Sean Kelly wrote:
== Quote from Georg Wrede (georg.wr...@iki.fi)'s article
The "presentation software format" is more restrictive than we usually
think. Everything has to be crunched to ridiculous screenfuls, mostly
containing a couple of bullet items. And if you want the audience to
follow the presentation "where you are" you have to do all kinds of
one-at-a-time appearing bullets. It's really pathetic. (And I, at least,
end up spending inordinate time figuring should they fly in from the
left or rignt, or should they "emerge", or whatever.) Instead of simply
scrolling them into view when needed.
...
PP is for M$ style sales pitches, not for disseminating serious content.
IMNSHO, of course. (And the less there's bread and butter, the more you
can decorate, having everybody exit, aahing and oohing all the way home.)
And how do you present conveniently a code snippet that exceeds a
screenful?
When I went back to finish my degree I was forced to take a Public Speaking
course, and the course basically had one simple message:
The likelihood that an audience will either get lost or bored is an exponential
function of the complexity of the presentation. As much as I despise the PP-
based presentation format, it does force the speaker to simplify things as
much as possible.
That's certainly true with non-techie audiences. I wish we had had
speaking classes when I went to school. The first time I gave a lecture
at the university, my hands trembled visibly on the OH.
