Re: [9fans] architectures

Re: [9fans] architectures

[anothy]

//err, mouse buttons?

okay, so USB would be needed to make Plan 9 on a Mac really
enjoyable. but heck, since i'm waiting on USB anyway...

as an unrelated point, what do people think of multi-button
mice as interface components for non-computer-savvy
folks? when i supported business-type users, particularly
such people on Win32 boxes, having them do anything with
any button other than the left was usually a failure. many
times i'd say "right click" and have them ignore the first
word. i'd repeat "no, _right_ click". the response would
usually be "i did" and they'd repeat exactly what they'd just
done. again, incorrectly.

don't get me wrong, i love the three button mouse interface
myself, given an inteligent use of the buttons (like Plan 9
has). i'm particularly fond of the acme interface, and i really
like the chording (okay, maybe it's not for everyone, but _i_
really like it). i'm asking about non-techie folks. for them,
wouldn't a single-button interface be simpler to understand?

oh, and for the moment, ignore design-specific issues. i
understand that one can design both stupid and inteligent
interfaces with _any_ number of buttons. i'm interested in
the question's more abstract form.
-α.

Re: [9fans] architectures

[Matt]

> when i supported business-type users, particularly
> such people on Win32 boxes, having them do anything with
> any button other than the left was usually a failure. many
> times i'd say "right click" and have them ignore the first
> word. i'd repeat "no, _right_ click". the response would
> usually be "i did" and they'd repeat exactly what they'd just
> done. again, incorrectly.

give 'em a big red button and no keyboard or screen

tell 'em press this button when you here a beep

Re: [9fans] architectures

[Boyd Roberts]

> as an unrelated point, what do people think of multi-button
> mice as interface components for non-computer-savvy
> folks?

you don't need to be computer savy to use your fingers.
that gets wired into the cerebellum pretty early on :)

i think the problem is that people with 'right click syndrome'
are suffering from bad design on µsloth's part because the
right button did _nothing_ for so long and then they screwed
it up in some contexts:

    click the right button on the desktop -- nothing happens.
    release it and something happens.  just like a knife that
    makes the cut after you've finished cutting.  totally
    counterintuitive.

Re: [9fans] architectures

[Laura Creighton]

my experience with non-techie folks is that once they get over the
conceptual hurdle of actually believing that can use a different
finger than their index finger to point with, they think that
being able to use their machine efficiently to do what they want is
as cool as the rest of us do.

The problem is that naive users are what people design for, because
customers who have never bought your product are by definition naive
users of it.  But naive users have a limited lifetime.  For a few
years I was involved with a project that tried to measure exactly how
limited the lifetime was. We came up with ~3 weeks for most users for
every program we tried to measure.  At this point, they become
frustrated users who want a better interface, or resigned users who
don't believe that there is a better interface because they have only
used computer interfaces designed for the naive.  The big lesson I
learned from this was to teach how to user regular expressions to every
vi user who has been using vi for at least 3 weeks ... but not
before then ... and make their lives a lot happier.  And to cheerfully
and patiently listen to all the complaints of the new users who found the
interface hard to learn, because, after all they deserve the respect
of having their complaints listened to and acknowledged; and then
carefully filing whatever changes they want under `things that they
most likely do will not want to change in about 3 weeks'.

Of course if your interface is truly lousy, the naive uers may quit
before 3 weeks is up.  And if you have botched some detail, the complaints
will continue after the 3 weeks.  But while you must never, ever
treat anybody with such contempt as to reply `you aren't significant
enough to have an opinion' - naive users truly are not significant
enough -- because like butterflies, their life expectancy is measured in
weeks.  Experienced users may also have a list of design defects in
your interface, sometimes because you have botched the interface,
sometimes because they have better vision than you did, and sometimes
because they are using your program to do things that you never do --
what is a problem for them never came up for you.  But it is extremely
rare for them to have the same list of changes as the naive (and an
indication that user interface design may not be what you have any
talent for).  In test after test where we established a user community
of experienced users and then announced that we were going to change
the interface in response to complaints that the interface was hard to
learn we got enormous protests (which we of course saved, that being
the point of this) of the form `when I was learning this, I thought
that XXX sucked too, but now I can't live without it.'

There are some things you cannot teach the technically unsavvy.  For
instance, in 20 years I have never, ever, ever, been able to convince
people that floating point, despite looking like decimal fractions,
ISNT, and that you MUST NEVER USE IT FOR MONEY.  The damn fools listen
politely and then go back to using it, because, after all, they think
they know better than you do.  Moth to the flame.  But I have worked
with 8-year-olds and 80-year-olds, secretaries, hairdressers, and
supermarket-check-out clerks, the most non-technical people we could
hope to find since we advertized for them.  And after they get some
familiarity with vi, I can teach nearly all of them how to use regular
expressions.  And just like the technically savvy, they think that
regular expressions are wonderful.

Laura

[9fans] Re: architectures

[Jim Choate]

It's not a question of 'tech savvy' it's a question of mental process,
levels of indirection and abstraction. Those are biological factors and
can't be taught. If you got it you can improve it, if you ain't you ain't.

I speak from spending 7 years in a hands-on science museum trying to
explain a host of technologies to folks. Most folks are not techie and
can't be. Most 'techie' folks really aren't either. They get a vague idea
of the process and work from that, they never get a deep inside intuitive
grasp of process and principle.


On Thu, 12 Jul 2001, Laura Creighton wrote:

> There are some things you cannot teach the technically unsavvy.  For
> instance, in 20 years I have never, ever, ever, been able to convince
> people that floating point, despite looking like decimal fractions,
> ISNT, and that you MUST NEVER USE IT FOR MONEY.  The damn fools listen
> politely and then go back to using it, because, after all, they think
> they know better than you do.  Moth to the flame.  But I have worked
> with 8-year-olds and 80-year-olds, secretaries, hairdressers, and
> supermarket-check-out clerks, the most non-technical people we could
> hope to find since we advertized for them.  And after they get some
> familiarity with vi, I can teach nearly all of them how to use regular
> expressions.  And just like the technically savvy, they think that
> regular expressions are wonderful.


 --
    ____________________________________________________________________

                Nature and Nature's laws lay hid in night:
                God said, "Let Tesla be", and all was light.

                                          B.A. Behrend

       The Armadillo Group       ,::////;::-.          James Choate
       Austin, Tx               /:'///// ``::>/|/      ravage@ssz.com
       www.ssz.com            .',  ||||    `/( e\      512-451-7087
                           -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
    --------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: [9fans] Re: architectures

[Dan Cross]

In article <Pine.LNX.3.96.1010712153305.9367f-100000@einstein.ssz.com> you write:
>I speak from spending 7 years in a hands-on science museum trying to
>explain a host of technologies to folks. Most folks are not techie and
>can't be. Most 'techie' folks really aren't either. They get a vague idea
>of the process and work from that, they never get a deep inside intuitive
>grasp of process and principle.

I'm sorry, I must be missing something.  I don't see how you spending
seven years in an environment where you interact with a single
individual for what, maybe a few hours on end, and that's it, qualifies
you to question the judgement of someone whose been spending 20 or so
years in an academic setting, working with individuals for a few months
(or more!) at a time.

I also fail to grasp the relevance of any of this to Plan 9; either the
operating system, or the Ed Woods movie.

	- Dan C.

Re: [9fans] Re: architectures

[Jim Choate]

On Thu, 12 Jul 2001, Dan Cross wrote:

> I'm sorry, I must be missing something.  I don't see how you spending
> seven years in an environment where you interact with a single
> individual for what, maybe a few hours on end, and that's it, qualifies
> you to question the judgement of someone whose been spending 20 or so
> years in an academic setting, working with individuals for a few months
> (or more!) at a time.

Because I'm a human being, arguments from 'authority' are worthless (and
in fact harmful but I digress).

You speak from ignorance of my situation. I spent 7 years working at
Discovery Hall (ask around any of the science museums that exist). I built
exhibits that went to the Exploratorium, Chicago, The Smithsonian. I
helped start the Austin Robot Group, ran their BBS, ran their exhibit
group (I've built over 40 exhibits using hundreds of volunteers), I've
over 10 years experience teaching. I've worked with three Nobel prize
winners. I've worked with NASA on several occassions getting "For All
Mankind" out of mothballs and on the road again, helped set up the 1990
Cyberspace conference here in Austin. A whole host of other activities.

You speak from ignorance and inexperience.

I say what I say because I've been there and done that.

> I also fail to grasp the relevance of any of this to Plan 9; either the
> operating system, or the Ed Woods movie.

I didn't start the discussion, but I did find it interesting.


 --
    ____________________________________________________________________

                Nature and Nature's laws lay hid in night:
                God said, "Let Tesla be", and all was light.

                                          B.A. Behrend

       The Armadillo Group       ,::////;::-.          James Choate
       Austin, Tx               /:'///// ``::>/|/      ravage@ssz.com
       www.ssz.com            .',  ||||    `/( e\      512-451-7087
                           -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
    --------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: [9fans] Re: architectures

[Douglas A. Gwyn]

Jim Choate wrote:
> ... Most folks are not techie and can't be. ...

But they could have been, if their early education hadn't ruined them.

Re: [9fans] Re: architectures

[Boyd Roberts]

From: "Douglas A. Gwyn" <DAGwyn@null.net>
>
> But they could have been, if their early education hadn't ruined them.

yeah, feynman was always tinkering with stuff from an early age.