[asdff]

The irony considering "good" ui to a ui designer is completely at odds with users. We got better ui when it was people who had no clue what they were doing just trying to make some sense out of it, vs the cult of dogmatic ui design we see today where everything follows the same crappy patterns and everyone is afraid to step out of line.

[bitwize]

Actually the opposite is the case. UI design was best when designers were systematic in their approach, employing concepts from human psychology and rigorously testing and timing how long it took to perform actions on the computer, optimizing for efficiency, discoverability, and ease of use. Today's UI designers copy from designs they've seen before, often poorly, and when they do apply data and metrics it's to bullshit KPIs like "engagement".

[asdff]

I'm talking the sort of tools you open where its like a giant anime cat lady on a background and a couple buttons to just run some functions or other scripts behind the scenes. Where the venn diagram of the person writing the software, understanding the problem, and understanding how people expected it to be solved overlapped perfectly. Tools for tool users by fellow tool users. Like all those little bespoke self made gizmos in my grandpa's old toolboxes.

[bitwize]

I get it now. The king of this school of thought:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Ra25c8-3I6w

It's a bit unusual to describe a disk utility's UI as absolute kino, but it fits for X-Copy. To understand X-Copy is to understand the Amiga.