Idk man, I think it's pretty charming even if it's not exactly the design choice I'd have gone with.
reply1. There is a link to a demo website, which is in fact in similar style.
reply2. I don't think the website is _nearly unreadable_.
3. Pretty rude remark.
> 2. I don't think the website is _nearly unreadable_.
replyFor me personally, the color scheme is uncomfortable to read. Dark text on a dark background
It's the decades-old problem of blue on black, which has led to interminable discussions of which exact tint of blue should be ECMA-45 blue on a terminal. Pick one, it has poor contrast with a black background. Pick another, it has poor contrast with a white background.
reply* https://invisible-island.net/xterm/xterm.faq.html#dont_like_...
So, pick two? One for each background?
replyThere is only one 'blue', colour number 4, in ECMA-45.
replyA terminal emulator could choose to display different foreground blues, depending on the background colour.
replytry the demo. it’s an entirely different style, which shows how versatile the tool is
replyIt still doesn't reflect the design philosophy at all, though. A wacky approximation of early MacOS that offers nonfunctional UI affordances doesn't fit my bill of No obscurantist programming languages and styles, or simple, maintainable software akin to machines that need to work under all circumstances in the far north.
replyI was also a little disappointed with the philosophy's goals in general, which seem to be mostly the personal preferences of a lone-wolf style open source developer, not a universal approach to software design.
When you describe my programming and design philosophy as "the personal preferences of a lone-wolf style open source developer, not a universal approach to software design", I consider that the absolute best compliment I could have ever hoped for!
replyA "universal" approach to software design is the problem I am addressing, not the solution. Coming up with your own philosophy of design and implementation that works for you, and hopefully works for others, is how we get better software.
I'm not arguing with that, I think; I agree with your general sentiment and apparently read many of the same books you read as well. Yet I still believe there's value in a shared understanding of what quality software is, and what ideals to strive for in its conception.
reply> I was also a little disappointed with the philosophy's goals in general, which seem to be mostly the personal preferences of a lone-wolf style open source developer, not a universal approach to software design.
replyHow would a universal approach to software design be in any way appropriate for this?
I like the general concept of software that treats its users as responsible adults, in the sense of not restricting them in how they can use the software; the analogy to machines that must work in remote areas with an extreme climate and no connection to the outside world is an apt one. Rejecting complexity in favour of maintainability, allowing to reach into and modify if necessary, those things I feel could be sharpened into proper, and universal guiding principles.
replyTroll trots out the old "You should only be allowed the web site aesthetic I approve of and anyone who doesn't agree with me is stupid!" and is shocked that not everyone on HN appreciates their insightful genius.
replySome things are a standard, and thats a good thing... Line lenghts discussed here for example: https://baymard.com/blog/line-length-readability
replyHN Guidelines: "Be kind. Don't be snarky. [...] Don't be curmudgeonly. Thoughtful criticism is fine, but please don't be rigidly or generically negative. [...] Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something."
replyidk, the demo thingy looks great.
replyObviously we have different monitors, but on mine the geneva-9 font doesn't render properly in the subpixels causing alternate green and purple, the underlines don't line up to the beginning of the words, and the whole thing stretches across the window the same way.
replyCould use some more attention to responsive layout though - too nav links aligned left flow into and overlap with top nav links aligned right. I’m on my phone right now so I can check but flex or plain old float could’ve solved that.
replyI prefer text over the whole width compared to websites that put all their content in the left 80 columns of the screen, taking up about a quarter of my screen width
replyWhy does my eye need to move more than it needs to?
replyWhy does my screen need to be used less than it needs to? If you're only going to use 1/4 of my screen for your content, you could at least put a cute cat picture in the rest of it or something
replyWhitespace is for breathing.
replyThat's a hell of a lot of breathing. I don't have that much lung capacity
replyIt is for sure readable, why so dramatic?
replyMy vision isn’t great and I do find it more difficult to read comfortably than most sites. I haven’t checked the actual contrast ratio, but for this particular font and size the text color feels like it’s lacking strong contrast against the background. The tabs at the top are even more difficult to read comfortably than.
replyBut I understand that sites that look this way are not made for maximum legibility, but as an in-group signifier.
The text flows over the whole width is one point, the paddings and margins is another one. Sure, you can read this if you really want, but it's painful.
replyI would like to introduce a wild concept -- browser window is resizable.
replyDo you think I will resize my browser window just because you fucked up your layout? No, I will leave.
replysure, but I prefer this layout to majority of big tech today.
replyGives me flexibility and choice and does not punish me with 600px wide content box because majority of users have trouble grasping the concept of window management.
Fair enough, I'd say for niche content it may be okay, but for targeting broader audiences I'd guess you lose many readers with that readability on fullscreen browser windows (what most people will have in front of them while surfing I guess).
replydeleted
replyif you move your mouse to the edge of your browser window it turns into a little bidiretional arrow, if you click then drag you can make your window more narrow until it suits your desired reading preference
reply