john13@garfield.MUN.EDU (John Russell) (12/29/88)
In article <10746@s.ms.uky.edu> david@ms.uky.edu (David Herron -- One of the vertebrae) writes: ]In article <1489@umbc3.UMD.EDU> cs374326@umbc3.UMD.EDU (Peter Johansson) writes: ]>How much research has actually gone into discovering what Joe Schmoe, ]>small and medium sized business owner, wants on his desk? Does he want ]>a gas-plasma-wall-hanging-display unit and an infra-red-input-device? ]>I find it very interesting that most of the messages here from developers ]>and programmers, and there is NIL in the way of input from the end user. ].. ]>I'm also curious just what percentage of the end-user computing market ]>the graphical interface has captured, and what their opinions of it are. ]>After all, these computers *are* for "the rest of us." I'm certainly not ]>saying that computer programmers (read: non-end-users) should be limited ]>to 80x24 text screens, it's just that from what I see, it's the programmers ]>using the new hypermedia, and the (majority?) of users are left with their ]>kludgy operating systems ans displays (?) This user prefers a nice unix ]>$ prompt, emacs, C, TeX (LaTex), and a vt100. Then again, I'm not making ]>millions of $$$ either. ] ]I don't know how much of that kind of research has gone on, but how ]might it be done in the first place? You go around asking people ]if they want mice & windows & such? I don't think that'll work because ]you'd get caught in the ] ] if all you have is a hammer all the world looks like a nail ] ]problem. That is, right now the common demoninator is an 80x24 screen ]that you type commands at. Oh and it's also PC-DOS, single tasking, ]and so forth. ] ]The hammer problem cuts both ways too ... the mouse & windows are not ]the be-all-end-all of computer interfaces either. (I added the Amiga and Atari groups to this thread -- John) There certainly has been a substantial amount of research on the topic. I suspect it's a favourite of grad students who don't like N-dimensional matrix theory :-). First of all, I've never liked the desktop metaphor much. My desk is completely taken up by a computer system, printer and floppy disks :-) ! The contrived nature of desktops appeals most to people who are locked in to that way of thinking, by years of experience in the conventional office environment. The window concept is IMHO the best jumping-off point for novices, who can move on to specialized ideas like desktops after they have a grasp of the basics. I wonder if the NeXT interface builder has the potential to condense the intial learning stage, by presenting a number of different metaphors for interaction in such a way that the pattern becomes apparent? That is, no matter what sort of action you're performing you need a way to do X, Y, and Z, and these capabilities are always present in some form. At the same time some people need A, other people don't but they do need B and C. A good way (I've found) to introduce the "window" metaphor is to take someone accustomed to the VT100, Csh prompt etc. and present them with a full-screen window running the same setup. Then after they see that the new environment is a superset of the old one, not a flawed replacement, present them with some circumstance where keyboard-based interaction is clumsy -- move the vi cursor to such-and-such a spot, or run two processes that both want to do screen output simultaneously -- and show how having a mouse makes it easier, having windows makes it possible. For the complete neophyte it's trickier. They don't know the good points and bad points of any interface. Very often (eg in a student environment) they may not be accustomed to a desktop like the Mac's, and so they have to learn that at the same time as they learn the general ideas of mouse/icon- based interaction. For them it's usually quick and easy to pick up since they don't have so many preconceived ideas, but I think locking them into one particular mold ("to delete, toss things in the trashcan") is not as good in the long run as giving them a broader perspective of things ("deleting files or other objects is something you'll always need to be able to do, and every system should allow you to by some method. One way, used by the desktop metaphor, is to display a trashcan into which the objects to be deleted can be 'dropped'."). John -- "If you steal all money, kids not be able to BUY TOYS!" -- Saturday morning cartoon character explaining why theft is bad
richard@gryphon.COM (Richard Sexton) (12/29/88)
John Russell spewed:
>(I added the Amiga and Atari groups to this thread -- John)
How will we ever repay you ?
Tomorrows lesson, class, will be the Followup-to: field.
Class dismissed.
--
I got a lump of coal.
richard@gryphon.COM {b'bone}!gryphon!richard gryphon!richard@elroy.jpl.nasa.govpeter@sugar.uu.net (Peter da Silva) (12/29/88)
Just being a troublemaker... What object on the desktop are pull-down menus a metaphor for? -- Peter "Have you hugged your wolf today" da Silva `-_-' Hackercorp. ...texbell!sugar!peter, or peter@sugar.uu.net 'U`
bwk@mbunix.mitre.org (Barry W. Kort) (01/02/89)
In article <3173@sugar.uu.net> peter@sugar.uu.net (Peter da Silva) asks: > What object on the desktop are pull-down menus a metaphor for? Have you never ordered a pizza, sub, or Chinese orgy while working late at the office? --Barry Kort