On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 8:10 PM, dave malouf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't know anything about flight control panels, but UNIX > (including Linux) has had a design akin to fraternity hazing from the > beginning. There was always a right of passage associated with > learning VI and EMACS for anyone who dared. I'm sure that has > changed recently as GUI is a lot more common in UNIX systems. But > back in the 80's when I started on computers in college on Sparcs & > SunOS, it was common to see people flaunt w/ bravado their knowledge > of VI and EMACS command line codes.
I'd argue that even this is not a case of intentional obfuscation, but instead an extremely capable design implemented within the constraints of very limited resources (no mouse, usability over remote terminal connections). After using GUI editors for a decade, sure, vi seems almost humorously arcane, but in the recent past I've started to pick up a few commands here and there, and compared to other command line editors, it's extraordinarily powerful and reasonably well designed, at least for a set of users who are used to the command line, keyboard-only paradigm (again, user-friendly => who is the user, and what is friendly to them?). I'd also make similar arguments for the architecture of console UNIX/LINUX as a whole. The concept of modular command line apps piping data from one to another is extraordinarily powerful and quite user friendly for the user base at which it was aimed. In fact there are plenty of tasks still today that send me straight to iTerm on my Mac. And when you consider how well it all works and how powerful it all is within the pre-GUI constraints, it's pure genius. And finally, a set of users flaunting w/ bravado is not equivalent to an intentionally complex design. If you look hard enough, you will find users of any app of meaningful complexity, from Photoshop to MS Word to Mac OSX, flaunting their prowess with bravado. This does not mean that they are intentionally complicated or poorly designed. It simply means that their users are human and have egos in need of stroking. Perhaps for this reason, the users like a bit of complexity with the app, but that still doesn't mean that complexity was a design goal. -n. ________________________________________________________________ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
