Post by darrell wilkinsNo it's Donald Norman thing that computers should be come single purpose
appliances.
That wasn't what I was saying- Jeff Raskin has many times said things along
the same lines. No, not that computers should become single purpose, but
that they should become "appliance-esque" in their ease of use.
Post by darrell wilkins* I read that I don't like the idea of general purpose computers. False, it
is Don Norman who takes that position. I think that general purpose
computers are the way to go. I published a critique of the idea that you can
do it all with separate appliances.
I've noticed Raskin's words change depending on who is offering to interview
him at the time. :)
Post by darrell wilkinsPost by Michael Bryan BellHe essentially thinks that everything should
be akin to the palm OS, or rather buttons on the computer you'd press for
sending emails, etc. He has a point, as it is more intuitive.
I don't know where you get that from.
In the humane interface, under the heading of "interface unification" he
makes great points about how an interface needs to be consistent across
applications. Great stuff from the mac days. But then he goes into his
current shtick- file systems are bad for users, folder heirarchies are
confusing and bad, why file names aren't right for humans and unnatural,
etc, etc, etc.
One of the major things he talks about is that if you're in a word
processor, and you want to make a new paragraph, how would you do it as a
new user? How would you even know where to start? Well, add it to the
keyboard! it's right there, you just press the button.
File hierarchies: they suck. If you want to find and open your email app,
and you don't even really know how computers work, just =finding= it can
really suck. The solution? ADD IT TO THE KEYBOARD, or onto the computer. :)
Basically that you shouldn't have to find stuff, it should be right there in
front of you. That there shouldn't even be a desktop, there shouldn't be
"applications" you should just press the button for writing and email and up
it would pop. He talked about adding keys for redo/undo, keys for "new
paragraph", keys for a history of you selections.
It sounds good, kind of opendoc-ish. And he raises great points, which I
respect him for raising. But he has no solutions to the problems.
Post by darrell wilkinsHave you ever read any of his work?
I've only read "the humane interface", and some of the original mac stuff
he's posted on his website a good while ago. Everything since then has been
through interviews.
I enjoyed it very much, and like I said originally, he makes good,
common-sense points. But I stick by the fact that since the macintosh he
just comes up with good, common-sense points but with no =answers= to the
problems.
Post by darrell wilkinsPost by Michael Bryan BellBut it always
breaks down when you try to get even mildly complex.
Not true. It is *very* hard to design systems that are easy for beginners
and experienced users to use but it is possible.
Uh huh. Where is it? I'm not talking about a website UI, and nothing I've
seen is dead simple for a computer illiterate (kiosk-esque) but yet allows
those who need it to extract the things they need as a power user.
I'm actually curious, maybe there is something out there I haven't seen that
you can point me to. Palm OS is dead simple to get started with, but not
intuitive to extend. Windows? Heh, that's an OS you learn, not that works
around you. OS2/warp? Cool OS, not for newbies. MacOS9? Fairly close, and
once you "got it" you "got it", its weirdness was consistent. I (and others
will disagree) think OS9 was light years ahead of the windows UI, but it was
not a power user interface, and there was still a learning curve. KDE/Gnome
are atrocious as a whole (but have cool things in them), openstep was
awesome was you groked it, but you had to grok it. OSX is pretty simple for
a new user, but is hardly (in its current form) a power user OS with the
exception that you have access to the terminal- and its biggest problem is
that it just doesn't scale. There have been so many points as to why it
doesn't (check out arstechnica, togs' reviews) that I won't relist them
here.
I'm not saying it won't happen, but so all of his suggestions break down.
His stuff above, about adding to the keyboard, etc? =That= is why people
think he's talking about specialized appliances. Because it isn't a bad
idea, if all you're doing is word processing. But it doesn't =scale=.
Post by darrell wilkinsPost by Michael Bryan Belland all he does is say
"this is the way it should be" instead of backing it up and doing something.
Not true. Just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean it hasn't happened.
There's really no way to respond to this statement. That's like me saying
"the sky is never pink elephants" and you saying the above. Just no way to
respond.
Post by darrell wilkinsPost by Michael Bryan BellSo far I haven't seen one raskinesque OS that has scaled really well
(including palm), so you're left with kiosk/appliances, which haven't sold
well at all with the exception of handlhelds (which aren't doing all that
well right now).
Not true. It all depends on the field your working in. There are lots of
computing devices that need interfaces not just the ones that sit on desks.
Think plane cockpits, think Air traffic control systems, think medical
equipment.
Remember, we're not =talking= about specialty, separate appliances for a
specific task, as you pointed out. All of the above is not it, and in his
discussions, he is talking about =computers=. General purpose, things he
thinks are wrong with todays interfaces.
Post by darrell wilkinsJust because Raskin hasn't built a well known GUI/OS that runs on a PC or a
Mac
No, not just well known. Nothing that I can see, whatsoever. A lot of the
principles he pushed weren't new, but the implementations he and others (it
wasn't just raskin, I believe) worked out through some hard science =were=
and helped set the stage for having concrete reasons for why unified
interfaces are good, amount other things.
I give him tremendous respect for that, and I thought I was being clear on
that. What I'm saying (and I'll stick to) is that he makes valid,
common-sense criticisms about today's current UI's, but none of his
suggestions work, and he's never built anything that would =show= it would
work. He has one project that started a good bit ago over at stepwise I
believe, to "impliment his ideas" but no work is being done on it.
Post by darrell wilkinssince he (helped) design the original Mac OS doesn't mean that his ideas
are not valid.
I looked at the email I said, and in it I said over and over again that he
had valid points. Just no solutions, and no one does right now. Naming files
sucks for new users, so what is the solution? What is a new paradigm that
would =work=?
He doesn't have one, but he doesn't just say that.
Michael Bryan Bell
------------------
ICQ: 16106263 Yahoo: mhbell1
No Link for you! AIM: drunkenbatman