I think this type of generated content has the same role as illustrations or newspaper caricatures in the past. It doesn't need to be true, it just needs to express a particular viewpoint.
I can't find it now but a while back on R*dd*t /r/synthesizers there was a diatonic Korg Triton that someone had clearly had custom made - possibly from the guts of a diatonic MIDI accordion, not sure.
It looked pretty slick, not the usual homebrewed raggy-edge crap. Someone had clearly spent quite a lot of money on getting *exactly* what they wanted.
And then there are diatonic accordions, which all use a similar layout both for the bass and melody sides (but you can't play in all keys[0] on them, that's the difference between chromatic and diatonic). While they are simpler than chromatic accordions, they are now usually more expensive because fewer people play them.
[0] that is, ~"scales"; usually all buttons will be working
Just look at the spacing and button layout, nothing is aligned, buttons are touching, the plus button is wider than the minus button, sizing is all over the place.
The first two items in each row are aligned, and each item is aligned to one of two columns
> "Buttons are touching"
The only buttons that are touching are the + and - buttons which are part of the number input, as they are one connected part, and the units dropdown which is also part of the number selection in one item
- The icon theming is inconsistent. There's a group of black-and-white icons, a group of blue icons, and a group of colored icons. They are jumbled together and don't seem to indicate any kind of function.
- Tools are not functionally grouped in way which (to me) makes sense. Why is there no separation between "Select", "Adjust", and "Create" tools? Why is the color pipette not part of the color select thingy?
Tool options:
- Why does the Font selector have its label on top and to the right, rather than to the left?
- Why is there no spacing between the "+" of Size and the unit dropdown, like with the labels and the text selector right above?
- Why are window openers in the middle of text properties?
- Why do some options randomly have bold labels?
- Why are Hinting/Color/Style more to the right than the Justify options?
- Why does Color have a weird not-quite-rectangle with grey gaps, rather than reusing the design of the color selector in the toolbox?
- Why are there radio buttons for Justify, but dropdowns for Hinting, Style, and Box - despite them all having about the same number of options?
- Why do the options below Justify have icons rather than labels? Why is the first one using a different look and not visually centered with the other two?
- Why is the label for "Language" above the input field, rather than to the left of it?
Edit dialog on the screen:
- Why is the spacing between "backspace" and "bold" different from that between "bold"/"italic"/"underline"/"strikethrough"?
- Why is the spacing different from that between the font name and size?
- Why is there no spacing between font size and unit? Or, if they are a connected control, why are they not properly connected like -/+?
- Why is "reset to initial"(?) not a proper button?
- Why is the text size number field a different length than the other two? Do we expect people to enter 5-digit font sizes?
- Why does the gap to the right of "strikethrough" not match with anything?
So yes, I would say it is indeed a bit sloppy. There's probably another discussion to be had about its higher-level UX design, but (as a backend designer) this is the kind of stuff a backend developer ends up creating as a quick-and-dirty proof-of-concept before any of the front-end designers get involved.
It is functional, but definitely not enough effort went into making it good.
The icon clash is unique to me - I prefer the colorful Legacy icon so I set it to that. It's not the "default" view, it's just a screenshot I grabbed from my own development build.
I appreciate the annotated screenshot! I'll compare with our default view and see what's applicable and fixable. We also have a pending merge request to do a more thorough redesign of the Text tool options if you're interested in looking at that: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gimp/-/merge_requests/2374
Just FYI, the screenshot was a separate post by dsego, not mine.
> It's not the "default" view, it's just a screenshot I grabbed from my own development build.
Prooobably best to avoid that in release notes. It is official communication, so people expect that the final release will also look like that. I know the default UI is now the Dark Mode (as it is on my machine), but besides the colors it isn't immediately obvious to a casual reader what else is theming versus UI design.
We're normally more selective with screenshots in actual release notes, but since this was a (even more) informal development update post, I used what photos were available (for instance, the spectral blending video and native file chooser dialogue picture use a different theme).
Thanks again, and I'll see what we can do about both of your design feedback!
Thank you for engaging here! Being critical of someone else's work safely from behind a keyboard is trivial, but seeing your baby being torn to shreds is never fun. The fact that you are taking it in stride and are this open to constructive feedback leaves me hopeful for GIMP's future.
As we've seen with Blender: all it takes is a few handful of people who really care about the UX to turn a project from a developer-focused "I guess it technically has all the parts?" into a user-focused "It is actually a pleasure to use and it is free - why haven't you switched yet?".
Just connecting to other people all over the globe was novel. At least for me as a kid, my window to the world in the 90s was TV and a satellite dish, and maybe a local library.
Speaking to relatives in other european countries meant a long distance phone call over a landline and it was expensive. My view of the world was shaped by physical books like encyclopedias or comic books, magazines, TV shows and documentaries. But everything was filtered through translations and choices made by local editors (a famous example is a local TV editor who spent decades at the national broadcasting service selecting foreign documentaries for broadcast, so his name in the credits meant a quality choice). A similar shift happened when we got the satellite dish and could get hundreds of new programs (mostly german, but some english) after having only a handful on terrestrial channels. And then suddenly with dial up, I could connect to the internet and find various web pages from all over the world and join forums and download images and later on videos, join discussions on forums. I would say this lasted from the late 90s to maybe 2010s or even before, things changed with wider facebook adoption and when youtube started streaming high definition videos and you could just watch it like it was TV.
I am wondering if I'm just not smart enough to understand, but I've managed to slog through GEB and in the end the proof seems contrived, it stands on self reference.
Nagel & Newman is much better if you find GEB a slog (which was also my experience). However, Gödel’s theorem is fundamentally due to self reference. But so is the fact that the power set of countable infinity is uncountable, in a similar way.
I think you certainly grasp the gist of things if you understand that the point is self-reference. What makes the proof shocking and beautiful (at least, IMO), is how sparse a toolbox Gödel is working with (and, perhaps, how clever the construction is). Contradictory self-reference in, say, plain English or naïve set theory, is not particularly surprising (at least to our modern eyes), because those are rich languages where you can express an extremely wide range of statements, but Gödel manages to smuggle it in using just whole-number arithmetic and first-order logical statements, which provides a recipe for doing so in essentially any formalized system of interest to "normal" mathematicians.
Some comments elsewhere in this topic mention that you can use the halting problem to arrive at the same essential conclusion in a more understandable way (and certainly one less fraught with small technicalities to work through), but (again, IMO) there's a certain mischievous magic to the way the Gödel sentence gets constructed that makes it very fun to work through for the first time.
In my residential building we have two elevators, a big one and a small one, the small one can fit 3-4 people if they squeeze together, it can't fit a bicycle. And of course, they don't work independently, so if the small one is already on your floor the big one won't stop there, so if I have my bicycle with me, I need to send the small one to a higher floor first, and since people are using the lifts constantly, sometimes I need to wait for a while and repeat the same process. There were times where the small car came several times before I managed to stop the large one.
In some elevators there is a stop lever for emergencies, but I found out it cleared all the selected floors as well. So in my building if I've made a mistake or a kid selected all the floors, I can just flip the stop toggle and reset everything.
In my building there are fire extinguishers for emergencies, but I found out they produce a really amazing snow-blanket effect even when it's not Christmastime.
OMG, this brings out memories about that oh so tempting red stop lever I was absolutely NOT allowed to touch as a kid. I haven't remebered that for decades..
One time our neighbor forgot her phone and activated the stop in the small elevator just as the doors were closing and it started going down. It stopped but already moved down and got stuck between floors. We were inside with our small child and it was not pleasant. Luckily, after resetting the switch and pressing some buttons, the elevator continued on its way.
reply