pae@cos.com (Paul A. Ebersman) (04/24/89)
A number of people have had complaints about the 'look and feel'
changes in elm. While I do not want to dive into the arguments about
whether specific changes are good and bad, I do think that charges
that changes were in a dictatorial or capricious fashion is unfounded.
I was one of the test sites for elm2.2. While a number of our users
are computer literate, there are some who are not, and we also have
the problem of users getting upset or disoriented by command changes
or feature changes. However, every change that people complained about
was debated on and voted on by developers and testers. While there
are certain key commands that I still am not thrilled with, I have
gotten more or less use to them, and I feel that the changes were
carefully considered before being implemented.
If you have concerns about the direction that elm is taking, volunteer
as a beta test site for elm2.3. The developers are not mind-readers.
They have what they think are good reasons for any changes. If the
changes are non-intuitive, then let them know through a constructive
exchange of opinions in an appropiate forum, like the development
group.
If Rob was getting snippish in his answers, I can hardly blame him. I
have personally corresponded with him on a number of bugs and feature
changes and know that he was put many man-months into elm. If you are
willing to put in the same level of time and commitment, then go
to it.
Flame off.....
--
Paul A. Ebersman @ Corporation for Open Systems
pae@cos.COM or pae%cos.com@uunet.uu.net or {uunet, sundc, hadron}!cos!pae
( The difference between practice and theory in practice is always
greater than the difference between practice and theory in theory. )