Pleasant@Rutgers.arpa (01/24/83)
HUMAN-NETS Digest Monday, 24 Jan 1983 Volume 6 : Issue 5
Today's Topics:
Computers and People - Computer Sex &
User Interfaces (2 msgs),
Programming - Unix (3 msgs)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 10 January 1983 11:10-EST
From: Stephen C. Hill <STEVEH @ MIT-MC>
Subject: computer sex
The question that arises about your computer-controlled sex-doll is
whether it would be listed in the new products directory under
hardware, software or firmware!
------------------------------
Date: 6 January 1983 23:10-EST
From: Robert Elton Maas <REM @ MIT-MC>
Subject: Use of keyboard characters and EFFICIENT user interfaces
Lockheed's DIALOG (document citation-retrieval system plus a little
database-fact retrieval) used a curious and possibly good command
structure. They use the top row shifted , i.e. !"#$%&'(), for
commands. This could be done because they had only a few basic
commands (login, logout, select-database, form-sets-by-keywords,
boolean operations on sets, type on terminal, list offline and send
by US postal service). They supplied a stick-on list of commands
that could be placed just above the top row for convenient
reference. This method combined standard terminals (you don't have
to buy a special terminal just for DIALOG, you don't have to reach
your fingers far away from the home position, and you can even
switch the stick-on if you use more than one system and need to
change the command legends when you switch systems) with
special-function-key terminals (the keys are labeled as to actual
function via the stick-on rather than being control-funny-letter
that you have to remember).
HP calculators have another way of combining the advantages of
function keys and control-mumble, although they have too many little
teensy keys to start with for touch typing. They have three
functions on each key, printed on the face, top-edge, and
bottom-edge (or is it four?, one on the bottom face-edge?). Anyway,
you first press a control key to get the second and third (etc.)
functions for a given key. The control keys and the extra functions
they enable are color-coded to make it easy to remember which
control key you have to press for a given function you see on the
legend.
Perhaps on directly-wired keyboards (where control-# etc. is
meaningful, which isn't true on 7-bit communication terminals) the
most often used functions could be tied to ctrl-shift-number and/or
ctrl-bottomrow-letter. Then a legend could be taped next to the
keyboard for new users, but commands would still be short (for all
users). For example, using orthogonal methods, ctrl-shift-number
could select mode (character, word, line, sentence, paragraph,
s-expression, page, etc.), which would be sticky over multiple
depressions of a lower-row command, and the lower row could activate
the command (delete-forward, delete-backward, skip-forward,
skip-backward, transpose; I think that's all, providing all normal
text was auto-insert like EMACS/MINCE, which I think is a big win).
Or for easier touch typing (numbers and lower row letters are hard
even for expert typists when done to excess), the home row and
upper-letter row could be used, with the stick-on legend a little
further from they keys so referring to the legend is a bit slower
but still a direct follow-the-line action that any novice user can
learn in 5 seconds. This would have the advantage that communication
terminals could use this method too, since ctrl-QWERTYUIOPASDFGHJKL
are all transmittable. With a sticky ctrl- prefix (no terminal mod
needed, do it in the host, just like ESC is the meta- prefix and
ctrl-uparrow is the ctrl- prefix in EMACS, except that it'd be
sticky until undone under my proposal. The mode line would of
course tell the user whether sticky ctrl- is in effect at any
moment.
------------------------------
Date: 5 Jan 1983 2139-PST
From: GRANGER.RS%UCI@UDEL-RELAY
Subject: A General Approach to User-System Interactivity
The following is excerpts from a memo I wrote in consultation with
the people running the Times-Mirror Videotex Test in 1981 (this was
a 200-family test of videotex using the Telidon software by Infomart
of Toronto). Some of the things Ray Clark is saying are so important
for system-design configurations I was prompted to dig through the
files and pull this out. I offer it for your perusal and response.
This memo deals with some considerations which probably ought to be
on all of our minds with respect to the way users -- be they
information-needers or information-providers or even our own staff
-- will relate to our system (as represented, most concretely, by
their keyboards and video-screens).
There are 2 types of users: "inexperienced" users, who are highly
prone to certain negative emotional states commonly known as
"anxiety," "fear," "panic," or "low self-image;" and "experienced"
users, who are prone to negative emotional states called "boredom,"
"anger," "frustration," and "disgust."
In the former case, the emotional states named are commonly brought
about by a system which
(a) overestimates the user's information base, and/or
(b) overestimates his/her understanding of automated electronic
information media or interactive teledactylography, and/or
(c) does not include adequate, appropriate, timely or
intelligible documentation (either on- or off-line), and/or
(d) presents itself with too much of a mystique, too much
jargon, or too much other stuff not within the user's
ordinary realm of familiarity.
In the latter case, the emotional states named are typically
triggered by a system which
(a) underestimates the user's information base and/or general
understanding of the medium, and/or
(b) over-documents by forcing the user to wade through too much
display verbiage explanatory of stuff he/she already knows,
thus delaying his/her arrival at the desired display
objective, and/or
(c) presents itself stupidly, i.e., does unnecessary things
and/or forces the user to do unnecessary things in order to
get what he/she wants, and/or
(d) is slow in responding to the user's input.
One objective of any system ought to be to avoid producing negative
emotional states in its users. In order to meet this objective, we
will have to tailor the interactive aspects of the system to the
needs of BOTH types of user described above.
This, of course, is a kind of a tightrope-walk; but, lest we forget,
that's what computers are for: they are the best logical
tightrope-walkers thus far known to man, precisely because of their
virtually unlimited flexibility.
Note, by the way, that any given user may at any given time fall
into EITHER the experienced or inexperienced category. I, for
example have now gained a rather extensive experience in the use of
Compuserve's electronic mail and messaging system, and so I get very
bored and start to drum my fingers and mumble nasty things as I am
continually forced to plod through 6 levels of menuing just to
effect some near-trivial function like altering an address field. On
the other hand, I am just now getting familiar with Compuserve's
file-handling and editing subsystem, FILGE, and so I feel comforted
by the very tight hand-holding I am getting the first few times I
try to deal with it: unfortunately, I know there will be no way to
turn it off when I no longer need it!
Further, users tend to move very rapidly and abruptly between the
two categories, and bidirectionally.
The problem reduces to one of coming up with an interactive design
which makes all meta-information -- information about information --
on the system highly accessible to, but not unwantedly forced upon,
the user.
There are, of course, clear software solutions to this problem. We
just have to not forget to implement them!
Editor's note: This is why BOTH ctrl/h and delete should be
recognized as backspace!!!!
Always and forever! It should be a universal standard!
Happy New Year to everyone...
Rob Segelbaum (GRANGER.RS%UCI@RAND-RELAY)
P..S.: Anyone in need of knowing what Times-Mirror, videotex, and/or
teledactylography are, just buzz me. It is not really necessary that
you know what they are to get the drift of the argument here, but if
anyone is does not know and is curious, just ask!
------------------------------
Date: 20 Jan 1983 1547-EST
From: Tony <Li@RUTGERS>
Subject: TOPS-20 vs VMS vs UNIX
To continue the discussion about different OSes.
OSes are like cars. There is no perfect OS. Each has its own
particular problems and advantages. You can't ask 'What is the best
OS?' or 'Is VMS better than Unix?' What do you mean by 'best' or
'better'? To put it mathematically, what is your metric? Asking for
the 'better' OS is similar to asking if a Porsche is better than a
Cadillac.
If you want to rank OSes, you have to consider the environment around
the computer. From working all over the place, there seem to be
essentially three different types of environments:
1) Hackers - These are the people who are willing to put in the wee
hours to customize the system to their liking. This is
typical of CS departments and students.
2) Competent Users - This group is willing to write small utilities
and read the manuals, but they aren't interested in making
BIG changes in the way their system works. These typically
are scientific labs and the like.
3) Lusers - For this group, ignorance is bliss. The less they know
about the system, the happier they are. They put numbers in,
and they get numbers back. Typically business users.
Granted, these are large generalizations, but they seem to catch most
of the systems that I've seen around. Now, for each of these
categories, we can talk about the 'best' system.
1) Hackers - A definite need for modifiability. Unix is the only
reasonable choice for a small group. Over several hundred
users requires a 20.
2) Competent Users - In this group, there is a definite eye towards
expansion. As more people discover the computer, usage will
grow until everyone has their own terminal. For a small group
I would recommend VMS, but for more than about 25 people,
I'd think a 20 would be more appropriate.
3) Lusers - Need to think here about canned software and good batch
performance. Again, if the situation is small enough, I'd
prefer VMS. Tops-20 does have the advantage of better
hand-holding, but most lusers aren't going to be in touch
with the computer at all. They'll hire you or me to do it for
them.
Of course, there are mixtures and other factors to consider. For
example, I consider EDT under VMS to be superior to EMACS on a 20. So
for an application that was heavily into word processing, I'd
probably think twice about VMS. But then again, what do I know?
Halon at the ready,
Tony <Li @ Rutgers>
------------------------------
Date: 21 January 1983 17:58 EST
From: Ken Harrenstien <KLH @ MIT-MC>
Subject: Minor quibble
ITS is one PDP-10 operating system that has a "pipe" IPC
facility (called the "core link device"). It also allows any
specific or wildcard filename to be "translated" into any other
device/filename which is how redirection is accomplished. Other ITS
features include filesystem links which are better than UNIX links,
and the capability to create arbitrary new devices by writing an
arbitrary user-mode program; for example, this is how a filename
such as AR12:KLH;FILE NAME can refer to the entry FILE NAME in the
archive-file KLH;AR12 X (on UNIX you would have to extract the entry
from the archive file before giving it to a program).
Alan Snyder (late of MIT-DMS) wrote a "shell" for ITS that
used the various ITS capabilities to emulate UNIX features, along
with a few utilities and stuff, but I don't know of anybody else who
really adopted this as their standard top-level process. Whether
that says anything about the viability of a UNIX emulator on TOPS-20
I don't know. I have hacked UNIX extensively and there are some
things it is nice for, but I notice that I rarely use it when not
actually grubbing around in the software to fix things. Maybe just
got imprinted on PDP-10s.
------------------------------
Date: 20 Jan 83 18:27:41 EST (Thu)
From: Speaker-To-Animals <speaker.umcp-cs@UDel-Relay>
Subject: VMESS...the Operating System for the 60s.
Date: 11 January 1983 12:10-EST
From: Gail Zacharias <GZ @ MIT-MC>
Subject: VAX VMS vs UNIX
As far as I am concerned, the major difference between Unix
and VMS is that there are Unix simulators for VMS, and no
VMS simulator for Unix. So if you get VMS, you can take
advantage of the features of either system, and run programs
developed for either one.
Of course there are no simulators for VMESS on Unix...who in there
right mind would WANT to simulate VMESS when they have Unix? If
you've ever used Unix or the Unix shells, then the advantages of
Unix over VMESS make themselves self-evident.
There are a reasons for simulating Unix on top of VMESS though, and
it isn't because VMESS holds any inherent advantages over Unix. A
number of firms are buying Unix simulators so that they can take
advantage of the elegant Unix interface, and at the same time run
their old VMESS software without all of the expensive conversions to
Unix. Remember, companies have a lot of money tied up in software
and people. The cost to switch to new software and retrain people
to use an entirely different system can be enormous. Sometimes the
company's contractors require software that runs only on VMESS.
Unix is rapidly gaining greater acceptance in industry though, so if
you're looking for a good software development tool with an elegant
human interface...then Unix is probably for you!
Unix forever!
- Speaker
------------------------------
End of HUMAN-NETS Digest
************************