[buggy6257]

So your arguments that it’s “objectively bad” are

- it has bad defaults for theme (which I bet most devs change immediately anyways on every IDE)

- “common items” (which when unspecified could be assumed to be subjective to each persons workflow) are hidden in submenus?

- “common shortcuts” (again unspecified) require stretching (again, something trivially changed)

Unless you have more these feel not only extremely weak but extremely subjective. Please avoid trying to phrase your opinions as some fact it’s a tiring trope these days.

[Kuinox]

The fact that's the contrast is bad isn't something subjective, the font rendering is also shit and reduce the contrast further. This is an accessibility issue, not some subjective problem.

[buggy6257]

Allow me to be more clear then:

- “default theme sucks and is bad accessibility”. On its own this is objectively provable of course except when you’re talking about probably the single most commonly changed setting in a coders primary IDE other than maybe font. Calling the app objectively bad because it chose a bad default theme that gets immediately changed is a weak take

- “hidden menu options” this is the subjective one as I called out unless you can provide examples that are universal.

- “bad keyboard shortcuts” is subjective for the most part but even still is a widely changed option and very easy to fix. So calling the app objectively bad for this is also a weak take.

[Kuinox]

You can select a simple metric, practicality, that will be objective.

The items in VS Code are sorted the chance you have to use it depending of the context. In rider, commonly used items are in submenu (rename hiding in refactoring), less commonly used items are not in the submenus.

For the keyboard shorcuts, again you can argue practicality as an objective metric. The number of keys for a combo and distance between the keys have a big practicality factor, and Jetbrains IDEs loves F-keys (that you can't reach if you hold a keyboard like ergonomists recommends)