kempf@tci.bell-atl.com (Cory Kempf) (02/15/90)
smikes@cbnewsi.ATT.COM (steven.mikes) writes: >Far be it for me to come to the aid of our competition, however a few words >of truth must be said on behalf of Motif, and HP in particular. Relevant to >another article in which the respondant states market share percentages, I >don't see at all what bearing that has on selecting a good user interface. Since I posted that article, I thought I would explain it. A good user interface will do several things for a product, almost all of which come out of making it easier to use and end up saving/making the producer money. One of the areas in which a user interface will save money in is product support, but only if people are familiar with that UI. Look at the Mac -- Most applications share the same UI. The typical user can pick up a new application, and figure out how to use it in a very short time, without looking at a manual, usually without looking at help. Look at MS DOS. Every application defines a new UI. Knowlege gained from one application cannot be transfered to another. All of this boils down to meaning that to get the most out of a UI, you need to be using a UI that the users are already familiar with. (Otherwise you need to teach them how to use it). The point of my article was that Motif looks like it is becoming the defacto standard (i.e. everyone is using it/planning on using it). -- Cory Kempf Technology Concepts phone: (508) 443-7311 x341 uucp: {anywhere}!uunet!tci!kempf, kempf@tci.bell-atl.com DISCLAIMER: TCI is not responsible for my opinions, nor I for theirs Tired of choosing the lesser of two evils? Vote Cthulhu! -- Oleg
mhn@hpfcdc.HP.COM (Mark Notess) (02/21/90)
> If I had a crystal ball I'd predict that for the next couple of decdes, > anyway, any place that "standardizes" on a uniform interface will end up > restandardizing every 3-5 years. It would be nice to be able to do, but > we just ain't there yet. This industry is just starting to hit adolescence, > and you know what that's like... :-). > > -- > Amanda Walker > InterCon Systems Corporation Bill Buxton predicted a couple years ago that the Mac interface would become the COBOL of the 1990s. Interesting ... Mark ** Mark Notess * mhn%hpfcla@hplabs.HP.COM * (303) 229-6232 ** ** Hewlett-Packard * 3404 E. Harmony Road * Fort Collins, CO 80525 USA **
roy@phri.nyu.edu (Roy Smith) (02/21/90)
In article <8450001@hpfcdc.HP.COM> mhn@hpfcdc.HP.COM (Mark Notess) writes: > Bill Buxton predicted a couple years ago that the Mac interface would > become the COBOL of the 1990s. Interesting ... And what does that mean? If I had to define COBOL, I'd say it is an ancient, horrible, computer language which computer science types sneer at, deride, and use as the punch line of endless jokes, yet is probably one of the most commercially important languages used today. -- Roy Smith, Public Health Research Institute 455 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016 roy@alanine.phri.nyu.edu -OR- {att,philabs,cmcl2,rutgers,hombre}!phri!roy "My karma ran over my dogma"
bill@polygen.uucp (Bill Poitras) (02/25/90)
In article <1990Feb21.145849.18857@phri.nyu.edu> roy@phri.nyu.edu (Roy Smith) writes: >In article <8450001@hpfcdc.HP.COM> mhn@hpfcdc.HP.COM (Mark Notess) writes: >> Bill Buxton predicted a couple years ago that the Mac interface would >> become the COBOL of the 1990s. Interesting ... > [stuff delete] >at, deride, and use as the punch line of endless jokes, yet is probably one >of the most commercially important languages used today. >-- Most important? How about the most lines currently written. I don't know if you realize it, but nobody is creating new programs in COBOL. The only reason why COBOL is still used, is because nobody wants to spend the money to replace the billions (and billions :-) of lines of COBOL into a more sensible language. If COBOL is so important, then tell why my University's College of Computer Science dropped COBOL as an offered course? I had to still take FORTRAN, LISP, C, Pascal and learn about other important things: Operating Systems, compilers, data bases, computer graphics, even the social impact of computers (that is required for my degree), but COBOL is not even offered. So you tell me what is important. +-----------------+---------------------------+-----------------------------+ | Bill Poitras | Polygen Corporation | {princeton mit-eddie | | (bill) | Waltham, MA USA | bu sunne}!polygen!bill | | | | bill@polygen.com | +-----------------+---------------------------+-----------------------------+
bob@MorningStar.Com (Bob Sutterfield) (02/26/90)
In article <678@polygen.UUCP> bill@polygen.uucp (Bill Poitras) writes:
If COBOL is so important, then tell why my University's College of
Computer Science dropped COBOL as an offered course?
Sounds like your University decided it wasn't a trade school. Some
aren't so enlightened yet.