Why does /g/ get so upset when attention is paid to aesthetics in hardware or UI?
Would you rather that all your hardware be ugly, clunky, and have a user-hostile UI?
Explain your reasoning in five sentences or less, image is optional.
>aesthetics in hardware
Goes with hardware that people don't actually want to look. Also computers are tools, not toys.
>aesthetics in software
Makes a simple software in a turmoil of colors that doesn't help in nothing with it's use, most of the time it makes things harder.
I have a serious question.
Is KISS supposed to be an ironic maxim?
If the advice is to "keep it simple, stupid", wouldn't it be better just to say "keep it simple"? Adding the extra word just to satisfy some acronym wordplay seems like the epitome of adding stupid extra shit to something for a reason that is ultimately not worth it.
The kind of people who bandy about acronyms like KISS are too dull to grasp that level of irony.
Also I like it how something being a tool precludes it from being aesthetically attractive. Apparently /g/ has never seen a nice tool before.
Usually when you need to inform someone to "keep it simple" they are doing something "stupid". Simply telling them "keep it simple" would not get it through that they are making a dumb move and it wouldn't register for them to change their course of action. Usually when they get called "stupid" they react and combined with those first 3 words usually is enough to steer them in the right direction about whatever they're working on.
To play devil's advocate (because I think I fully agree with you), I can see part of the other side of the argument, that if you have time and energy to put into aesthetics, then put that energy into refining the function of the tool.
That being said, ergonomics, aesthetics, etc. are all outside of the strictly functional scope of most tools and in the past 10-20 years we've realized that these qualities matter not only in the adoption but also in the ongoing use of tools. To ignore these criteria is to bury your head in the sand.
That's fine, but don't you risk poisoning the pill of your advice by antagonizing the person you're advising? I've seen people's input get thrown out (on 4chan and even "in real life") all too often because the messenger made no effort to be likable. Not that you need to be a salesman, but being abrasive or irascible is no way to evangelize a principle (whether that principle is simplicity or otherwise).
Because of the following options:
a) they are math/extremo/g/-autists defending their mentally ill choices of tools that defy all psychological and ergonomical rules
b) they grew in the 90s where everyone was shilled with bad design
c) because they have somehow bad experiences that are actually linked to bad implementations rather than to design or aesthetics
d) because they are jelly for people who can into design
e) (Apple specific) because they are tired of listening to shills promoting their actually horrible design decisions, like separated window and menu bar or sharp cut out wrist ruining alu cases.
I don't mind design at all, as long as it does not compromise the functionality, efficiency (to an extent) or the user's freedom. When it comes to functionality and freedom there should be no compromise whatsoever. A slight loss in efficiency is inevitable.
If it adds to the price then the asthetics are driving up hardware costs for something no one is ever going to see or care about
if it doesn't add to the price, it could just add an asthetic that I don't want in my machine
/g/ mainly cares about the hardware specs because that matters the most to people here. The way a computer looks is secondary to how it performs. You wouldn't use a pretty laptop that can't even play youtube videos over an ugly laptop that can, now would you?
/g/ also doesn't really care about UI, many people on /g/ do things in a CLI anyway. And even when they don't, /g/ prefers features over a pretty UI. And most of all, we like feature-rich software that can be customized to our liking.
Not 5 sentences, I know, but what the hey, it's 4chinz and I don't really need to obey your rules.
Keep It Simple, Concise, Elegant, Easy To Maintain, Intuitive, Inexpensive, Marketable, Profitable, Memorable, Scalable, Durable And Flexible, Stupid
>Why does /g/ get so upset when attention is paid to aesthetics in hardware or UI?
They're butthurt that people like what they don't have.
They rationalize it by saying "wasted effort", or "only homos and girls like it".
You seem to think aesthetics = ornaments.
It's far from that.
Aesthetics can be an intuitive and coherent design, that makes things easier to find and use, which increases productivity.
Even colours, that might seem ornamental, can be used to increase (colour) contrast and guide the eye to menus, toolbars, etc. .
Same for opacity, even animations.