Re: [9fans] User Interface

[Eric de Redelijkheid <ericdere@xs4all.nl>]

Dan Cross wrote:

>In article <3B793F22.5080707@xs4all.nl> you write:
>
>>This procedure is absurd.  [...]
>>
>
>Rather, your behavior is absurd.
>
>Let me get this straight; you use a piece of software, but with
>pre-conceived notions about how it should work.  When it's borne out
>that those notions don't mesh with the reality the software presents,
>you complain about and insult the software?
>
>And this makes sense to you?
>
More sense than making this piece of crap and then blaming users if they 
don't appreciate it? I think insults can work out in two way's. Either 
the software designers come up with something better, or there will be 
nothing left to insult.

>
>
>I mean, not to be rude or anything, but this sounds more like your
>issue than Plan 9's.
>
>All I can really say is, well, if notepad.exe works for you, stick with
>it.  Why you bothering to change?  What's your motivation?  If you're
>not going to attempt to learn a new way of doing things, and it sounds
>like you're not, you should probably just stick with what you know.
>
I am very willing to learn new things. This OS, however does not invite 
a me to learn about it. For your information I finally figured how to 
operate 'acme' and 'sam' and I still think it is stinks. It won't be 
long before I wipe my harddisk. I am thinking of trying beos instead. My 
motivation is not to put up with any illconceived idea about how a 
computer should be operated.

>
>
>On a personal note, I really like Plan 9.  It's a lot like a breath of
>fresh air for me; but then I like to think that I'm able to appreciate
>the new ideas that went into it, which took me quite a long time before
>I was able to do.  Maybe Dennis Ritchie and Rob Pike don't appreciate
>my humor about 1200 baud modems (:-p), but they do know a thing or two
>about how to write operating systems.
>
These new ideas won't mean a thing if you can't get ordinary human 
beings to work with it. And knowing a thing or two about operating 
systems, does not mean they know anything about how someone in the real 
world would want to use a computer.

>
>Hmm, maybe it's that stuff they sell in Amsterdam....
>
You could not point the place on a map if you wanted to. What are your 
hobbies besides computing and shooting strangers of your farm?

>
>
>Oh, one other thing: I don't think the `goal' of Plan 9 was wide-spread
>acceptance.  It was built to meet the needs of the people who built
>it.  There's nothing wrong with that, and it certainly wasn't a waste
>of time.  This can be seen empirically by the fact that they've used it
>for years to get real work done.  To the extent that it's provided a
>new way of looking at things, I think it's been rather successful as a
>research endeavour, too.  Don't make the mistake of assuming that every
>piece of software needs to be written for a mass-audience of millions
>in order to be successful or useful.
>
Then why is it for sale? To hurt users? If it is just an excercise in 
building a distributed operating system, why let  it out of the lab?

>
>
>That's all I'll say on the issue; I have no real desire to participate
>in a flame war over opinions on user interface issues.
>
>	- Dan C.
>
And I don't want to hear excuses like: if a user can't operate our 
software, we are not to blame; this user must be stupid, or: I can 
operate this software, so logicly if I can, anyone can.