I have to say I disagree with it, mainly the phrase "intuitive
well-designed user interface". The idea that a human interacting with
a piece of plastic and silicon can be intuitive is crazy. 'Intuitive'
is extremely skewed towards individual skills and preference. I think
he means 'aesthetic', but I could be making that up.

Given my position that it is impossible to be intuitive, I think it is
more important that whatever you use be cohesive and consistent, and
more importantly that your skills 'compound'. That is, understanding
or getting better at one part of a system will improve your skills
across the board.

As far as I am concerned, Windows and OS-X both fail miserably at
this, (although, I don't really use linux either, mainly for reasons
of code quality, UNIX all the way!). In terms of my productivity and
evolving my skills, I find that I am held back when using either. This
is based on having to use OSX for work for the past 12 months, and my
memory of Windows (it has been a while though). I won't be going back
to either anytime soon.

Again I must clarify that this is entirely dependent on my skills and
preference for how things work.

On a side not, I do love this priceless vista quote which provides
some cannon fodder.

"It’s easy to ridicule the estimated 2006-or-2007 ship date for
Longhorn, the next major release of Windows. But do you doubt for a
moment that Longhorn will provide more improvements from Windows XP
than desktop Linux will gain during the same period?"

I don't think that one panned out, given what ubuntu, the vista of
linux, achieved in that same period.

Mark.



On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 11:07 AM, Michael Neale <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I think this still rings true today, but its not linux specific, nor
> open source specific:
> http://daringfireball.net/2004/04/spray_on_usability
>
> Some choice quotes:
>
> "This idea, that the hard work of development is in building the
> underlying foundation, and that the easy part is writing a “GUI
> wrapper”, has been the Linux/Unix way all along."
>
> "UI development is the hard part. And it’s not the last step, it’s the
> first step. In my estimation, the difference between:
>
>    * software that performs function X; and
>    * software that performs function X, with an intuitive well-
> designed user interface
>
> isn’t just a little bit of extra work. It’s not even twice the work.
> It’s an entire order of magnitude more work. Developing software with
> a good UI requires both aptitude and a lot of hard work."
>
>
> The layering and separation that was encouraged (and still is by ill
> advised people) in java apps means this applies here as well. The term
> "user interface layer" often implied some trivial detail that junior
> devs would do.
>
>
> Interesting....
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The 
Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to