| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
IBM To Linux Desktop Developers: 'Stop Copying Windows' (InformationWeek)IBM To Linux Desktop Developers: 'Stop Copying Windows' (InformationWeek)Posted Aug 8, 2008 16:42 UTC (Fri) by lieb (subscriber, #42749)Parent article: IBM To Linux Desktop Developers: 'Stop Copying Windows' (InformationWeek)
I've listened to and sometimes engaged in the UI debate for years starting from before there
was a G prepended. For the most part, the talking points are rubbish. Consider the car. If
you go US<->UK, the whole UI is flipped left for right. People manage to get around
reasonably well and not kill anybody. Also, the little details between a Toyota interior and
a VW | Ford are not all that different, really. People do just fine. Otherwise the whole
international rent-a-car industry would collapse. At some point it becomes, "We're a
{VW|Chevy|Honda} family.", a matter of taste. I use Fedora with it's mix of KDE and Gnome and
my family does just fine. I think the real thing to take away from his talk is the bigger
picture, namely the Windows desktop is Office (only connected to office things), Outlook, and
the few other client/server apps. We can do better like better web integration, taking
advantage of OO's open formats to integrate with IT systems, e.g. report templates in one
filled out in the other... In other words, expand the horizon beyond M$'s product marketing
wish list which is same old stuff with more buttons.
Then again, I never could understand why anyone would want a Chrysler. I've seen better
looking creatures in tide pool.
(Log in to post comments)
IBM To Linux Desktop Developers: 'Stop Copying Windows' (InformationWeek) Posted Aug 11, 2008 2:38 UTC (Mon) by Sutoka (guest, #43890) [Link] The main thing about cars is they're mostly homogeneous. And for the non-superficial differences (say, the type of transmission) people often prefer one way over the other for often the same reason as other people prefer is the opposite way. Don't forget that cars also aren't something that people jump into (the driver seat) without any training (like most everyone has done with computers); I'm not sure about all countries, but it's often illegal to drive a car without taking a test that generally covers the normal interface for the car (as well as using the interface). IMO, cars make a better example of a (mostly) homogeneous interface than being an intuitive interface.
IBM To Linux Desktop Developers: 'Stop Copying Windows' (InformationWeek) Posted Aug 14, 2008 12:44 UTC (Thu) by lysse (guest, #3190) [Link] > If you go US<->UK, the whole UI is flipped left for right. People manage to get around reasonably well and not kill anybody. A whole load of people from the UK get themselves and others killed on everyone else's roads every year, though, from forgetting which side they're supposed to be driving on... the car's UI is the least of the problems. In any case, a car's UI is a lot simpler than a computer's UI - hell, most car stereos are more complex than the cars they're in - and it also provides the kind of immediate physical feedback that people are still missing on computers; when you turn, you can see and feel how much you're turning in real time.
|
|
||||||||||||