"It's shit" is not constructive feedback. As the parent commenter said, this is a relatively UI toolkit, and this desktop environment implementation is even younger. It takes time and effort to tweak things and there's no need to be hostile to new efforts. Especially when you consider that Qt, Windows, GNOME etc all have had years and years to tweak their design, and have also been redesigned.

I didn't say it's shit. The underlying technology is probably pretty nice, the fact it's done in Go and multi-platform is nice.

But they need to take some styling inspiration from, well, 2021. Even their icons on their website look old. That's a deal breaker for many. Why would you choose this over say, Flutter, when Flutter is also cross-platform and there's an obvious way to style Flutter apps? There's examples of good-looking Flutter apps...

But the website is not the toolkit. Yes the marketing needs work, but I would not judge the style of a toolkit based on it's homepage. The icons and design are based on Material Design which is really quite modern.

Why choose Fyne over Flutter? Mostly because it offers clear, easy to understand APIs instead of a glorified web UI. You pick Test Driven Development or Refresh Driven Design - people generally prefer one or the other ;)

It’s all gone downhill since Windows 2000, NeXt, Amiga.

The feedback is, 'do some proper UI design, because it really, really needs it'. That's constructive, as I read it, and very relevant.

> More like there's obviously no designers on the team.

Given what we've seen from modern "designers", I'm actually going to count that as a positive.