On Wed, Nov 15, 2006 at 07:08:18AM +0200, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote: > >according to Craig A. Finseth, and Emacs fan, whose thesis on text editing > >technology was regarded as the authority in the field ^^^ What is regarded as the authority in the field now?
> """Novice users have used a computer before, perhaps for text editing, > word processing, spread sheet, or database applications. In any event, [..] > Basic users are like novice users, only more so. They understand such > programming concepts as thread of control, variables, and statements > like "A = A + 1" (in fact, many people call such users "programmers"). > These users can operate any program, even one with a poor design. Must have been written before GUI's came out. No mention of lusers or cluebies(sp?)? > on debian lists, I come across 3 classifications: > * newbies > * intermediate > * experts That's a bit broad. How about: * Aunt Tilly * luser/clubie * novice/newbie * beginner * intermediate * Advanced * Expert * Wizard Aunt Tilly -- someone who hasn't used/seen a computer. luser/cluebie -- Can't programme TV/Video etc even with the manual. Although you may see him/her moving the mouse round and clicking things in Windows. Some even know how to email, as long as it is no more complicated than click ... click ... type ... click. novice/newbie -- Can programme TV/Video. Just starting on computers. beginner -- Just starting to understand the terminology, and using software. intermediate -- Understands most of the terminology. Can use most of the software for standard tasks. Understands basic error messages and why they occur. Advanced -- Understands nearly all of the terminology. Can use most of the software for Advanced tasks. Can "sort" out most error messages. Expert -- Understands all of the terminology. Writes software for advanced tasks. Wizard -- Can programme TV/Video/Computer etc without the manual. Note that someone may be advanced at one thing while being a beginner at another. -- Chris. ====== " ... the official version cannot be abandoned because the implication of rejecting it is far too disturbing: that we are subject to a government conspiracy of `X-Files' proportions and insidiousness." Letter to the LA Times Magazine, September 18, 2005. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]