Man these comments are fun. The patricians defending the (admittedly) bad UI/UX as the skill-hurdle it is, while the rest are finding inventive ways to rephrase “gib button plz”
Plenty of developers also use GitHub for software distribution for end users, so that’s where the problems lie. I’m not saying GitHub should change their UI to match something the site wasn’t made for, but it’s still an issue for people who choose to use it that way.
While it may have begun that way (and may still be the overwhelming use case, idk the breakdown) devs are using it for FOSS releases, and that’s where the ‘less literate’ crowd enters. Sourceforge was very simple to use, and had a consistent layout. GitHub wasn’t meat to be a SF replacement, but here we are having this discussion
But it is often additionally used as a software package distribution platform, so it would be helpful for some developers to reach their users by having a clearer path to the most current release.
I can personally do without a special button, and the op is obviously making a joke, but why not improve the UX for some users? It’s certainly possible to do this without impacting the smelly nerds who wouldn’t use the button.
The problem with github isn’t really a problem. It’s just accessible enough to borderline tech people who want a one click solution to a problem. They can find it, but using it requires more skill than they have. It’s a code repository, not an app store. The most useful things I find on github aren’t from some massive app developer, they’re from some guy who happened to have the same problem as me. Rather than screaming at that guy for an executable, level up. Learn something.
Or head over to the releases page (just saying, it can be an app store too).
Basically, if there’s no exe ready and you don’t want to learn to make it, that means it doesn’t exist for you. The github page might as well just say “Coming eventually!”.
Tbf the released page can be hard to notice/find, a lot of projects who use it simply have links on the main page to it because a portion of users will fail to navigate there
I mean I code extensively and it still pisses me off they kind of don’t make the “download zip” more prominent or explain to noobs that this isn’t compiled/ plug n play…nor are most of the apps for Windows users, really.
This isn’t the job of a Git repository nor is it for GitHub, this is an issue for developers which shouldn’t use it as their main download way.
The download zip is not meant for the average person and frankly useless for most projects. I don’t know why you expect a Git repository to explain to you that bare code isn’t compiled or plug and play? How would GitHub know other than you informing them that the app isn’t for Windows?
I don’t think you understand the concept of what Git and GitHub even are and their intentions.
There’s no qualification to be a developer to access github though, I think is what the person you responded to is saying. It’s entirely possible for a user to end up at github without a true understanding of its purpose. Therefore, it would be helpful if it was more clear to the average non-developer user that what they’re looking at is a code repository and is not meant for general consumption.
And that’s the problem with modern internet and consumerism. I get your point, but the “I’m here, so I should be made comfortable and tended to” mentality really has no place in some situations. If you end up on a car parts website and have no idea what’s going on, you don’t just comment “Hey, this is really complicated, and no one warned me. Please consider making it more noob-friendly” because people usually know better, and understand that some things are outside their grasp, and that’s ok. This can be applied to academia sources as well. You would rarely see “What the hell is this all about?” below a rocket science article. So, my point is, GitHub is for people who at least know how to open the command prompt on windows. Maybe they should use this as a warning next to any GitHub link, idk.
I agree with most of what you said but it wouldn’t hurt to create a watered down version of the site and put it on a subdomain like noobs.github.com … There can be separate UIs for different kinds of users.
They could ask when you register an account what you intend to use GitHub for and what your familiarity is.
I see you you’ve decided to take the road of not reading anything that has been said. There’s no bad usability OR lack of features for literally anyone relevant to these platforms.
Maybe I’m misunderstanding… but are you saying GitHub, the corporate entity acquired by Microsoft for 7.8 billion dollars 6 years ago, is a champion of the free and open software movement and that needs some rando on the Internet to stand up for it?
People have lived through many cycles of Microsoft doing this shit. They don’t deserve defending.
Maybe I misunderstood your comment. I’m talking from the layman’s perspective looking for a stable build of whatever the software is.
"
Anything outside of code repository stuff is outside their lane
" sounds like you’re talking about non-technical users when that was the context of the original comment. I understand what you mean now though, and I somewhat agree.
Can someone explain to me why github apparently has bad UX/UI? I always thought the UI has gotten really good over the years.
[Edit] Like there this huge argument in these comments about the release button being all wrong. ??? No clue what people have against it. I thought it was fine? You can use it or not. People link to it if they want it more prominent. Someone explain?
[Edit 2] Also what’s up with the people who are vehemently against uploading bins to GitHub releases. This is literally what github is doing on their own repos. Not trying to say that anyone should feel obligated to release bins (CI/CD is a literal job title). People are releasing software for free because they want to. Let’s not look a gift horse in the mouth.
Idk I’m gonna stop reading this thread. its driving me crazy.
Around last year or the year before that they changed the placement of that button, never really given much thought about it tbf. Just a minor annoyance.
But yeah it was like in the same top row as the code/issues/pull-requests/wiki pages. Now you can only access it from the code page inside a lateral panel. Before that you could just jump to the releases from the wiki page, as an example.
I find that when you know how to use Github, Github is pretty easy and close to perfect for what it is, a code repository.
I think that most people who stumble across a Github link through a Google search, probably like in the original post, want to treat it like an app store. The read.me is the description, so they can tell it kind of does what they need, but they’re missing a big, green download and install button.
Yeah seriously, I don’t understand why Github can’t just have a dedicated download button. Instead you have to dig through the Readme to find it and it’s in a different place every time.
just go to the releases? yes it’s slightly hidden but that’s because github isn’t supposed to be a way to publish release files, it’s supposed to be a place to host and collaborate on source code.
but so long as the developer handles releases correctly it’s just like 2 clicks to download an executable file…
Not OP but many Linux project I follow, since they don’t have many resources, publish their releases through Torrent, a seeebox is fairly cheap (something like €10 a month) and could be easily crowdfunded even for a small project, and isn’t a huge expense anyway. And the site could just be a static page, or better yet the magnet link could be aviable on Github for people that want the precompliled binaries instead of the source.
Same thing that’s wrong with oatmeal: Nothing, that’s just not what it’s for.
Github and tools like it are designed for codebase versioning. It’s a great tool for developers who have a need to collaborate with others and manage releases/branches. But, it’s really not great for distributing executable apps to end users because it’s not for that. You shouldn’t tell end users to clone a git repo and type make install, because that’s not normally how people manage software.
If possible, the app should be packaged and in a software repository/app store typical of the platform. Chocalatey on Windows (Microsoft has their own Windows Store, but fuck that), Brew on MacOS…if we’re talking about an end-user application for Linux, I’d recommend Flatpak because it’s become the de facto one to rule them all; if you really must host something on your own website right next to a windows .exe I will say go with appimage.
You can get hosting for distributing end user apps, Github has a service called Github Pages for this purpose, for example. But especially in the Linux world, too many creators of little things like to just point you at their git repo and only accept user feedback in the form of pull requests.
“I went to the farmer’s market but they didn’t sell me a complete meal, only all these fucking plants. They think everyone’s a cook, and expect to know cooking, but i’m not and I don’t. Make a fucking meal and give it to me! Stupid fucking smelly farmers” – that’s how that sounds
The point, which you missed, is that going to github, a source code hosting service, to look for downloading executables for your specific platform - is like going to a farmer’s market to try and get a ready made meal. You’re at the wrong place, and it’s not meant for you if that’s what you’re looking for.
Github is fairly user friendly, but it’s users are developers.
I’m a developer and I hardly ever compile shit for my personal computer from source. I’d rather use a package manager, sure, but on Windows that’s by far the exception to the rule and if you want regular users to use your app, it needs to be a downloadable EXE.
This. Building a random app from source and tracking down its many dependencies is a massive pain in the ass, doubly so on Windows where you have to jump through a ridiculous number of hoops just to install a C compiler.
But when consumers get in contact with Github - and they do get in contact at some point - it is to download executables, since a good number of consumer-facing software which isnt on an app store does simply release their executables on github. That twists people’s understanding of what the platform is.
Not really, no. There’s a releases section where the developer can upload an exe for example but it’s really not easy to tell that that’s where you need to go if you just want to use the program/script, etc and you’re not a tech savvy person.
I mean, there is at least one, it’s called the releases page. Maybe what you want to eat hasn’t been prepared there, though. That’s not because they don’t realise people can’t all cook, but because they haven’t done it yet.
To strain your metaphor, I think what most people are looking for is a sign that says “FOOD COURT THIS WAY ->”
If they just had a prominent link to “download latest stable version” in a consistent place, people wouldn’t be so confused (and devs wouldn’t have to do extra work to try and make it obvious).
The specific repo in question had (and still has) a USAGE section.
And again, I have to point out that it is a python script, not an executable - it’s not standard, common or expected that python scripts be provided as a standalone executable. What makes you think even if there was a download link the guy would have gone down to find it?
Metaphors aside, the guy who originally posted this literally went on a source code-hosting website that primarily aims at making source sharing easier, yelling that he didn’t want to see said source-code, only an executable for a product that literally does not compile to an executable, did not bother reading the instructions, but instead posted on a public forum, in full arrogance, insulting developers by calling them “SMELLY NERDS”.
I’m astounded that there’s still people defending this guy like that’s a totally normal thing to do.
If you only want to download an executable, GitHub is NOT the best place to look for that. Yes, many developers do provide compiled versions of their code, and yes, it is often very convenient that they do so - but it is neither the intended purpose of GitHub, nor is it required that developers provide one.
But a lot of developers do do exactly that. They not only distribute binaries on their github, it is the only place where they distribute binaries. Github should probably recognize that it is a common use case and accommodate it better.
I’m also sure that a lot of people, like myself, took no notice of what specific package this user was complaining about, and are simply agreeing with the general sentiment that github could make things easier for non-technical users (which would, in turn, make it easier for developers since they would not need to field questions from users about how they download the software).
It’s more like going to a restaurant expecting them to make a recipe but instead they tell you to select this random list of things and then they cook it (like US Mongolian bbq places).
If you know what you’re doing you get a good meal. If not? Ketchup on rice.
From someone in computer networking classes: “I don’t use GitHub. This is too complicated” Like bruh. The instructions are right there in the readme.
There’s also the time where we were asked to read temperature from a sensor, and everyone went straight to chatgpt. Meanwhile, first search result, full repo with full noob instructions.
Computer networking was the most complicated class I took. How can GitHub be too complicated compared to the class? Or is it a non low level computer networking class?
This is literally the third year of the diploma. This is not even source control. This is literally installing the software provided with the instructions provided
But as I seen both, networking is easier than programming IMO. Networking is mostly knowing a lot of things to be able to reuse that knowledge Programming is actually creating things and solutions to problems, and is more complicated, at least for me. But I still prefer it as I actually feel mentally challenged (pun intended)
My personal issue with github is more the placement of the actual download links, sometimes its harder to find than the real download button on a dodgy pirate site without ad-block.
As a CS student, yes absolutely. These people then complain about paper exams and when the code gets complex enough for the AI to make mistakes. I’ve seen a few people drop out in programming 2, and my web 1 class was decimated because we were doing more than leetcode exercises. It’s a real problem that so many people are using it as a crutch.
I’m not a developer but I write a lot of code for network infrastructure automation… when I started learning I was already a network engineer so I figured it would be a cakewalk. I think it takes a certain type of person (patience, persistence, tenacity, etc) to excel in a computer science field. I’d reckon a lot of young people think the jobs are all pretty sweet and cushy
I still do sometimes. Wish they release a build so I don’t have to download all the dependencies and learn how to use a new program to build the damn thing
there is, it’s called “releases” and it’s like 2 clicks to download an executable, it’s not a github issue at all, and github isn’t meant to be where you get your executables anyways
That guy is not asking, is demanding. I use lots of open source software and am aware that the developer is often stretched thin. If I can’t help with the project (can’t say I have in the past two decades) I want them focused on what is important and what probably keeps them motivated, writing code and adding cool features. If they have time, fix bugs. If there is more bandwidth, write documentation.
Not wasting time making an executable for every OS out there because some ingrateful asshole is too lazy to figure out how to read instructions in plain English.
The next generation of script kiddies is going to be iPad babies. It’ll be interesting to see, since the majority can’t use anything in tech unless it’s an app.
We built computer labs in schools, to teach kids how to use computers. Then we decided computers are ubiquitous enough that we didn’t need computer labs anymore. And now we have an entire generation that doesn’t know how to use computers, because they use their phones and tablets for everything instead.
I grew up with windows and it’s sloppy implementation of a lot of things is a big reason why I got into computers because it let me fuck around with things under the hood easily. I remember messing around with the registry to do things that you couldn’t edit in the settings guis.
Have you tried Linux or the BSDs? Having spent a lot of time on Linux and Windows, the former feels like a well oiled machine with many fine tuning screws, while the latter feels like a rusted old trunk that needs a crowbar to get anything done.
AI for the heavy lifting, some poor overworked freelancer overseas fixes issues and refines, and then maybe, mayyyybe a domestic review team of senior coders for pen/security testing.
Ugh. You’re probably right. Finally all those idiots who come up to me going “I’ve got a great idea for an app” will actually be able to release their great idea :)
I used to be able to say “ideas are easy, work is hard”. Now we won’t be.
I’m yet to hear anyone saying that chatGPT can navigate the complex series of design decisions needed to create a cohesive app (unless of course, it was trained on something exactly the same). Many people report spending an inordinate amount of time rectifying the mistakes these LLMs make. It sounds like a glorified autofill (I haven’t used them yet). I shudder to think about the future of the software ecosystem if an entire generation is trained to rely entirely on them to create code.
LLM is great for writing code in small snippets. I’ve used it for quickly writing batch files, for instance. I couldn’t be bothered to look up how to format something obscure. So I use an LLM like ChatGPT to do the bulk work, then I just double check what it gave me.
I wouldn’t use it for anything over ~100 lines at a time. Just like with long conversations, it will have a tendency to “lose the plot” and start forgetting things that it said early on. Because as things get added to the conversation it has to parse more and more data. So it’ll start to drift off topic as conversations get longer.
It can also be handy for debugging sections of code. Because programming is just a form of language with strict grammar/diction/spelling rules. And a LLM will be really really good at spotting stupid grammar mistakes. It’ll instantly notice your missing semicolon and point it out to you, which can save you a ton of frustration.
Just like with any tool, how well it works is entirely up to the user. It will likely progress to the point of being able to manage longer code eventually. But right now it’s still incredibly useful as long as you accept its limitations and work within them.
and they’re going to be precisely as nonsensical as those AI articles are
sure, you can get good output from LLMs, but companies are absolutely not going to bother putting in the effort to do so, as not putting in effort is the entire point.
it’s at least nice to know that corporations will enshittify themselves out of existence, while one guy living in a basement will silently release something they poured their soul into and it sells 5 billion copies in the hour
People wrote software before there’s was computers for them to grow up with. They’ll be able to develop these skills in university’s, colleges, coding courses or online.
I grew up prior to the app world. My exposure to computing during highschool was word, excel, access and once we used PowerPoint. Nothings changed, people are only taught what the teachers know.
I started from a similar background in school. Learning from books in the library and coding on a sheet of paper. Opportunities to get that in a real computer was hard to come by. Some teachers helped by pitching in to get me a few hours in the school lab. Those who like it start learning well before the resources become available. You don’t need to wait till UG to gain those skills.
That said, how often do you see kids these days using a real general purpose computer suitable for coding? Like a desktop or laptop? Not phones, Chromebooks or tablets. In fact, it’s bewildering these days to see programming tutorials start with a statement saying that you need such a device. It was a given, back in the day. And the other stories here don’t paint a good picture.
It’s probably the same amount as before. More phones and tablets haven’t had a big effect on the amount of general purpose computers. There’s devices today like raspberry pi and Arduino that fill the same niche as older general-purpose computers.
Your assume things are different and must be worse. This is a take old as time. Socrates complained about the youth no longer taking the studies as serious as his generation did. The world would have fallen into complete chaos if it were ever true. It’s the conservative myth that things were better and can only get worse.
These kids accessing websites that tell you that a general purpose computer is needed, would have to rely on textbooks and magazines to get the same information in the past. A much bigger barrier, even identifying which ones you need.
I saw a tweet that said something like “It’s amazing that somehow we were only able to produce a single generation that knows how to properly use computers” and now it lives rent-free in my head.
Meh, maybe 10% of a single generation at most know how to use computers. Technically savvy millenials vastly overestimate how technically savvy other millenials are.
Even if it’s just 10% of millennials, that still feels higher than both the older and younger generations. I’m in my 30s and a lot of people I went to school with can at least do basic things on the computer, since we had computer classes in primary (elementary) school and high school.
I think there was a golden 20 year era for learning basic computing. If you were a kid somewhere between 1985 and 2005 you had to figure out some slightly more technical things to use a computer. I’m late Gen X and so was exposed early on to the Commodore 64 and MS-DOS, but kids working with Windows 3, 95 and 98 would have developed similar skills.
Eegh, even in high school (thirty-something Millennial here) I got that. “Woooaaahh, is that code there?!?” “Uhh… it’s an article? It’s in plain English. You know, your own native language? There’s even a class at this school called that. I know you know this because you were in that class last period. What I’m saying is, I don’t understand how the same language you just read out loud an hour ago suddenly looks like arcana on a computer screen.”
… It’s extra weird because no one ever just happened to go shoulder-surfing when I was actually programming. 🤷
I don’t think the percentage for gen X is much lower. But those people simply engaged with a kind of computer technology in their youth that is irrelevant today, and had to keep up with a lot of new things since then.
I’m a millenial who does tech support in a school and I see this every day. Older people and young kids generally are pretty clueless about doing anything in a computer.
I always thought the generations after the millennials would use a computer as second nature as they would be born when computers were already everywhere. Instead, they are just as useless as boomers.
But millenials always manage the basics. And learn stuff quick when they have too. I doesn’t matter if it’s a teacher or a janitor. It’s a different mindset.
I graduated high school class of 2005 in a random rural high school in North Carolina. Everyone in my graduating class knows how to navigate a file system, ie knows how to find homework.txt in My Documents/Homework, can type an essay in MS Word and could do a simple invoice or something in Excel. I don’t think they even offered programming classes, and I don’t think I met anyone who took CAD drafting or whatever, not until college.
Yes, I think that most of us realized from some of the self-aware wording that this is a parody. But like many parodies it’s a real trope taken to a silly extreme, so we’re talking about users who fit that trope (including ourselves, sometimes!).
Sometimes I can understand this struggle. For example let’s play a game. There is this app from e-foundation “Blisslauncher” it’s the default of eOS. And since I like it but don’t use eOS I want to download the apk from their gitlab page.
They actually call the android releases “cookies” because of this tradition for the code names. You can read phrases like “This will be fixed in the next cookie”
Add comment