Post #235,474
11/22/05 2:44:16 AM
|
A couple things
You dismiss this by accusing the group of being techno-geeks and not understanding that to make it usable you must oversimplify...and us geeks will just have to use our geek-fu to (now understand this statement carefully) reclaim lost functionality that has been removed to (in your words) improve the experience.
\r\n\r\n Not quite. I've been pointing out that the functionality is still accessible, yes, but one of my earliest posts in this thread was "nobody's forcing you to use GNOME". If you want something which exposes tons of configuration all the time, then use something which does. But don't go to a project whose aim is a simple, usable desktop for a broad userbase and ask for that, because it's not really compatible with that aim. \r\n\r\n and adding a click behavior option is a line and a couple of radio buttons in a screen that is already there
\r\n\r\n Every UI change, even when it's "just a couple radio buttons", has an impact on usability. Every such change must, therefore, be rigorously determined to be necessary. As I've said before, many people here seem to have the attitude "how can you justify removing this?" while my attitude is "can you justify keeping it?" Applications should have as many configuration options as are absolutely necessary, and no more, because when you start throwing in edge cases like "well, maybe one or two people would want this to be configurable like that, so let's just go ahead and add it", you start down the road to feature creep and poor usability. \r\n\r\n Dumbing down the interface for everyday users isn't going to win many friends and influence many people that use Linux.
\r\n\r\n I really, really, really hate the phrase "dumbing down". That's how most "geeks" perceive it, unfortunately, but it's very sad that they do because it implies "those average people are too stupid to use our l33t system!" In reality, usability has nothing to do with "smart" and "stupid" people, and the best interfaces are those which are intelligent, not those which are "dumbed down". But any attempt to simplify the use of Linux applications, or remove unnecessary hurdles to learning to used Linux, is immediately set upon as "dumbing down", even if it results in interfaces which are more intelligently designed. \r\n\r\n Case in point: I'm helping to develop an application which will profile certain types of information about web sites. As part of its configuration, it needs to know things like whether a site has a search function and what URL and URL parameters it uses in searches. Comparable applications tend to have an input box for "search URL" and another for "search query delimiter", along with explanations (sometimes lengthy explanations) of what these mean. My proposal for interface to implement this is somewhat different: since a large part of our target audience is bloggers, I proposed that it instead ask "what blogging software do you use", and offer a list of Movable Type, Wordpress, etc. Since those packages each have their own standard search URLs and parameters, that information can be inferred from the blogging software without needing to mess about with asking a user for it. Of course, an additional "I don't see my software listed here" option would pop up a traditional search URL/query parameters input, but for the vast majority of cases we've just avoided the need for that. \r\n\r\n This would be called "dumbing down" by many, but what it really involves is making the interface more intelligent; it doesn't need to ask potentially-confusing technical questions because it can usually infer the answers it needs from a simpler question. \r\n\r\n (It also, you'll note, removes at least one item of configuration. I'm a fan of that.) --\r\nYou cooin' with my bird?
\r\n[link|http://www.shtuff.us/|shtuff]
|
Post #235,498
11/22/05 9:06:33 AM
|
Nits
But don't go to a project whose aim is a simple, usable desktop for a broad userbase Point I made before, define your userbase. For Linux, that userbase is a fairly well educated and fairly technical bunch. And possibly, the alienation of the userbase may have come from a change in project goals...which will generally make enemies of the current userbase if they feel like the changes aren't necessary/warranted (which brings you back to the curse of having smart people as users) I understand the feature creep issue. However, we're back to an understanding of the usersbase, which for Linux (be definition) is a broader group that those used to a "click to focus" model. And again, I understand your overall point, but this was not a really good example to prove it. That's how most "geeks" perceive it, unfortunately, but it's very sad that they do because it implies "those average people are too stupid to use our l33t system!" . And my point to you is that "those average people" are already l337 and are likely to remain that way. Ignore your audience at your own peril. the best interfaces are those which are intelligent I disagree, the best interfaces are those which are intuitive and consistent from the outset. The great interfaces are those which, from the humble beginnings of consistency, give the user the ability to adapt the interface to his/her specific situation (ie-disability configurations, personalizations, etc.) And I will remain with judgement that Apple has the edge on all current competitors but the simple most elegant and consistent desktop experience came with Warp 4 (and it was also incredibly configurable). And, unfortunately or fortunately for the Linux community, Microsoft is 3rd. Hopefully this will change (or Microsoft will finally break backward compatibility in a gracioius gesture to implement a better security model..or hell will freeze over ;-)) If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. Fudd's First Law of Opposition
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #235,500
11/22/05 9:08:47 AM
|
I never got it with Warp.
I thought it sucked. Fiddly, ugly, corporate horribleness. Like Windows 3, but uglier.
Peter
[link|http://www.no2id.net/|Don't Let The Terrorists Win]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Home]
Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
|
Post #235,503
11/22/05 9:32:11 AM
|
It wasn't pretty, granted
But it was consistent and built to handle common tasks (at the time) quickly and with minimal fuss.
If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. Fudd's First Law of Opposition
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #235,506
11/22/05 9:40:28 AM
|
And, it could be made quite pretty
Though nowadays without the AA it's harder to make it look good in comparison to other interfaces.
--\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n* Jack Troughton jake at consultron.ca *\n* [link|http://consultron.ca|http://consultron.ca] [link|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] *\n* Kingston Ontario Canada [link|news://news.consultron.ca|news://news.consultron.ca] *\n-------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Post #235,507
11/22/05 9:44:15 AM
|
I thought its font handling was spectacularly awful.
And as I was trying to do document work at the time, that didn't help any at all.
Peter
[link|http://www.no2id.net/|Don't Let The Terrorists Win]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Home]
Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
|
Post #235,520
11/22/05 11:37:19 AM
|
The early iterations of the TT handling _were_ awful
it improved over time, and nowadays if you go and get the OS truetype implementation, it's actually pretty damned good (what's it called, opentype IIRC?), but when it came out TT fonts did look bloody awful... on the screen. It worked fine for print output, but I still prefer using ATM fonts on Warp, despite the fact that TT works very well now. Not least because they work sooooo much better in PDFs.
--\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n* Jack Troughton jake at consultron.ca *\n* [link|http://consultron.ca|http://consultron.ca] [link|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] *\n* Kingston Ontario Canada [link|news://news.consultron.ca|news://news.consultron.ca] *\n-------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Post #235,505
11/22/05 9:40:19 AM
|
Re: Nits
Point I made before, define your userbase. For Linux, that userbase is a fairly well educated and fairly technical bunch. And possibly, the alienation of the userbase may have come from a change in project goals...which will generally make enemies of the current userbase if they feel like the changes aren't necessary/warranted (which brings you back to the curse of having smart people as users)
\r\n\r\n GNOME has defined its target userbase. Its target userbase, however, is not necessarily the sort of person who's already using Linux, and a lot of its moves toward simplicity and usability have been undertaken with an eye toward bringing users to Linux who never would have considered the switch before (and who mostly would not have considered the switch because Linux represented a bewilderingly complex and frightening system with an obscene learning curve). Also, there's rally no way to aim for this target userbase without forsaking the "absolutely everything must be configurable in absolutely every conceivable way" crowd. \r\n\r\n I disagree, the best interfaces are those which are intuitive and consistent from the outset. The great interfaces are those which, from the humble beginnings of consistency, give the user the ability to adapt the interface to his/her specific situation (ie-disability configurations, personalizations, etc.)
\r\n\r\n That really is a nit you're picking there. For sake of technical precision, I would have been better off saying "A characteristic of many of the best interfaces is that they are intelligent", but felt no need for such cumbersome language. \r\n\r\n As for alienating the userbase, I don't think it's too much of a problem. The people who were going to switch away from GNOME over this have already done so. The remaining noise is from people who wouldn't use GNOME even if it implemented everything they say they want, and can be safely ignored. --\r\nYou cooin' with my bird?
\r\n[link|http://www.shtuff.us/|shtuff]
|
Post #235,509
11/22/05 9:59:33 AM
|
OT: Please don't put things in quotes unless you're quoting
In this thread especially, some of the arguments have been over what people said. Putting thing in quotation marks that aren't quotations, especially in a thread like this, can add to increased confusion and misunderstanding. For example, you wrote: Also, there's rally no way to aim for this target userbase without forsaking the "absolutely everything must be configurable in absolutely every conceivable way" crowd. I think you're putting words in the mouths of a [link|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/board/search/?field_searchUser=-1&field_searchSubject=&field_searchContent=absolutely+everything+must+be+configurable+in+absolutely+every+conceivable+way&field_searchSignature=&field_searchForum=-1&field_boardid=1&submit_ok%3Amethod=Search|crowd] that isn't participating in this thread. ;-) If you want to give your impression of an argument put forward by others, but it's not a quotation, maybe use italics or something. Thank you. Cheers, Scott.
|
Post #235,615
11/23/05 4:12:32 AM
|
When I quote
I use the blockquote tag. \r\n\r\n And at this point, honestly, there's so much straw lying around I might as well use it to build some men of my own. --\r\nYou cooin' with my bird?
\r\n[link|http://www.shtuff.us/|shtuff]
|
Post #235,589
11/22/05 8:04:37 PM
|
He seems to be listening to you.
Perhaps you could add that the direction the GNOME developers are taking are "we want to you use it thus" instead of "how do you currently use it and what is difficult". This was, IIRC, the nucleus of the disagreement about GNOME's configuration.
Wade.
"Insert crowbar. Apply force."
|
Post #235,849
11/24/05 9:15:15 AM
|
Well.
He was being fairly polite. \r\n\r\n Why not go over [link|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=235846|here], and let's see if we can't have a civilized discussion about configurability? --\r\nYou cooin' with my bird?
\r\n[link|http://www.shtuff.us/|shtuff]
|
Post #235,929
11/24/05 7:02:05 PM
|
Do you blame me for losing my temper? (new thread)
Created as new thread #235928 titled [link|/forums/render/content/show?contentid=235928|Do you blame me for losing my temper?]
"Insert crowbar. Apply force."
|
