When it was new its design was a big draw (second to performance, of course).

Are you confusing modern Google Chrome with early Google Chrome, or did you dislike early Google Chrome?

> All other browser I've tried (firefox, vivaldi, edge, safari, atlas, many others) and all other programs with a tab-based UI I use (zed, vs code, sqlitebrowser) look worse.

Both you and the poster could both be correct.

Looking good and being a poor interface are unrelated.

IOW, something could look absolutely beautiful and still have a nightmarish UI.

"Looking pretty" is subjective. Being a good UI is objective.

Reminds me of how like 10 years ago there were the fanbois who wanted to do their cars in Material Design or tatto Material Design on their face and such.

Yes, people who disagree with me about which program has the best implemention of a tab-based user interface remind of people who tattoo things on their face as well.

What don't you like about Chrome design?

It's not that there is anything to like or dislike: it's just that there is no "design" in it, nothing to reference

If you're talking about graphic design, that's probably true. I'm talking about the thousands of design decisions the Chrome team made to decide exactly what to include and not to include, where to put things and how they appear, what words are used, and how features behave. Chrome is heavily and well designed in that regard. It's evident that everything was heavily considered and evaluated. I contrast Chrome to other apps and websites where it feels like the "designers" may not use the product at all.