2009/8/5 Tim Dobson <li...@tdobson.net> > Thanks Brian, > > That's made what you were saying loads clearer to me. :) > > As I had suspected, I fundamentally disagree, but at least I'm clear about > what I'm disagreeing with now. Thank you!
Excellent. Agreeing about this never gets anyone anywhere. > > > Please see comments inline. > > Brian Butterworth wrote: > >> The point about the very specific examples that I gave was that as a group >> "Windows users" have a strange and wide-ranging levels of understanding of >> the system they are using. >> > > I realise these are very specific examples so I'm not going labour any > points about those specific examples. > > If you started with Windows 1.21 or your first times is with Windows 7, >> the skills you learn will stay with you. >> > > > >> Even if you came to Windows via Mac/OS or GEM or OS/2 PM or X-Windows or >> Xerox Star .. you bring along a subset of the whole range of things you can >> do with Windows. >> >> Because Linux does not have the attitude of Windows, "a PC on every >> desktop and in every home" it has taken shortcuts. >> >> So, everytime there isn't a usability study into the user experience of a >> Linux release, there just isn't the attention to detail. >> > > I'm not going to go into the pedantic semantics on what one means by "Linux > release" (kernel.org are sure good at end user UI! ;) ) but I think it > might be worth looking at this project from one of the major GNU/Linux > desktop environments, GNOME: > http://live.gnome.org/UsabilityProject > There once was a time when functionality was the biggie for distro. Now > it's usability and they are making leaps and bounds. The first version of Unix I used was on a PDP11! When I started doing system admin for Unix I learnt both System V and BSD. I used XWindows on Sparcstations! So, I have a rather blaze attitude to "new" versions of something I have known for a more than a few decades. Sorry... > > > Someone goes, as you did "I can do Alt-F1, arrow, arrow, enter." you drop >> some potential new users, because Linux "doesn't understand them". >> >> Given that a modern OS has huge qualities of these components, many small >> UI "failings" means the Linux interface fails for more and more people. >> > > "more and more" -> you don't think there is *any* relative improvement? I'm NOT in anyway talking about improvement. What I am saying is that for "the masses" to move to Linux, they need NO barriers at all. This is not about creating a better UI, it is about having a UI that you don't need to learn because it leverages the user's Windows "skills". Only once you have got your users can you think of improving them. > > I'll assume that's just hyperbole. No, I trying to point out that Linux desktop acceptance needs present not a single hurdle to acceptance. I've seen it myself many times. You plonk the MD of the company, who used computers years ago, down in front of a non-windows machine. He click a few things, can't make it work straight away and decided "it's rubbish, stick with Windows". If you in sales or marketing, then you're going to stick a Machead down and get them to use the Linux box. Again, it doesn't appear enough like a Mac, so they go to their backup Windows skills and still nothing. The wide-scale acceptance of a Linux operation system will depend on the people who make the decisions about purchase. This is, surely, self-evident. As a parallel, remember the iPlayer wasn't going to have a Mac version. And then Flash saved the day. How would all those Mac people in the media have reacted to a Mac-less iPlayer. The same way they did to 4OD. "it doesn't work". > > > Let's think for a moment about "start menus" or menus to launch programs. > The actual name is irrelevant. > [snip] There is a simple way to sort this out ... make it do what the user expects. Especially if the user has ingrained their knowledge below their personal perception threshold. There was a guy I tried to help the other day who just couldn't get the hang of the mouse. Can most UI designers remember how they learnt THAT skill? > I won't reiterate the article but just point out that as anyone on the > latest version of ubuntu will know, notification windows ROCK now. > > Someday, someone will stick a few million dollars into sorting this out >> and there will be a "perfect release" of Linux that anyone can use BY >> BRINING WHAT THEY KNOW OF WINDOWS on a personally deep level. >> > > Well there's at least one notable multimillionaire throwing money at this > at the moment. > http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/223 > Yes, perhaps. > > > This does not mean that Linux should simply ape Windows. But it does mean >> that as an absolute minimum it should behave as everyone (as individuals) >> expect. >> > > Including the requirement of antivirus, application level firewalls and > $latestwindowsworm? I jest, obviously not and you are right that the UI > needs to conform to standards, be interoperable and seamless from technology > to technology. Yes. This is 100% my point. It doesn't matter if it the funtionality is "wrong" by some definition or other. It is the user's unconcious expectations that need meeting. Who cares if the OS doesn't need an anti-virus (say) - the user should still "see one" because that is what they expect. > > What would be really amazing would be if Microsoft and Apple participated > in the http://www.freedesktop.org community, however that will never > happen so I might as well forget that and point it out as an example of how > developers are collaborating with each other to ensure consistent usability > across their platforms. Ah, aeronautical pork time. > > > I know I can use any interface that is presented to me. I'm happy with a >> VT100 and vi. >> >> That's the problem with Linux, it's designed by people like "us" and not >> for "every home, every desk". >> > > hhahhahah, now if *I* was designing a text editor..... Vi was my second love, I started with ed. On a teletype. > > > *enter some mashup clone of emacs & vi in a Words 2007 UI with clarisworks > support and textmate bindings* > > In all seriousness, I wish I could write something worthy of going in > GNU/Linux distro - the people I know who contribute or have contributed are > a lot more talented than me at least. The quality of code accepted into > debian/centos etc is not for people like me, I can say that. How about a BBC Micro 2012 Edition...? FM&T need another impossible tech project. Be more exciting than "Bang Goes The Theory". > > > cheers, > > Tim > - > Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please > visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. > Unofficial list archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ > -- Brian Butterworth follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002
