bobr@tekgds.UUCP (Robert Reed) (09/03/83)
How about "nonantagonistic user interfaces" instead of "user-friendly". This seems a much more apt description of what everyone wants, although much harder to build. It means providing additional support when a user WANTS it, and then getting OUT OF THE WAY. Robert Reed, Tektronix LDS, tektronix!tekgds!bobr
brian@sdcsvax.UUCP (Brian Kantor) (09/05/83)
I second the suggestion of "non-antagonistic" instead of
"user-friendly". Perhaps if we do, software designers will be reminded
that moderation is a virtue in helpfullness as well.
I've recently experienced a set of programs that were
being developed for a micro business system that could best be
characterised as "user-affectionate" and sometimes verged on
"user-intimate". And there was no way to reduce the level of
"helpfulness". Argghhh!
Perhaps its because I'm from the old school (yes, punch cards, plugboards,
and paper tape), but I find it DISTRACTING when an error message tells me
something like "My dear Brian, you should not have typed a space at the
end of the part number" or some such twaddle.
--
Brian Kantor, UCSD. {philabs,ucbvax} !sdcsvax!brian
sdcsvax!brian@nosc