AP: History Panel

[artjourney]

I find the text for the History Panel to be too small, even with “Large”  UI Font Size turned on, the text remains unaffected. I often find myself moving closer to the monitor and squint.

[loukash]

I'd even consider this a bug.

[Bit Disappointed]

It's part of a larger architectural issue in Affinity and how well (or not) Serif has ensured that the architecture is implemented correctly in all development activities. It is in fact many things, amongst these, technical debt, so let's ask someone. It this in fact technical debt?

Quote

 

Yes, text in a software program that maintains a static size regardless of the user's preferences for text size can be considered a form of technical debt. Technical debt refers to the compromises or simplified solutions in software development that can create additional work in the future. Here are some reasons why static text size might be considered technical debt:

1. Usability and Accessibility: If an application does not respect the user's preferences for text size, it can impact usability and accessibility, especially for users with visual impairments. This might require future adjustments to ensure compliance with accessibility standards.
2. Scalability and Responsiveness: Modern software development emphasises responsive design, where the user interface adapts to different devices and screen sizes. Static text size can create issues in various contexts, necessitating additional developmental work.
3. Maintenance: Should the software need updating to improve accessibility or adapt to new devices, the static element in the design can make it more time-consuming and costly to maintain.
4. User Expectations: Users increasingly expect applications to respect their system settings, including text size. Ignoring these expectations can negatively affect the user experience.

Addressing this type of technical debt is important to ensure that software remains user-friendly, accessible, and easy to maintain.

 

Despite Serif's boast about how Affinity is built around modern technologies, it doesn't apply to the programs ability to scale up, across the board and 'locally' as is the case here, so it's easy to find sad reports from customers about how microscopic Affinity appears on 4K screens.

I'm afraid we'll have to wait for an Affinity 3.0 before the architecture gets an overhaul, and if it doesn't happen then, Affinity in the future will be like running old computer games in simulators, postage stamp-sized, and I think Serif knows that's a massive business risk. I simply can't understand why programs designed in recent times were programmed into an architecture as if they were only to be displayed in 1024 x 768 resolution or so, i.e. working from the maximim and minimum resolutions of the time as a static starting point and whush... here we are with 4K and soon 8K.

The worst architecture failures often haunt the ship all the way to scrapping, or become the cause of a shipwreck or early scrapping. This is a great starting point for being extremely focused and willing to pay the salary when recruiting IT architects. And members of the usability team.