Jon A. Cruz wrote:
And there are two other large factors for Adobe's UI design that must be kept in mind
- "I don't care if this sucks, we need it thus-and-so so that we can
sell more copies of Photoshop"
Hi all this is one of those imho posts. Im a user not a dev. Have used AI FH and now learning Inkscape.
I dont necessarily agree that it needs to look like AI to be practical, however they are interesting to look at because yep the ui from PS and AI have commonality, the ui for many macintosh apps had commonality, this was part of the apple way of doing things. It meant that people *could* futz around and see where the common things happened and look further right in the menu listing for things specific to that application or that sort of thing.
I'm new to all of this but I can se that there is already a lot of cooperation between the graphics tools developers and areas where we overlap with gnome. I dont think we need to develop a mac or win interface but using the libre meets to encourage common approaches and ways of accessing things is great because the people that use these apps most often use them as a combined group of apps wangling something in gimp, importing it into inkscape, tracing some vectors, exporting stuff back out and into scribus or pdf or openoffice.
So I guess I'm saying yep reducing the learning load per application is a great idea. Using the applications and desktops which can participate in that collaboration to get as much congruent ui as possible is probably my point of difference. eg Gnome, Scribus, Inkscape, Gimp, etc That way at least the groups participating in finding common ways to do things are talking about their own functionality and what best fits with its partners rather than trying to play catch up on the uis of people who dont operate like that and will be designing to suit different kinds of functions / file formats / constraints / marketing depts =).
Cheers
Janet