Re: [9fans] User Interface

[Randolph Fritz <randolph@panix.com>]

In article <20010814125559.826F319A3E@mail.cse.psu.edu>, rob pike wrote:
>> The editors, sam and acme are virtually unusable.
> 
> Many people disagree, even feel the opposite, that they are among
> the easiest-to-use editors around.
> 
>> Why is it that such a simple task as editing the contents of a textfile 
>> must cause so much pain?
> 
> I don't hear many yelps where I work and essentially everyone uses
> either sam or acme.  I suspect you don't know how to use them.
> 
> A criticism I will accept is that there is inadequate documentation
> explaining how to use them well.  Try reading the associated papers,
> rather than just the man pages.  They help somewhat.
> 

I think a key point has been hit, albeit glancingly: computer
scientists are willing to study a system before using it; most
people--including most software professionals, these days--are not.

The original usability goal of the Mac was 30 minutes from a newbie
sitting down to beginner-level productivity.  (Without, I think,
reference to any manuals, though with quite a lot of text on-screen.)
A much gentler learning curve, yes?

Now there is no requirement that Plan 9 be accessible without
extensive study.  However, I suspect there are good reasons to look at
these issues more closely.  If nothing else, it seems to me there are
interesting design process issues in the area, and working on it might
open up interesting research topics.  I've seen a lot of sneering at
the Mac, but, still--30 minutes to usability?  That's an impressive
design achievement, and it surprises me it doesn't engender more
respect and emulation.

It also seems to me that aiming at a gentler learning curve for
software developers might attract a broader group of software
researchers to Plan 9 and--forgive me if I have this wrong--isn't that
one of the reasons Plan 9 is being published on the internet with
source code?

It would be an interesting research topic for someone who wasn't
busily studying architecture and building science... :-)

Randolph