@anon27868450 The only UI I respect is C4D’s. It’s unbelievable how things are customizable and so well organized. Feels like witchcraft. 
1 Like
always on an aesthetic level, I was impressed by messiah studio, the ui was really well organized and aesthetically pleasing over 10 years ago
@ThinkingPolygons talking about applications to respect is Michael Gibson’s work, who with his moi 3d that looks like a toy for children, is instead a very powerful modeling tool, that man is a genius.
1 Like
The “Industry standard” argument, i think, works when arguing against designs that needlessly go against common sense of the user, making the program needlessly awkward to use at first. Trackball orbiting, Right click select, that kind of stuff…
Neither one column design (2.8 as is, or proposed) is awkward in that sense.
The reason why the proposed design is better, is not because the current design feels alien, but because it’s better in readability, and uses less space. Also, arguably, simply more pleasant to look at.
As I said in the first post, the proposed design is better in pretty much every way. I can’t think of a single advantage the current design offers, that can’t be done, or be done better in the proposed design…
blender being born with a screen divided into 2 parts, the superior composed of the 3d view, and the bottom made up of all the buttons and control panels in a horizontal interface …
halfway with blender 2.5 has changed this inposting by opting for the more “industry standard” way via entering an interface with the vertical property panels to the right of the screen … this result has become the most common and solid over time …
but it has brought with it the “defects” that derive from the horizontal position that no longer exists and these defects must now be tackled and overcome.
but at the same time I believe that some insights are valid up to 2.79 blender and should not be distorted but simply evolved and improved by removing the defects, not aping other applications …
these are obviously my personal opinions.
after which I respect the choices of designers and developers.
We have 2.79 design, 2.8 current design and Brita proposal.
When do you refer to current and proposed? Which one do you refer to?
(I think I know what you mean, but my bad English makes me have doubts)
I am talking specifically about 2.8, not 2.79
So, the current design (In 2.8) and proposed design (for 2.8).