260
submitted 1 month ago by wuphysics87@lemmy.ml to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

When you connect a new device to a 'smart' tv, you must pay homage to the manufacturer with a ritualistic dance. Plugging and unplugging the device. Turning them on and off in the correct sequence like entering a konami code.

Every time you want to switch devices, the tv must scan for them. And god forbid you lose power, or unplug something. You are granted the delight experience of doing it all over again.

I have fond memories of the days of just plugging something in, and pressing the input button. Instant gratification. It was a simpler time.

What is some other tech that used to be better?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] VinesNFluff@pawb.social 52 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I feel like the problem is less with the technology itself and more with some of the stuff within and around it. So let me list my favourite bugbears:

  • Buttons!

Here's the thing about buttons and knobs: they are definite. When you press them, you KNOW you pressed them, you can use your finger to feel for them without activating other stuff by accident. Back in the day with my cheap-ass chinese MP3 player, I could change tracks and playlists without taking it out of my pocket just by using tact and muscle memory.

Nowadays with my smartphone even something as basic as skipping a track requires me to take it out and unlock the screen. It's like. Sure, the phone does a lot more stuff, and can stream stuff from the internet so I don't have to download every track (even if I keep a local library for my favourites in ogg format), it has bluetooth for wireless headphones, a lot of good shit -- But that little bit of user experience is just dead and buried.

Heck, my older sister tells me she used to text her friends in class without taking her phone off her pocket. Imagine! IMAGINE typing a text on one of those old phone number pads, just by muscle memory and tact! It may not be the ideal user experience, but holy shit, it was possible! Try doing anything even close to blind typing on a modern smartphone.

Another point: when something goes unresponsive on a device with just a touchscreen, you experience a confusing and annoying experience as all you have feedback-wise is the screen and sometimes it freezes and you're swiping and tapping and just praying something happens.

When a computer with keys and buttons goes unresponsive you can do the three-fingered-salute and that usually gets it to do something, and because the keyboard is a physical object, it can't be hidden from you by a crashed OS.

Nowadays even kitchen appliances are dropping buttons and knobs. My parents' dishwasher is all touch-buttons, sometimes they brush against it while walking around the kitchen and lo and behold, their butt pauses the washing cycle. Something that wouldn't be an issue with a much cheaper set of regular-ass buttons.

To say nothing of cars and the horrid security issue that fusing a tablet to the dashboard and replacing every control with just that has proven to be.

  • Customization!

Used to be, Windows 9x let you change every colour of your UI right from the built-in settings app and came with a dozen colorschemes built-in, and Windows XP came with three built-in themes and could with just some changing around (you replaced like ONE dll file, a single copypaste), support themes that totally changed the look of the OS. Nowadays you get "White" and "Black" and that's it.

And like, that's windows, a corporate-ass proprietary system for corporate jerks -- But even Linux -- Linux! the darling of nerds who like to change everything in their computers (like me!) has caught this illness -- And you'll see people defending this. Saying that having no theming support and only having users be able to change highlight colours if even that is the "right way" to do it.

On the note of customization -- In the back-then times, chat applications let you set fonts and colours to give your messages "your look", and your friends could do the same. -- Fuck! The application me and my mates used for playing RPGs by text back in the early 10s supported not just font colours, but also complete rich-text, and would let you set different colours for like, things said by a character vs. narration, resulting in an utterly beautiful formatted text.

Don't get me wrong, we use Telegram/Discord for that now and having a fully searchable archive of everything that we did and talked about is great and I wouldn't trade it for the world. But the most customization you get is -- Setting a profile picture. The most formatting you get is bold/italics.

Webforums would let you have an avatar, a user title under the avatar (that many forums let you customise!), and a signature. Nowadays with things like Lemmy you have to squint to see a person's username.

And like, it's not like there is something about the modern technologies unto themselves that prevents these bits of customisation: Computers are better at drawing shit on screen than ever, internet connectivity has only gotten faster, and we figured out 'sending some markup codes to make rich text' as a thing way back in the 80s. We lost all that simply because the people making the applications don't want to have it.

I feel like for every neat thing that new technology provides us, it takes three steps back for entirely human and not at all technological issues. ^read:^ ^capitalism^

[-] Sethayy@sh.itjust.works -5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Uhh Linux is a kernel and on its own doesn't even support graphics much less customising them.

But if you wanna actually blame someone, we'll need to know which software youre talking about - could be OPPO's ColorOS for all we know.

That being said a big name in the Linux world is KDE, and they have one of the best theming engines Ive ever used. Everything QT follows the theme - so much so I didn't even realise how ugly some apps look on windows (like prism launcher not matching my file explorer?? Eww)

That being said I couldn't agree more with the first part, and in linux specifically I wish we had more 'basic display driver' like tools to handle emergency situations.

[-] VinesNFluff@pawb.social 14 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Uhh Linux is a kernel and on its own doesn’t even support graphics much less customising them.

I think we all realise that when someone says "Linux" in casual conversation on the internet, they mean existing well-known distros that include far more than just the naked Kernel, because no one who uses Linux is using just the Kernel, even headless servers aren't "just the kernel".

ANYWAY, I mostly am bitching about Gnome, but other DEs and WMs caught that bug as well to varying degrees. As have a dozen unconnected libre programs. Just for one example try finding a Matrix client that DOESN'T look like a shittier version of Discord (... And doesn't run on the Terminal)

There was even a collective of libre application developers that got together specifically to chastise people for using themes and to beg DEs to disable all theming by default because "muh app's branding and identity!"

Everything QT follows the theme - so much so I didn’t even realise how ugly some apps look on windows

Unless you're using Flatpaks. Then you have to spend an afternoon metaphorically beating your computer with a metaphorical hammer to get the apps (not just qt, gtk too) to look like the rest of the OS.

and in linux specifically I wish we had more ‘basic display driver’ like tools to handle emergency situations.

It's true. It would make the whole thing more resilient.

[-] Sethayy@sh.itjust.works -4 points 1 month ago

Of course, but by just saying Linux you're bound to be wrong somewhere - I'm just highlighting its so broad its an essentially useless definition (42% of all computers run it by the way). Gnome is pretty shit for customisability, so what's more customisable than having another option?

By looking at 'just Linux' you couldn't be more wrong for the core argument.

It also shifts the blame to many smaller devs like matrix which tbh they're mostly doing work for free so who's gonna complain they don't want to add extra complexity, just get in that source code if you really care. And in the age of such easy frontend engines an experienced could probably whip up their own in a week.

Also ive never had issues with qt/flatpaks, using prism launcher as an example, its seamlessly followed my color scheme (not saying bugs don't exist somewhere I'm not seeing, but there certainly is 'just works support to some degree).

I you're gonna be mad people don't like something, yikes open source isn't for you - git as a whole all but is designed to handle disagreements without breaking its stride.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (19 replies)
this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2024
260 points (97.4% liked)

Asklemmy

43027 readers
1481 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS