Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] what's wrong with glame
From: Richard Dobson (RWD_AT_cableinet.co.uk)
Date: Fri Jul 27 2001 - 14:52:44 EEST
Well, nobody can ever win these arguments; I find the new Start menu
system very convenient and intuitive, as I do indeed use 15% of my
installed programs 99% of the time.
Win2k Startmenu doesn't move menu items to different places (though it
enables you to do that if you want), it just hides rarely used items.
'Intuitive' is a wonderfully useless (and much abused) (non-)technical
term, as it invariably means different things to different people,
because, strangely enough, people learn to wotk (and think) in different
ways. Nothing is intuitive, until you have learned it! Any of you tried
learning a musical instrument to conservatoire level recently? How long
did it take you? But these instruments are very intuitive to play, when
you have mastered them.
There simply is ~no~ single 'right' way to design things, and in the end
people do learn to use one tool in depth, and working with it does
become transparent, unless the design is totally flawed.
You may feel that Win2k does come into this category, but I don't
(actually, I think it is political posturing much of the time!), and
that is as much as I can say about it, really. Whereas I find a lot of
Linux (especially the new Gnome/KDE interface) anything but intuitive,
and in general, unless you were born thinking of shell scripts, I would
say that very little of Linux is intuitive at all. But you get used to
it, like using an italic fountian pen after years of using a biro, and
forget there is an interface between you and the task you are doing,
witness the amazing things a skilled user can do with emacs. This
clearly works for Mac users, who make exuberant claims about how
intuitive and easy to use it is, whereas never do I come so close to
dropping the machine from a great height as I do any time I try to use a
Mac.
And I feel that the new KDE itself has tried to add too many stupid
added-value enhancements that I could well do without, c.f. the example
I described in a previous post.
Richard Dobson
Kevin Hremeviuc wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> --- Steve Harris <S.W.Harris_AT_ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 04:54:09AM +0900, Patrick
> > Shirkey wrote:
> > > Richard Dobson said:
> > >
> > > >and, wherever possible, ensure that the most
> > frequently performed tasks
> > > >(which may be the most argued-over parameter, of
> > course) require the
> > > >least number of steps. A sub-menu requires at
> > least four, possibly five
> > > >steps:
> > >
> > > How difficult would it be to add a statistical
> > analysis function to the
> > > program which tracks the most used menu items and
> > organises them into a
> > > seperate menu specifically for the most used
> > items?
> >
> > Nnnnnnnnooooooooooooooooo!
> >
> > That way lies madness. Have you used win2k? I find
> > it really anoying.
>
> I agree totally!!! W2K and the Microsoft philosophy of
> trying to do as many stupid values adds, to justify
> there ridiculous price tag ( given the volume sold )
> are incredibly annoying.
>
> User interfaces need to be intuitive. For linux
> applications it is better to satisfy the 90
> percentile. Bells and whistles should be left to
> professional software companies in competitive markets
> where the price tag and the functional inanity reach
> mind boggling levels.
>
> What is needed is good robust applications that offer
> sensible functionality with intuitive user interfaces.
>
> >
> > - Steve
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk
> or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie
-- Test your DAW with my Soundcard Attrition Page! http://www.bath.ac.uk/~masrwd (LU: 3rd July 2000) CDP: http://www.bath.ac.uk/~masjpf/CDP/CDP.htm (LU: 23rd February 2000)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Fri Jul 27 2001 - 14:51:36 EEST