ill-founded, and some of your writing is sloppy FUD and nothing else.

    These aren't "forums" they're my site and as such, I can ask that people follow some rules.

    One of those rules is not to spread crap. I'm fine with differing opinions, but you need to support your opinions. You fail to, consistently.

    Your attempt to rile me has failed. I remain calm and am simply glad that you've agreed to leave. Flamebait doesn't hook me.

    Ta ta.