[ Show All Polls | Show Comments | Submit Comment ]
|The FLTK website was designed with speed in mind. The design as a result is very minimal. Should we change fltk.org? Please write your suggestions into the comments section.|
|I love the site the way it is|| 1318 / 26%|
|it only needs a different color scheme|| 696 / 13%|
|it needs a redesign, but minimalistic is good|| 2082 / 41%|
|the FLTK site needs a complete redesign - please hire an artist|| 966 / 19%|
|5062 total votes.|
[ Submit Comment ]
From mdickie, 10:03 May 21, 2013 (score=3)
I think it needs a redesign using html5, newer div techniques and a better overview. Also I think Bugs & Features should be replace through another Bugtracker because it is heavy to find duplicates. In Bugzilla it's much easier to find duplicates.
[ Reply ]
From overthetop, 13:59 Apr 10, 2012 (score=3)
It needs a redesign but it does not look bad now. It looks fine, but it is way to messy underneath. It should be designed with minimum html and the spacing, layout, etc... should be done with css.
[ Reply ]
From bmorel, 20:36 Mar 09, 2012 (score=3)
Need for beauty? Pfeu! I don't mind beauty, I just wan't easy, clear accessible sites.
Now, about the site... I am sorry, I will be hard. Very HARD.
1) wikipedia gives you many more credits than yourselves. The problem is that on YOUR site, the newcommer does not see why to choose FLTK instead of WxWidgets or Qt? (for Gtk and MFC, it is easy: portability...)
2) your site, using a cover of simplicity is just not complete (the main page should say why you are so good, so beautiful, so intelligent... oh, sorry, you are an open source project? And? Does it mean that we are stupid to use and produce open source softwares?), or at least, make the user think he is not in the right place.
BTW... look your "forum" page. Are you sure it is not a mailing-list? I am not, and I am a visitor. Err... I do not like rich interface, I do not like also web scripts, but... using a more common design does not cost resources (images are not loaded on text browsers so if you do not use them you could reach minimalism, and be clearer than you are. Anyway, most images can be light! -- use svg by example -- )
3) I am here to look if I can find a standard, C++ compatible, easy to use, and portable library, better that wxWidgets (to be more precise, menus management is ... no, no comment).
I just know you because you are producing an open source software. I already seen projects using fltk on debian. They were not beautiful, but they were useful. The best thing for a software.
Seriously, you wrote a library which is well known... only under linux!
If I would troll, I would say that the look and feel of fltk softwares I seen is like this website: disgusting (in appearance). But, I never stop myself on graphics.
The main problem I think you have is that you even do not speak of your specificities, and ADVANTAGES! (you probably have, but which?).
Why are you different of Qt and wxWidgets? If you does not have good differences, why not merging?
I should have ask this question of your forum, I know, but I just seen a mailing-list-like website instead of a forum.
There is also Versions.
Even on your FAQ, the conclusion is at... The end!
F-A-Q ==> Frequently Asked Question. People want quick replies!
They do not want to learn history of the project... they will have to learn your library, and to do that, they will need to want it!
They will not want the past...
By the way! You plan to have a compatibility layer between: 1.2, 1.3 and 2.0, merged in 3.0! I do not understand... to merge version is ok, but keep compatibility with your old versions? I do not think it will help you.
Hum... maybe you will ban me for that comment. Or maybe you will ask me to speak with you.
I would prefer the second, because I don't want to see an open source good project to die.
Mail me if my comment cause problems.
(I have more to say, but, it is time to sleep)
[ Reply ]
From engelsman, 17:45 Mar 18, 2012 (score=3)
Several points to reply:
- FLTK is a Fast Light Toolkit, designed to run on MacOS, Windows and Linux, and with a small footprint and few dependencies so that you can also run it on small embedded systems.
- FLTK is a fraction of the size and complexity of Qt and wxWidgets in order to keep it fast and light, but it does mean that you might have to roll your own widgets if you want something particular.
- The site is a little, um, non-standard, and the "web" forums are really just views into a set of mailing lists, which are also gatewayed and available via NNTP to newsreaders. It's pretty versatile and people can access and archive however they want.
- The version number confusion is the result of history but is covered in the Article What are the Versions of FLTK? which is tweaked so that it remains on the first screen of the "Articles and FAQs" tab.
- Yes, there should probably be a more obvious link to a FAQ list.
- Constructive suggestions and patches are always welcome, so sign up and get involved :-)
From Frank, 15:48 Nov 16, 2011 (score=3)
I says the same as nick, if I were good at selling things -- I would sell you a new look ;)
I like the minimalism of the look for this page, but a small dash of colour and padding here and there would not hurt. I also consider the red text to be hard to read, a darker value would probably be better.
Well, enough chatter here! I'm going to install FLTK1.3 (Last time around I used FLTK2.0, it had the highest even version number!) and figure out how the hack I can make a multi-threaded MVC program with asynchronous callbacks in C/C++ and Lua ;)
The reasoning for using MVC-like architecture is so that I can shovel away the V component when FLTK3.0 comes out with ease. And for the “multi-threaded asynchronous-callback”-thingie; Lets just say that I've become a node.js junkie in the last one and a half month (Right now it's the only model my brain can think with, the conversion did hurt though).
[ Reply ]
From nick, 02:41 Nov 05, 2011 (score=3)
It's a very dated look, but the minimalistic /feel/ is good. Unfortunately the layout relies heavily on what I like to call "table madness." There are tables 5 levels deep on the home page... try:
document.querySelector('table table table table table');
...and also, blank table cells are used instead of padding, etc. This is not really minimalism after all, because a ton of presentational markup is sent across the wire with each page request, which could instead be achieved by a single css file cached in the browser and much less markup.
In short, this is what people were doing around 1999/2000, before css had really matured and become widely supported. I think it's time for an update. If I was more of a sales guy I'd sell you an excellent redesign package myself ;)
[ Reply ]
From TeXJunky, 21:20 Oct 25, 2011 (score=3)
love is not the right word, but it easy to navigate.
[ Reply ]
From dejan, 06:06 Oct 23, 2011 (score=3)
FLAK.org??? FLKT??? :)
Someone had too much alcohol while typing message for this poll. :)
[ Reply ]