Bring Back Idiomatic Design (2023)

Bring Back Idiomatic Design (2023)(essays.johnloeber.com)

694 points by phil294 82 days ago | 371 comments

In text boxes in some applications, enter submits the entered text, and ctrl-enter forces a newline (not at my computer, but I think Slack does this). In others, it's the other way around (pretty sure GitHub does this for comments).

I don't know how we got here and I don't know how to fix it, but "bring back idiomatic design" doesn't help when we don't have enough idioms. I'm not even sure if those two behaviors are wrong to be inconsistent: you're probably more likely to want fancier formatting in a PR review comment than a chat message. But as a user, it's frustrating to have to keep track of which is which.

layer8 81 days ago | |

Decades ago, Return and Enter were two different keys for that reason: Return to insert a line break, Enter to submit your input.

Given the reduction to a single key, the traditional GUI rule is that Enter in a multiline/multi-paragraph input doesn’t submit like it does in other contexts, but inserts a line break (or paragraph break), while Ctrl+Enter submits.

Chat apps, where single-paragraph content is the typical case, tend to reverse this. Good apps make this configurable.

jeberle 81 days ago | | |

Before that, page-mode terminals used <Return> to move to first field on a subsequent line (like a line-based <Tab>) and sent the page only on <Enter> or <Fn-key>. This made for quick navigation w/ zero ambiguity.

irishcoffee 81 days ago | | |

Carriage return and line feed go way back. Tty stands for teletype. A computer was the job description of a person.

It’s turtles all the way down.

iambateman 81 days ago | | |

Microsoft teams: not as bad as people say, except for this situation.

I have accidentally sent so many messages trying to get to a new line.

cratermoon 81 days ago | | |

don't get me started on backspace vs delete...

AgentEpsilon 81 days ago | |

Teams does both - normally it’s Enter to submit and Shift+Enter for a new line, but when you open the formatting tools it switches. They at least do have a message indicating which key combo inputs a new line, but it still gets me on occasion.

jimbokun 81 days ago | | |

I have a very mild jolt of anxiety every time I want to enter a new line in Teams or Slack, wondering if it will send a half completed message I will need to edit after the recipient has seen the half completed message, or it will enter a new line like I want it to.

The behavior also changes if you start editing a numbered or unordered list. Maybe that enters the "formatting tools" mode you mention?

powvans 81 days ago | | |

Teams is insane. You want a new entry in a bulleted list? Hit the enter key. If you dare.

I had managed to be on Slack exclusively for at least 10 years. Recent acquisition has me using Teams and it's hilarious to see for the first time what people have been complaining about. I thought surely people are exaggerating. No, no they are not.

It only took a couple weeks for me to figure out that I would have to compose longer messages somewhere else and then paste them into Teams.

andrepd 81 days ago | | |

The Signal desktop app does both too, I guess, but in a way that actually makes sense. Enter sends a message since IMs tend to be short one-liners. Shift-Enter inserts a line break.

But if you click an arrow on the top of the text box, it expands to more than half of the height of the window, and now Enter does a line break and Shift-Enter sends. Which makes a lot of sense because now you're in "message composer" / "word processor" mode.

darrylb42 81 days ago | | |

Slack is similar Shift enter in normal text. Enter in a code block, shift enter sends in a code block.

physicles 81 days ago | |

In Slack it can get even worse.

If you turn on Markdown formatting, shift+enter adds a new line, unless you’re in a multi-line code block started with three backticks, and then enter adds a new line and shift+enter sends the message.

I can see why someone thought this was a good idea, but it’s just not.

least 81 days ago | | |

It’s kind of modal editing. Your 99% is enter to send because it’s a chat program. You’re sending mostly quick messages where adding a chorded input to send is just adding extra work to that mode.

When you enter a code block, that assumption changes. You are now in a “long text” mode where the assumptions are shifted where you are more likely want to insert a new line than to send the message.

I think people that have used tables or a spreadsheet and a text editor kind of understand modal editing and why we shift behaviors depending on the context. Pressing tab in a table or spreadsheet will navigate cells instead of inserting a tab character. Pressing arrow keys may navigate cells instead of characters in the cell. Pressing enter will navigate to the cell below, not the first column of the next row. It’s optimized for its primary use case.

I think if the mode change was more explicit it’d maybe be a better experience. Right now it is largely guessing what behavior someone wants based off the context of their message but if that mismatches the users expectations it’s always going to feel clumsy. A toggle or indicator with a keyboard shortcut. Can stick the advanced options inside the settings somewhere if a power user wants to tinker.

croemer 81 days ago | | |

When you're in a multi code block it should simply never send on (shift+)enter then. Close the code block first.

hamasho 81 days ago | | |

The worst part is if I paste markdown it's not formatted automatically.

jwolfe 81 days ago | | |

This is a user preferences setting for what it's worth.

Bjartr 81 days ago | | |

There's a setting to toggle this behavior

trelbutate 81 days ago | |

Nice solution for this might be:

Ctrl+Enter: Always submits

Shift+Enter: Always newline (if supported)

Enter: Reasonable default, depending on context

timokoesters 81 days ago | | |

I thought this is how it works for most software. What are the exceptions to this rule?

Nemi 82 days ago | |

Thats funny because I thought it was shift-enter that creates a newline in a field where an enter submits. Just shows the fractured nature of this whole thing.

Izkata 81 days ago | | |

I've found Shift+Enter to do this pretty reliably across systems whatever they've chosen Enter / Ctrl+Enter to do.

It even works inside bullet points to add separate lines as part of the same bullet.

lytedev 81 days ago | | |

This is my thinking. Ctrl-Enter is usually "submit the form this input is a part of" in my experience, especially if you're in a multilinear text input (or textarea).

ryandrake 81 days ago | | |

I've seen Enter, Shift-Enter, Ctrl-Enter, and Alt-Enter, (and on macOS, Cmd-Enter and Option-Enter), depending on the application. Total circus. I think this is actually a weakness of the standard keyboard: Keyboards should at the very least separate "submit form / enter" from "newline / carriage return" with different physical keys, but good luck changing that one, given the strong legacy of combining these functions.

grishka 81 days ago | |

> I don't know how we got here

I have a suspicion — it has to do with instant messaging clients. The idea being that you want to type short one-line messages and send them as quickly as possible in most cases, but in a rarer case when you do want a line break, that's Ctrl+Enter or Shift+Enter. Probably the first one where I personally encountered "enter is send" is ICQ, but I'm sure it's older than that, I would be surprised if no IRC clients did that.

michaelmrose 81 days ago | |

Anything which supports multi-line input shouldn't submit on enter it should submit on button press so anyone can use it instantly without learning or remembering anything.

Then make it easier for users to learn that they can enter more quickly with control+enter which you can advertise via tooltip or adjacent text.

Better that 100% find it trivially usable even if only 75% learn they can do it faster

layer8 81 days ago | | |

That isn’t workable for chat apps, at the very least on mobile. And that’s the most-used text entry interface that users nowadays grow up with. So I think you need to make an exception for such applications.

yoz-y 81 days ago | |

Today I’m thoroughly confident that if I sit in front of an AI chatbot/TUI/whatever. I will invariably fail at knowing which key combo sends the input and which enters a new line. It’s maddening.

I don’t understand why we ever let plain Enter send a prompt out.

abustamam 81 days ago | | |

Yeah this is insane. Maybe most users of chat bots are just sending one line prompts but I find that hard to believe users of Claude code are doing that more often than sending multi-line prompts.

rightofcourse 82 days ago | |

For Slack at least you have the option to change that back to use Enter for new line (which is what I do), but other software is not that generous. I think Grafana introduced yet another way, Shift-Enter to submit, that I alway mix up.

abustamam 81 days ago | | |

Hot take — Shift enter to submit should be illegal everywhere. If there's any key chord to submit, it should be Ctrl Enter.

I think I'd be OK with some inconsistency in how Enter works as long as the key chords are consistent!

vbezhenar 81 days ago | |

This is a lot of pain.

It is very easy to fix. Add button somewhere around text box. Which turns it into multiline text edit control, increases its height. Now <Enter> works as line feed and to submit the text user have to click "send" button. Most of chat messages are not multi-line, but few are and for them, proper edit UI is essential.

I, personally, just use separate text editor like Gnome Text Edit to compose my message and then Ctrl+C/Ctrl+V to send it.

badsectoracula 81 days ago | | |

I think this is just doing things differently, not fixing them - and IMO not for the better either.

I've been playing with making a chatbot with llama.cpp and FLTK[0] and FLTK's default behavior is actually to add a newline in the multiline editor when pressing Enter even if a 'Return button' is in the form (Return buttons are buttons activated when you press Enter or Return though Return is also handled kinda differently). And i have a big Submit 'Return button' there.

And TBH it annoyed me a LOT that i have to move the mouse and press the button to submit or that Enter adds newlines instead of submitting so that i explicitly added code so that pressing Enter is not handled by the editor (letting the Return button submit the input) and pressing Shift+Enter is what adds the newline (Ctrl+Enter also works, this comes from FLTK's behavior, but i've been used to Shift+Enter myself).

Which is basically how pretty much every chat interface (be it AI chatbot or something like Discord or whatever) that i've used in recent times works. And TBH it makes sense to me that the simplest/easiest shortcut (Enter) is what does the most common thing (send text) in a chat interface whereas the more involved shortcut (Shift+Enter or Ctrl+Enter) is used for the exceptional/less common case. In such an interface, the multiline editing is there as an exception (for when you want to paste some stuff and even then often Ctrl+V by itself can be enough), but most interactions are going to be single line submissions (often wordwrapped to look like multiple lines but still a single line).

[0] https://i.imgur.com/K3m9KAD.png

cyberrock 81 days ago | |

I think this one is easy to explain: it's a clash between chat idioms and forum idioms. Chats since IRC have had Enter=Send because messages were supposed to be single line, while web forums have had multiline text editors from the start so Ctrl+Enter=Send made the most sense. As the two merged, confusion and conflict was inevitable.

We can easily fix this by just letting everyone choose, but no one wants to make configurable UX.

dgb23 81 days ago | | |

> while web forums have had multiline text editors from the start so Ctrl+Enter=Send made the most sense

This is normal/standard behavior for multiline inputs such as the textarea, while input type=text/search/email will trigger a submit.

https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/form-control-infrastr...

So basically a chat input based on web technology is saying:

"I'm a single line input, but will allow multiline editing if you ask nicely"

cstrahan 81 days ago | |

Slack requires shift+enter to create a new-line, while in JIRA shift+enter creates a new-line instead of new paragraph, creates all sorts of confusing layout issues, and because the difference is invisible, it's hard to to figure out where/when you've made this mistake of using shift+enter instead of just enter.

Nearly drove me insane, until I developed separate muscle memory between the two apps/sites.

userbinator 81 days ago | |

Win32 standard multiline edit controls use Ctrl+Enter to insert a newline (instead of pushing the default button or "submit" action on a dialog), so that may be where the idiom came from.

For me, Enter to send and Ctrl+Enter for newline is the norm in an IM application, while longer and more asynchronous communication (like this textbox on HN for commenting, or a forum post, or an email client) implies that Enter inserts a newline and something more substantial (Alt+S is common, or Tab,Enter to move to and press the submit button) submits.

marxisttemp 81 days ago | |

>"bring back idiomatic design" doesn't help when we don't have enough idioms

One must always research and find the dominant or most applicable idioms for whatever they're doing. Are you building a command line tool? For which platform? What other similar tools are you basing its design on? You have to check yourself and see whether your software conforms to the idioms of the platforms, communities, etc that you're targeting.

cubefox 81 days ago | |

It's even worse on some websites. For example, Grok sends on enter. Even on mobile. Where you can't even press ctrl+enter, because mobile software keyboards don't have a control key. So you can't include line breaks at all when talking to Grok. You can merely accidentally send a message prematurely. (Maybe they have fixed it by now.)

jmbwell 81 days ago | |

macOS is slightly more consistent among apps that use system controls, but the more custom the app, or the more React Native or Electron it is, the less predictable it is

Infuriatingly, some apps try to be smart — only one line, return submits; more than one line, return is a new line, and command-return submits; but command-return on just one line beeps an error.

Years of muscle memory are useless, so now I’m reaching for the mouse when I need to be clear about my intent

So much is solved when developers just use the provided UI controls, so much well-studied and carefully implemented behavior comes for free

sheept 81 days ago | | |

Using provided UI controls is consistent with how today's apps behave on mobile:

- For single-line text fields, pressing enter is an alias for submitting the form. - For multi-line text fields, pressing enter inserts a new line. There is no shortcut for submitting the form.

In mobile chat apps, the enter key inserts a new line, so you have to press the non-keyboard submit button to send a message. In mobile browser address bars, since they are single-line text fields, the enter key becomes a submit button on the virtual keyboard.

oneeyedpigeon 81 days ago | | |

> Infuriatingly, some apps try to be smart — only one line, return submits

Tbf, this is almost certainly what the vast majority of people want, most of the time, from chat apps like Slack. It would be much more frustrating to have to click a button after each thought.

numpad0 81 days ago | |

PSA: CJK input frameworks(IMEs) use both Space and Enter for doing Hanzi/Kanji. Naively rigging Enter in JS to send causes wrong homonyms and/or raw phonetic scripts to get sent. There are few ways to resolve this issue, of which the easiest is to just leave Enter to the operating system.

the__alchemist 81 days ago | |

Sometimes it's shift enter too! I am having a hard time keeping this straight between applications.

swiftcoder 81 days ago | |

> and ctrl-enter forces a newline (not at my computer, but I think Slack does this)

Slack also has the option to invert this in settings. I always have it inverted, so that I can freely type multiline messages, and require the more intentional ctrl-enter to actually send.

eviks 81 days ago | |

> you're probably more likely to want fancier formatting in a PR review comment than a chat message.

Exactly, and that's how you keep track

tomjen3 81 days ago | |

This one has bitten me plenty of times, but the solution is what slack does: write underneath what you are supposed to do.

QuercusMax 80 days ago | |

Sometimes it's ctrl-enter. Sometimes it's shift-enter. ARGH!

carlosjobim 82 days ago | |

Apart from a chat interface, when should enter ever submit your text?

JoshTriplett 81 days ago | | |

A single-line text box that has no possibility of multi-line text (so, not a chat interface), such as search, an address bar, something that's obviously "submit one item" (e.g. "submit a word"), etc.

binarymax 81 days ago | | |

In a multiline text box, enter should NOT submit the form. Chat interfaces violate this rule and it results in lots of premature chat submissions.

layer8 81 days ago | | |

In single-text-input contexts, like search fields and the browser address field, and things like Save As dialogs. It’s the general expectation for dialogs with an OK or default button, just like Escape cancels the dialog.

masswerk 81 days ago | | |

The new idiom:

You are right, of course this is your account name! Do you want me to be keep you logged-in?

> _

somehnguy 82 days ago | | |

A search box, I think

gostsamo 81 days ago | |

for this reason I use shift+enter. I'm blind and not sure if it starts a new paragraph or is just a paragraph break, but works well enough in my experience.

Stratoscope 81 days ago | |

Enter-to-send is horrible.

ChatGPT does it.

Claude does it.

Nextdoor does it.

And none of those give you the courtesy of being able to turn it off.

Slack does it, but if you dig through the settings you may find the way to switch it.

How on earth did so many "designers" fixate on this idea that we must want to share our thought immediately instead of allowing a calmer interaction?

abustamam 81 days ago | | |

I can kinda understand why ChatGPT and other chat bots do it. It's a chat interface. Most people chat with single line prompts.

Next door and social media apps, to answer your question, I'm sure a PM somewhere was able to prove that engagement increased if we let people share their thoughts immediately, and the PM got a tidy bonus because of this.

I would be OK if they put a checkbox next to the text input that let me choose whether enter sends or line breaks. I would be OK even if that lived in session storage, to remove the friction of a new Db column. Just give us the option!

flohofwoe 80 days ago | |

> In text boxes in some applications, enter submits the entered text...

On Mac it's also not unusual that the Enter key is linked to the outer window's Ok button even when an a text input field is active (for instance in the "new" settings panel when trying to enter a DNS server address - pressing Enter closes the entire DNS panel, infuriating if you want to add more than one DNS server).

JojoFatsani 82 days ago |

Most software is not designed by intelligent and thoughtful people anymore. It is designed by hastily promoted middle manager PM/Product type people who, as has been mentioned elsewhere, simply were not around when thoughtful human interface design was borderline mandatory for efficiency’s sake.

There is incompetence and there is also malevolence in the encouragement of dark patterns by the revenue side of the business.

iamcalledrob 82 days ago |

As the author identifies, the idioms come from the use of system frameworks that steer you towards idiomatic implementations.

The system UI frameworks are tremendously detailed and handle so many corner cases you'd never think of. They allow you to graduate into being a power user over time.

Windows has Win32, and it was easier to use its controls than rolling your own custom ones. (Shame they left the UI side of win32 to rot)

macOS has AppKit, which enforces a ton. You can't change the height of a native button, for example.

iOS has UIKit, similar deal.

The web has nothing. You gotta roll your own, and it'll be half-baked at best. And since building for modern desktop platforms is horrible, the framework-less web is being used there too.

teeray 82 days ago |

> There are hundreds of ways that different websites ask you to pick dates

Ugh, date pickers. So many of these violently throw up when I try to do the obvious thing: type in the damn date. Instead they force me to click through their inane menu, as if the designer wanted to force me into a showcase of their work. Let your power users type. Just call your user’s attention back to the field if they accidentally typed 03/142/026.

pkphilip 82 days ago |

UX has really gone downhill. This is particularly true of banking websites.

Also, the trend of hiding scrollbars, huge wasted spaces, making buttons look really flat, confusing icons, confusing ways of using drop downs rather than using the select/option html controls etc have all made the whole experience far inferior to where desktop UI was even decades ago

hermitcrab 81 days ago | |

Hiding scrollbars is a deeply annoying trend. I don't understand the rationale. Because someone thought it looks aesthetically cooler?

trueno 81 days ago | | |

mobile first philosophies is my guess.

...curious who decided seeing scrollbars wasn't useful on mobile though. it's very useful knowing where i am in a long scrolling thing.

augustk 81 days ago | |

For group chats in Microsoft Teams with more than seven participants, if you click on "View and add participants" (an icon with two people and a plus sign) you see a list of seven participants. At first I didn't know that you could scroll in this list.

trueno 81 days ago | |

i think material ui kicked design in the face in a broad multiple-industry-capturing way. it's gotta be the worst design language to interface with and it just unreasonably requires effort to navigate around gcp and lots of other google tooling. i'm glad it feels dated now and people are moving away to input boxes that are enclosed in, you know, a box... but i cannot stand what it brought to ux/ui.

paulmooreparks 81 days ago |

Thank you so much for writing this. I'm also from the desktop era and I can't STAND all the reinvention going on, or the fact that I have to move the mouse all over the screen or randomly stab my phone with my finger to find out what I can interact with.

I'm working on a GUI app and a web app in concert right now. They work in the same niche, but at different levels (one is desktop-level management, the other is enterprise-level management). I stepped back and developed a unified design language (Tela Design Language, or TDL) which has saved my sanity and made the apps actually usable again.

https://parkscomputing.com/content/tdl-reference.html

https://github.com/paulmooreparks/tela/blob/main/TELA-DESIGN...

finghin 82 days ago |

> Prefer words to icons. Use only icons that are universally understood.

Underrated. Except for dyslexic people, and the most obvious icon forms, I am pretty sure most people are just better and faster at recognising single words at a glance than icons.

zahlman 81 days ago |

> Every single button is clearly visually a button and says exactly what it does. And each one has a little underline to indicate its keyboard shortcut. Isn’t that nice?

Something not mentioned here (that came from the Mac world as I understand it): everywhere that the text ends with an ellipsis, choosing that action will lead to further UI prompts. The actions not written this way can complete immediately when you click the button, as they already have enough information.

foobarbecue 82 days ago |

Lately I've occasionally been running into round check boxes that look like radio buttons. Why????

LunicLynx 82 days ago | |

UX want to put their own spin on things. I’ve noticed this repeatedly.

UX has gotten from something with a cause to being the cause for something

hexasquid 81 days ago | | |

In 20 years of front-end web development I've never encountered a designer willing to use standard form controls. I assume they exist.

andai 82 days ago | |

I think the answer is they just don't know.

iamcalledrob 82 days ago | |

iOS decided square checkboxes were ugly, and design patterns are flowing from mobile->desktop these days.

suzzer99 81 days ago | | |

I think Apple does stuff like this because a) they can get away with it and b) they know countless competitors who can't get away with it will blindly follow their shitty new design paradigm.

aspensmonster 82 days ago | |

Squircles[1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squircle

pilingual 82 days ago |

Interesting that Apple is praised.

> that a link? Maybe!

When Apple transitioned from skeuomorphic to flat design this was a huge issue. It was difficult to determine what was a button on iOS and whether you tapped it (and the removal of loading gifs across platforms further aggravated problems like double submits).

Another absurdity with iOS is the number of ways you can gesture. It started simply, now it is complex to the point where the OS can confuse one gesture for another.

wffurr 81 days ago | |

I have a lot of gripes with Apple's various design decisions over the years, but they're at least consistent across their apps, which is the point of TFA.

Mystery gesture navigation is also now on by default and terrible on Android, too. It's awful with children or older folks (or even me!) who trigger it by accident all the time. Some of it I was able to disable on my children's iPads. It's still frustrating that easy to accidentally trigger but impossible to discover gestures are the default and also frustrating that we have the very last iPad generation with a button.

bitwize 81 days ago | |

I think that the best UI design language is somewhere between "flat" and "skeuomorphic". I want neither a UI with notes apps that have Moleskine leather and vellum paper textures, nor the Android 12-like vague shapes of current-day macOS. The Windows 9x, and even more so, its predecessor NEXTSTEP, look and feel was perfect. Widgets had depth and definition, were still abstract but readily identifiable to the eye.

trueno 81 days ago | |

PWA dudes that all want to use some variant of shadcn or whatever same but different flavor of what is effectively the same design language are the more critically dangerous influences on design in my eyes than say apple. apple is highly opinionated on their design frameworks and that, at least, brings consistency. even if it's a dumb change, at least you can expect it everywhere

einr 81 days ago |

It's a little interesting that they would pick Office 2000 as an example, since Office 97 and onwards do not use standard OS widgets -- it reimplements and draws them itself*.

The menu bar in Office 2000 does not look like the standard OS menu bar, for instance. The colors, icons and spacing are non-standard. This is only slightly jarring, because it's pretty well done, but it's still inconsistent with every other app.

This was kind of the beginning of the end for Windows consistency -- when even Microsoft thought that their own toolkit and UX standards were insufficient for their flagship application. Things have only become worse since then.

* This becomes very obvious when you run Office 97 on NT 3.51, which generally looks like Windows 3.1, but since Office 97 renders itself and does not care about OS widgets, it looks like this: http://toastytech.com/guis/nt351word.png

vladvasiliu 81 days ago | |

This is funny because Teams on Windows uses its custom notifications instead of the system ones. But running it in a browser under Linux, I get my native notifications!

userbinator 81 days ago |

button is clearly visually a button

I had the pleasure of using a web app a few years ago that somehow managed to have buttons that looked like buttons, buttons that looked like static text, static text that looked like static text, and static text that looked like buttons, all on the same page. It was very memorable and extremely confusing to use.

    Checkboxes are square,
    Radiobuttons are round,
    Beware those who dare
    To switch them around

suzzer99 81 days ago | |

I like how it became uncool about 10 years ago for buttons to provide any feedback that they've been pressed. Thanks Tim Apple!

alentred 81 days ago |

At some point UX became a synonym of manipulating users into doing things, and I wonder if it can ever go back.

It might have started in an innocent way, all those A/B tests about call-to-action button color, etc. But it became a full scale race between products and product managers (Whose landing page is best at converting users?, etc.) and somewhere in this race we just lost the sense of why UX exists. Product success is measured in conversion rates, net promoter score, bounce rates, etc. (all pretty much short-term metrics, by the way), and are optimized with disregard to the end-user experience. I mean, what was originally meant by UX. It is now completely turned on its head.

Like I said, I wonder if there is way back of if we are stuck in the rat race. The question is how to quit it.

robocat 81 days ago |

We've lost some common features:

* Undo & redo

* Help files & context sensitive F1

* Hints on mouse hover

* Keyboard shortcuts & shortcut customisation

* Main menus

* Files & directories

* ESC to close/back

* Drag n drop

Revelation features when they first became common. Now mostly gone on mobile and websites.

godshatter 80 days ago | |

Also having the cursor show up in the proper place on a new form and having tab order work.

robocat 80 days ago | | |

Oh yeah.

Keyboard focus and focus indication on browsers is fundamentally broken.

We often notice when focus is buggy. But there are many many hidden/unobvious edge cases.

Previously I created a fix for the worst focusing issues on browsers by creating a fully custom framework (before modern HTML help with popovers/dialogs/overlays/viewports/anchors). No other framework at the time managed Internet Explorer's quirks very well (we served businesses who mostly used that browser).

augustk 81 days ago | |

And knowing how to get the version of an application (which used to be in Help -> About).

lxe 82 days ago |

Yall remember https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mystery_meat_navigation? Back in 2004-ish era, there was an explosion of very creative interaction methods due to flash and browser performance improvements, and general hardware improvements which led to "mystery meat navigation" and the community's pushback.

Since then, the "idiomatic design" seems to have been completely lost.

the__alchemist 82 days ago | |

Is this what the hamburger button is made of?

zahlman 81 days ago | | |

I mean, your guess is as good as mine as to what options the corresponding menu will actually contain, so....

jcoq 82 days ago |

Much of this is foisted upon us by visual designers who wandered into product design. It's a category error the profession has never quite corrected. (maybe more controversially, it's caused by having anyone with the word "designer" in their title on a project that doesn't need such a person - this category is larger than anyone thinks)

weitendorf 81 days ago |

Guys, I found out about this technology called Cascading Style Sheets recently and I think it's the missing piece we've been looking for. It lets you declaratively specify layout in a composable, hierarchical system based on something called the Document Object Model in a way that minimizes both clientside and serverside processing, based on these things called "stylesheets".

The best part is, it's super easy to customize them, read others for inspiration or to see how they did something, or even ship multiple per site to deal with different user preferences. Through this "forms" api, and little-known browser features like url-fragments, target/attribute selector, and style combinators, plus "the checkbox hack" you can build extremely responsive UIs out of it by "cascading" UI updates through your site! When do you think they're going to add it to next.js?

I'm tentatively calling this new UI paradigm "no-framework" or "no package manager", not sure yet https://i.imgur.com/OEMPJA8.png

glerk 81 days ago |

One trend that I can’t stand currently is the obsession with keyboard shortcuts everywhere even to the point of overriding browser defaults. Cmd+F focusing on the site’s search input instead of letting me search in the page with the browser’s search functionality (looking at you github and Linear).

I generally don’t need any fancy keyboard shortcuts on a website. I have a mouse, I can just click around.

bryankaplan 68 days ago | |

Ctrl-k focuses the Search bar unless a website hijacks it, which became regrettably common after the Search bar got hidden by default. But Firefox allows one to reënable it, and some of us continue to rely upon it.

nine_k 81 days ago | |

To the opposite, I'm a heavy user of keyboard shortcuts everywhere they exist. OTOH taking over the browser shortcuts, and especially the search, is something that I very much dislike.

glerk 81 days ago | | |

I'm ok with them as long as they're not overriding what I have saved in my muscle memory (cmd+F for search, tab to change the focused element, cmd+L to go to the navbar, and a few others).

I think the user should be able to customize/disable those as much as possible if you do provide them.

eviks 81 days ago | |

What do you think about search override on some dysfunctional modern forums that can't display more than 3 replies, so if you used the built in browser search you wouldn't be able to find anything in a discussion?

But also, Vivaldi is awesome here is allowing you to block overrides for specific shortcuts so you Ctrl F is always yours

glerk 81 days ago | | |

> dysfunctional modern forums that can't display more than 3 replies,

I assume that's overzealous virtualization/infinite scroll pagination? I don't have a solution, I think fundamentally we're building a workaround for a workaround and the root cause for the performance issues should be fixed. Somehow, HN is able to show a lot of comments per page and page loads are always O(100ms). I'm wondering what kind of sorcery they're using to achieve this.

But if you have to deal with this in your codebase, my instinct is still not to hijack the native Cmd+F, even if it only searches what's inside your viewport. You can expose some other command for full custom search (Cmd+K seems to be the standard, I think VSCode made that popular).

jmyeet 81 days ago |

I had to laugh when I read this:

> Avoid JavaScript reimplementations of HTML basics, e.g. React Button components instead of styled <button> elements.

I've been hearing that for the entire Internet era yet people continue to reinvent scrollbars, text boxes, buttons, checkboxes and, well, every input element. And I don't know why.

What this article is really talking about is conventions not idioms (IMHO). You see a button and you know how it works. A standard button will behave in predictable ways across devices and support accessibility and not require loading third-party JS libraries.

Also:

> Notwithstanding that, there are fashion cycles in visual design. We had skeuomorphic design in the late 2000s and early 2010s, material design in the mid 2010s, those colorful 2D vector illustrations in the late 2010s, etc.

I'm glad the author brought this up. Flat design (often called "material design" as it is here) has usability issues and this has been discussed a lot eg [1].

The concept here is called affordances [2], which is where the presentation of a UI element suggests how it's used, like being pressed or grabbed or dragged. Flat design and other kinds of minimalism tend to hide affordances.

It seems like this is a fundamental flaw in human nature that crops up everywhere: people feel like they have to do something different because it's different, not because it's better. It's almost like people have this need to make their mark. I see this all the time in game sequels that ruin what was liked by the original, like they're trying to keep it "fresh".

[1]: https://www.nngroup.com/articles/flat-design/

[2]: https://geekyants.com/blog/affordances-in-ui-design

wffurr 81 days ago |

The number of JavaScript dropdown replacements that don't work correctly with the keyboard is stunning. It always amazes me how many forms fail at this basic usability aspect. The browser has homogeneous form controls built in, just use them!

hexasquid 81 days ago | |

This needs to be built into figma and taught to product managers. FE devs are telling each other this all the time (mentioned in every single FE conference), but most of the time

- they don't get to make this decision - they fail when pushing back - Hacker News eventually blames the FE dev

trueno 81 days ago | |

i've seen this critiqued as ugly by people who didn't want to use daisyui's original dropdown which just deferred to the built in controls. now in daisyui's latest release there is an additional dropdown that you can style, because utility is a second rate citizen in design

wffurr 81 days ago | | |

Usable has to come first. That's what all these designer types are missing. It's user interaction design, not visual design. The interaction is key.

alienbaby 82 days ago |

designers are creatives and will always believe the visual elements of a design need to be updated, refreshed, modernized etc.. then we get flavour of the month nand new trends in visual language and ui design that things must be updated to.

As soon as UI design became a creative visual thing rather than a functional thing , everything started to go crazy in UI land..

ako 82 days ago | |

That is because they know the users. Users are very sensitive to this: if the outside wasn't changed then the internals cannot be much improved. You see this with cars, cars need a new design otherwise customer will think nothing much changed. Customer will usually buy newer over better because they think newer must have improvements, and styling signals new. Same with computers, all the disappointments when apple releases a new macbook without changing the exterior....

xnx 82 days ago |

My hope is that since tools like Google Stitch have made fancy looking design free that it will become obvious how functionally worthless fancy looking design always was. It used to signal that a site paid a lot of money and was therefore legitimate. Now it signals nothing.

jonahx 82 days ago | |

This is a good point, but there's usually a long tail on transitions like this.

johncch 81 days ago |

I’m not sure the core thesis is correct for two reasons. I’ve been around the block a few times now and I don’t think I’ve ever lived in an era where people were like “the current state of design is awesome”. There are always rose-tinted think pieces with some dubious stats about how things are awesome in the past.

Secondly, idiomatic is good if it matches your mental model. However, what does idiomatic mean in the context of billions of people coming from various computing starting point. Just as a simple thought exercise, how do you design idiomatically for people who are most familiar with Windows era computers and people who start with touchscreens, both generations who are still alive today?

_moof 80 days ago | |

The Mac desktop era before its iOS-ification was, in fact, awesome. It was a triumph of consistency. The UI guidelines were excellent. Nearly every application worked in predictable ways. I appreciated it at the time and I miss it terribly.

nickcoury 81 days ago |

I reference Jakob's Law at least once a week, which says users use not your site most of the time. So if it works like most other sites then users will intuitively understand it. And if you do something different users will struggle to learn it.

marcosdumay 81 days ago | |

As a tangent, he has so many really important pieces of advice, naming one as "Jakob's Law" is deeply impractical.

beloch 81 days ago |

The solution to this kind of problem is standards.

For most of the history of computation, things were moving too fast for anyone to really worry about standardization. Computing environments were also somewhat Balkanized. Standard keyboard shortcuts, for just one example, weren't. They still aren't. e.g. If you fingers are accustomed to hitting Ctrl-C to copy on most computers, they'll hit Fn-C on a Apple keyboard, which isn't Copy.

Today, things are moving slower and web interfaces have largely taken over. Your choice of OS mostly just affects how you get into a browser or some other cross-platform program... and what keys you hit for Copy and Paste.

Now would be a reasonable point in the history of computation for us to seriously consider standards. I'm not talking about licenses, inspectors, and litigation if you get it wrong. I'm just talking about some organization publishing standards that say, "This is how you build a standard login form. These are the features it should have. This is how they should be laid out. These are the icons to use or not use. These are the what keyboard shortcuts should be implemented." The idea is that people who sit down and start building a common bit of interface, instead of picking and choosing others to copy, should have a clear and simple set of standards to follow.

And yes, Apple needs to fix their #$%@ing keyboards.

Skeime 81 days ago | |

Isn't the Macintosh desktop (with Cmd as the modifier for standard shortcuts) older than Windows and Linux desktops? So historically, it's not Apple that deviated but the others?

(I did not do an extensive search into this, so there might be Ctrl-based standard shortcuts that predate Apple.)

beloch 81 days ago | | |

Apple moved the Ctrl key around at least a couple times. On the Apple II it was next to the A key, the same as it was on the Xerox Star. The CMD key was a later addition.

At this point, I'd say let history be history. It'd be better to standardize on what most people are using.

_moof 80 days ago | | |

Yes, the Cmd key has been around since 1984.

Narishma 81 days ago |

> The visuals feel a little ugly and dated: it’s blocky, the font isn’t great, and the colors are dull.

I don't get this at all. I find the screenshot clear and beautiful if anything.

kristianp 81 days ago |

> You can enter ALT+F to open the File menu, then hit N

Some developers raised on Macs don't understand the need for this behaviour in the Windows version of their software. Most do, but it's frustrating when the windows version of a multi platform framework doesn't afford for this.

Also the arrival of windows 8 which put controls and buttons at top and bottom of the screen was a big step backwards in consistency. Mobile interfaces (Android) still do this and it slows down interactions.

kennywinker 82 days ago |

> You don’t want to have to remember to use CTRL + Shift + C in certain circumstances or right-click → copy in others, that’d be annoying.

laughs in linux wouldn’t that be nice.

davemp 82 days ago | |

I’m a decade+ linux power user and I still do insane things like pipe outputs into vim so I can copy paste without having to remember tmux copy paste modes when I have vertical panes open.

skydhash 82 days ago | |

Terminal UX existed before the CUA guidelines from IBM. People complains about Ctrl + Shift + C behavior when it exists only in one category of application, terminal emulators.

eviks 81 days ago | | |

Age doesn't matter, usability and consistency does, so that's a valid complaint towards all those hostile apps that haven't changed the defaults

bitwize 81 days ago | | |

This is why Apple gave Macs a command key in 1984. Control is for sending control cides; command is for issuing commands!

layer8 81 days ago | |

This is the kind of thing why I still prefer Windows as a UI.

ux266478 82 days ago | |

Plan 9 fixes this.

Thorrez 81 days ago |

>using GMail is nothing like using GSuites is nothing like using Google Docs

G Suite (no s) was the old name for Google Workspace. Google Workspace includes GMail, Google Docs, Google Sheets, Google Calendar, etc., so it doesn't really make sense to say that Google Workspace has a different UX than Google Docs, if Google Docs is part of Google Workspace.

Disclosure: I work at Google, but not one of the listed products.

realityfactchex 81 days ago | |

If GSuites was a typo for GSites (e.g., informal for Google Sites classic), then the sentence in TFA could work.

IDK if such was the intent, of course.

JoshTriplett 81 days ago |

> Suppose you’re logging into a website, and it asks: “do you want to stay logged in?”

Then the website has made its first mistake, and should delete that checkbox entirely, because the correct answer is always "yes". If you don't want to be logged in, either hit the logout button, or use private browsing. It is not the responsibility of individual websites to deal with this.

eviks 81 days ago |

There are too many issues with those designs of the old, so instead of going regressing into them let’s instead progress towards the fantasy of universal user-centric configuration!

Who do I need 50 different “save” icons in different apps when I could set just one and have instant “idiomatic” recognition anywhere? I could even ditch the text because it’s one of the top 10 commonly used icons that require no text. Oh, and the web apps would also use it in their menus… Or not, I never need this icon in the first place since I always use a shortcut, so one config change, and now not a single app has the icon!

Can I have “Close” menu use X as an accelerator shortcut everywhere instead of C, and let it work on Windows and Mac and Linux?

Can I not waste the most ergonomic thumb modifier key Alt to open menus I rarely use? And if I waste it, can I also have it working on a Mac, where it would have the same physical position, ie, Cmd?

hollowturtle 81 days ago |

Are mobile native apps "idiomatic" then? Speaking of uis made with native frameworks of a specific platform. They surely share some patterns, especially on navigation, top bar, button bar, etc but it's been the death of design and ux. You can't use any app with one hand alone, everything is flat. I share the sentiment that some basic elements should behave the same, like inputs, but I miss the day where we experimented with uis, especially with early internet and flash. Sure many of these looked bad and were horrible to use, but in some ways each one had some character. We basically stopped doing any ui innovation on both the web and native desktop/mobile platforms and that's sad to me

layer8 81 days ago |

One of my pet peeves is that increasingly frequently, pressing Enter to submit a web form doesn’t even universally work anymore. Instead you have to tab to the submit button, and (depending on the web page) have to press Space or Enter to actuate it.

Another annoyance is that many web forms (and desktop apps based on web tech) don’t automatically place the keyboard focus in an input field anymore when first displayed. This is also an antipattern on mobile, that even on screens that only have one or two text inputs, and where the previous action clearly expressed that you want to perform a step that requires entering something, you first have to tap on the input field for the keyboard to appear, so that you can start entering the requested information.

sminchev 81 days ago |

The behavior science also changed a lot of things. People study behavior, patterns, what can sell more, what looks more intuitive. If something looks a bit different from the others, it will sell better. If something look the same way as the previous one, why should the client buy it? The client needs to see a difference, it can be only a little bit more flashy, but it must be different. 20 years, later, this is the result.

Especially now, in the AI era, where each person can make a relatively working app from the sofa, without any knowledge of UI/UX principles.

donatj 81 days ago |

The examples chosen are particularly interesting to me.

In particular Microsoft Word 2000 was panned at the time for not following native conventions. Its inputs, buttons, and File/Edit menus actually do not match the underlying OS.

Do developers who came from Photoshop or Fireworks days actually like Figma? Maybe it's just down to how our designers are using it but I find pawing around a giant 2 dimensional document awkward as hell versus just opening a well named PSD in a folder.

LaGrange 81 days ago | |

I mean, looking at it in 2026 Word 2000 looks _amazing_. How far my standards have fallen.

And yeah, I've met a lot of people who love Figma. I hate it so much, personally, getting around and finding what I need in it is so much pain.

msie 81 days ago |

That windows 2000/win 95 interface was peak windows design.

rho4 81 days ago |

A few of my favorites:

- "Not-Boxes": Negatively formulated text (disable... / don't...)

- "Button-Checkboxes": Checkboxes with verbs that trigger actions

- "Radio-Checkboxes": Radios that are actually checkboxes (not mutually exclusive)

- "Toggle-Checkboxes": Checkboxes that are actually toggle buttons and can't decided wheter the text should show the current state or the state that will happen when you click.

ufocia 82 days ago |

UIs are inconsistent even in the same app. Nevermind plugins or suites. It would be great if menus were customizable so you could plug in your own template.

jfengel 82 days ago | |

I prefer to avoid customizing apps. I want to be able to sit down at a fresh install (or someone else's) and not spend time learning their preferences.

When someone asks me for a checkbox so they can have my app work their way instead and everyone else can do theirs, the hair stands up on the back of my neck. The check boxes are hard to discover unless you put them front and center, in which case they remain there forever serving no purpose.

I would rather redesign the entire interface, either to find the right answer that works for everyone, or to learn what makes one class of users different from another. The check box is a mode, and nodes are to be avoided if I possibly can.

I realize that this puts me at odds with a whole class of users who want to make their box do their thing. It's your box and you should do what you want. And I really love style sheets for that. Rather than cobbling together my own set of possible preferences you should have something Turing complete. Go nuts with it.

eviks 81 days ago | | |

> I want to be able to sit down at a fresh install (or someone else's) and not spend time learning their preferences.

This is impossible: someone else is also capable of customizing

But also, what 0% of your use cases are fresh installs with config wiped out and not restored?

carlosjobim 82 days ago | | |

I think most non-Linux users haven't made a fresh install in 5-10 years. Preferences files and apps get transferred when you buy a new computer or update your os.

amadeuspagel 80 days ago |

> Study and follow HTML/CSS idioms whenever possible. For example, a link should be underlined, colorful, pointer on mouseover, and written as an <a> tag.

Moreover, if you change the color, you should also change the color of visited links, otherwise they will be the same color. And ideally, you should use a shade of blue for links, and purple for visited links.

chapz 82 days ago |

This kinda hurt. The world is in a rush to be the ASAP, so nobodys interest is to do design good, it needs to be fast. And now we have this sh*tshow.

andyfilms1 82 days ago |

And while we're at it, stop with the popups and notifications.

I don't care about the new features in a browser update. Ideally, nothing at all has changed.

I don't want a "tour" of the software I just installed. I, presumably, installed it to do something, and I just want to do that thing.

I don't want to have to select a preference for how a specific action is performed in your software. If it's not what I expected, I will learn it.

And for the love of GOD, nobody wants to subscribe to your newsletter.

bccdee 81 days ago | |

I actually might want to subscribe to your newsletter, provided I read & enjoy your article. So why does the pop-up always interrupt me before the page has even finished loading?

If you inset an unobtrusive newsletter button 60% of the way through the article, perhaps I'll actually click it (or, more realistically, follow your RSS feed).

mcculley 82 days ago |

The web needs a HIG.

All of these people who keep saying that webapps can replace desktop applications were simply never desktop power users. They don’t know what they don’t know.

andai 82 days ago | |

Yeah it would be nice if the web accessibility guidelines also focused on actually using the thing normally. For example: offsetting the scrollbar from the right edge of the screen by 1px should be punishable by death.

dxdm 82 days ago | |

I think HIG means "Human Interface Guidelines" here. Seems to be an Apple thing.

I wish more people would avoid or at least introduce abbreviations that may be unfamiliar to the audience.

andai 82 days ago | | |

Microsoft had one too: WIG!

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22475521

marcosdumay 81 days ago | | |

I think it was a Xerox thing. But since the 90s, everybody has some since.

Oh, and if you want to read one to learn, the Microsoft ones are better than the Apple's.

ErigmolCt 81 days ago |

But I'm not convinced the old consistency was purely a design victory... it was also a result of heavy constraints

barrkel 81 days ago |

With some irony, one thing Substack doesn't afford is zooming in to images on mobile.

heftig 81 days ago | |

Firefox on Android can override this via a toggle in the Accessibility settings. Maybe other browsers have something similar?

sph 82 days ago |

Shows a picture of Office 2000 and says "The visuals feel a little ugly and dated: it’s blocky, the font isn’t great, and the colors are dull."

Are you serious? Nothing has come close to it. Yeah we have higher resolution screens, but everything else is much less legible and accessible than that screenshot.

petee 81 days ago |

My health provider recently changed their homepage UI to have a human 'profile' icon to mean "register", a lock icon to sign-in, and 'box-arrow-in-right" to logout. No tooltips

satvikpendem 82 days ago |

Not sure how you can put the genie back in the bottle, every app wants to have its own design so how can you enforce them to all obey the same design principles? You simply can't.

graemep 81 days ago |

This is a feature, not a bug. By making your software different you make it harder for people to switch.

unsungNovelty 81 days ago | |

You're confusing it with something else. You don't have to have the same things. But there are basic understanding for UI like how certain elements should work. People might tolerate cos its not on their hands. But the moment they can, they'll make sure to not use it.

This also means more support tickets and internal escalations. Just like how you should drive predictably on road to avoid maximum accidents, predictable UI's are important for maximum productivity. People will use it more. And when they move to another software and don't get the same, they will talk sh*t about it. They will tell people how a certain software is soooo good.

ClickUp for example is the most disastrous UI I've used in recent history. If you get angry while using software, you've done your job poorly. When someone discussed about ClickUp, I immediately shut it down. It's the same reason why people disliked Jira. AWS console Etc. They might tolerate for a while. But they will jump ship at the first opportunity. So can't figure out how it is a feature.

graemep 81 days ago | | |

I am basing it on what I have heard normal users say. The easiest thing is what they are used to. People mostly use UIs that are not idiomatic. Websites vary wildly, lots of mobile apps do not stick to conventions, and even some desktops apps do not. For example, what else uses a ribbon menu like MS Office? Most people switch between desktop and mobile. Some people like an app to be consistent across platforms - which means breaking with platform conventions.

People do tolerate AWS Console though. Jira seems to be widely used.

marcus_holmes 81 days ago |

It's not only the users that are frustrated.

Developing a VB app in the 90's was simple; just drag'n'drop components around the place and boom, you're done. There were very little design choices to make, and most of those were about accessibility rather than style. It had to look like a Windows app, and that was it. A developer could (and we did) slap together screens in minutes, and while they would never win any prizes for best-looking application UI, they were instantly usable by users because they all shared a consistent UX.

Making a web app means following a Figma thing where a designer tried a new experiment with some new thing they read about last week, and it kinda looks OK as a static screen design, but has huge problems as a User Interface because users don't understand it (and that's not even considering accessibility). And as a developer it's a pain in the arse to implement; lots of work to work around the standard way of things working because the designer thinks it looks good.

My personal bugbear on this is scroll bars: just leave the fucking scroll bar alone. No, it's not "pretty", but it tells me how far down the page I am and it's useful. Removing it is actively making my life worse. You are spending effort making my life worse. Stop doing that.

zetanor 82 days ago |

Day-to-day usability doesn't bring much "wow" factor to a sales pitch.

readitalready 82 days ago |

This is a really huge and a fundamental flaw in AI-driven design. AI-driven design is completely inconsistent. If you re-ran an AI generated layout, even with the same prompt, the output for a user interface will look completely different between two runs.

ceejayoz 82 days ago | |

You can steer it towards reusable components, though.

Find a run you like, and build off that.

userbinator 81 days ago | | |

You definitely need to filter if you use AI. Looking at all the vibe-coded creations that are showing up these days has changed my mind from "AI-generated code is bad" to "the one using the AI is doing a bad job of it".

basilium 81 days ago |

Am I the only one who doesn't know what that "Keep me signed in" checkbox is for? I mean, I was a web developer for many years and I rarely encountered this checkbox in the wild, don't remember implementing it even once. I mean the choice itself is very ambiguous. It is supposed to mean that the login session will only live for the duration of the current browser session if I uncheck it. But for a user (and for me too) that does not mean much, what is the duration of the session if my browser runs open for weeks, what if we are on mobile where tabs never close and tabs and history is basically the same thing (UX-wise). If I decide to uncheck it for security reasons (for example when I'm on someone else's device) I want to at least know when exactly or after what action the session will be cleared out, and as a user I have zero awareness or control there.

I don't advocate for removal of this checkbox but I would at least re-consider if that pattern is truly a common knowledge or not :)

ryandrake 81 days ago | |

I've never seen one that actually works. It seems like whether or not I check them, the next time I log into [every site] I have to re log in.

zahlman 81 days ago | | |

Really? I don't think I've ever seen one that doesn't work. What sites are you using where you encounter this? Have you checked your cookie settings?

userbinator 81 days ago | |

It's basically the expiration date on the cookie that keeps you logged in. Very common on forums and the like, and some even let you select how long you want the session to last.

zephen 81 days ago |

Hell, I'd be happy if, when I started reading text, the websites would just let me keep reading text rather than popping up an interminable number of ads, video, alert/app/notification options, etc.

I mean, you know that if they can't do that, any other idioms from last century are right out the window as well.

stavros 81 days ago |

> The visuals feel a little ugly and dated

It's... beautiful.

DoneWithAllThat 82 days ago |

Idiomatic design will never come back. The reason being companies believe (correctly) that they design language is part of their brand. The uniqueness is, basically, the point.

strongpigeon 82 days ago | |

That was one of the problem with the original Material framework: every app looked too similar making it hard to distinguish one from another. Google was concerned about people associating bad third party app with itself.

They added more customizability in Material 2 (or was it 3?), but yeah at that point some of the damage was done.

allthetime 82 days ago |

Apple was doing a pretty good job until whatever happened with v 26.

On the web, the rise of component libraries and consistent theming is promising.

SoftTalker 82 days ago | |

They were not. Their own apps on iOS are wildly inconsistent.

allthetime 77 days ago | | |

I was thinking only of desktop/macos. I try to use my phone as little as possible.

jgalt212 81 days ago |