Comments on: Why Are Most Open Source Application And Websites So FUgly? http://www.clazh.com/why-are-most-open-source-application-and-websites-so-fugly/ Tech & Design Fri, 16 May 2008 10:08:59 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 By: rambhai http://www.clazh.com/why-are-most-open-source-application-and-websites-so-fugly/#comment-18842 rambhai Fri, 18 Jan 2008 11:55:25 +0000 http://www.clazh.com/why-are-most-open-source-application-and-websites-so-fugly/#comment-18842 maybe the simple answer is most of them are free~~hence may be gimp doesnt hav as big of a budget as may be photoshop~~~if you want gold pay for it~~~stones are available in plenty maybe the simple answer is most of them are free~~hence may be gimp doesnt hav as big of a budget as may be photoshop~~~if you want gold pay for it~~~stones are available in plenty

]]> By: Arpit Jacob http://www.clazh.com/why-are-most-open-source-application-and-websites-so-fugly/#comment-12710 Arpit Jacob Sun, 25 Nov 2007 13:56:36 +0000 http://www.clazh.com/why-are-most-open-source-application-and-websites-so-fugly/#comment-12710 michael » I wouldn't call GIMP a replacement for Photoshop. GIMP is rather unpolished and raw the UI is a mess. On the other hand Inkscape is a worthy replacement for Illustrator. michael » I wouldn’t call GIMP a replacement for Photoshop. GIMP is rather unpolished and raw the UI is a mess. On the other hand Inkscape is a worthy replacement for Illustrator.

]]> By: michael http://www.clazh.com/why-are-most-open-source-application-and-websites-so-fugly/#comment-12631 michael Sun, 25 Nov 2007 04:31:39 +0000 http://www.clazh.com/why-are-most-open-source-application-and-websites-so-fugly/#comment-12631 GIMP is a great open source replacement for Adobe Photoshop and Inkscape is a replacement for Adobe Illustrator. GIMP is a great open source replacement for Adobe Photoshop and Inkscape is a replacement for Adobe Illustrator.

]]> By: Bipin 3~ Upadhyay http://www.clazh.com/why-are-most-open-source-application-and-websites-so-fugly/#comment-11261 Bipin 3~ Upadhyay Mon, 19 Nov 2007 10:38:39 +0000 http://www.clazh.com/why-are-most-open-source-application-and-websites-so-fugly/#comment-11261 Well, I've my differences Arpit. First thing first, these site aren't really ugly. They have a proper layout and provide you almost any information in *minimum no. of clicks*. What they don't do is follow the latest trends in web *designing*... and let's face it. They don't need to. In fact, in reality, designing the sites in the _cool mode_ might hamper their main motive, which is to reach to maximum number of people. Just imagine opening a flash/silverlight/ajax, or say, wordpress in lynx :) On and ending note, IANA is redesigning it's site :) Well, I’ve my differences Arpit.
First thing first, these site aren’t really ugly. They have a proper layout and provide you almost any information in *minimum no. of clicks*. What they don’t do is follow the latest trends in web *designing*… and let’s face it. They don’t need to.
In fact, in reality, designing the sites in the _cool mode_ might hamper their main motive, which is to reach to maximum number of people. Just imagine opening a flash/silverlight/ajax, or say, wordpress in lynx :)

On and ending note, IANA is redesigning it’s site :)

]]> By: rdw http://www.clazh.com/why-are-most-open-source-application-and-websites-so-fugly/#comment-11077 rdw Sun, 18 Nov 2007 18:04:04 +0000 http://www.clazh.com/why-are-most-open-source-application-and-websites-so-fugly/#comment-11077 It boggles my mind too sometimes why people spend months developing something but can't put up a decent website. Quite often those sites don't even make it clear on the first page what the software actually does. Though i think useability is more useful than pretty looks. Lots of popular commercial sites are ugly, or at least boring looking. It boggles my mind too sometimes why people spend months developing something but can’t put up a decent website. Quite often those sites don’t even make it clear on the first page what the software actually does. Though i think useability is more useful than pretty looks. Lots of popular commercial sites are ugly, or at least boring looking.

]]>