Jerry J. Haumberger wrote:
> Even toasters break down. So far, computers aren't so cheap that if one
> stops "toasting", you toss it in the garbage and buy another one without
> bothering to see if you can fix it. A society that prefers its children to
> use and trash instead of learn and build will be used and trashed by its
> children.
It IS bad, but thats how it is today. Went you go to a tech to fix
a computer, they usually prefer to take out the damaged part, trow
it away, and replace it with a newer one. To most technitions the
term "fixing" is same to "upgrading". But I cant really see how
this is connected to easy-to-use computing interface.
> The perception that computers are supposed to eliminate the effort required
> for us to learn is ridiculous. Computers cannot "learn" for us. But if we
> expend a reasonable amount of effort to learn how to use them properly, they
> allow us to save a lot of time and effort in other tasks later on. Anything
> beyond that is lazy fantasizing -- like wasting money on a lottery and
> hoping to win millions and retire forever. Feh!
Ok. Think for a moment that you are going to buy a typewriter.
You are presented with 2 choices.
One is a good typewriter, capable of doing all type of fonts, colors,
tables, and all you need to do to use it is to learn a very simple
interface for about 15 minutes. Some people dont even need to learn
the book. Its so comfortable that they can start using it right
away and learn while using.
The other typewriter is even better. Its fast, and it can do
all of the above. And it can do more. It can play CDs and sound
files such as MP3 as you work. It can run games, and other
forms of entertainment. It can connect you to other people and
to vast archives of information. With the correct external utility
and prorgam, you can even do more. There is, however one problem
with it: It doesnt look as easy to use as the previous typewriter.
Infact, when you turn it on, you dont get a friendly menu with
a nice design that lead you to the work directly. All you get is
a cryptic word that looks like a "C:\>". Apon looking at the guide
book, you realise that you will have to learn something that resemble
an entirely new "language" to communicate with this machine. You
understand that in the end it will worth the effort, but still.
>From this point in time most people choose one of 2 ways:
1)They'll take the second machine, and start learning.
2)They'll see the second machine, decide that "its not for me"
and take the simpler one. Now the only thing left for a bystander
to do is to ponder on the big 12 trillion dollars question: "WHY?"
If you think I can answer that question, then nope, I cant.
Its because i'm one of these types that take "curtain #2" and
start learning. I've never been one of those who give up functionality
for the benefit of easy-to-use systems. Which is also why its hard
for me to understand the general idea of taking #1.
But you CAN go and try to ask the general simple-task user why
they choose #1. After all, most of them really do get fascinated
from the capabilities of #2.
But you can be certain that its not only "being lazy" and hating
to learn. There are many other reasons. Just go and dig (litraly).
> The cultivation of high quality learning skills may not have the greatest
> "mass appeal", but it still remains the best ideal for which we should
> strive.
Most "experts" prefer to use the CLI. And i'm sure that most of
this list prefer CLI themselves. But the general idea is to also
appeal to the typical "john doe" from #1. Why should a SurvPC
attempt to appear such a person? Because if you'll ask me, I think
that the interface is one of the last reasons for why such a person
wouldnt use a SurvPC. After you proove him that yes, SurvPCs can
run games, can run graphics, can run office utilities (not MS-Office
ofcourse), and generaly run and perform on 66MHz what they do today
in 350MHz, at half the price, they will ask if its easy to use.
And as we know, they dont want to talk about CLI.
I know that "being correct is more important of being popular",
but there is a chance to be both correct AND popular. Should it
fails, we'll still be correct. So there is nothing to loose here.
By the way, when I say GUI I do not refer to an interface that will
attempt to hide the computer from the user. The starting default
will appear like #1, however an advanced user can select to
"take out the protective layer" and do things the real way. So dont
misunderstand me on this point.
Or Botton
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- "Truth is stranger than fiction, because fiction has to make sense."
//@--------------------------
http://members.xoom.com/dsdp/
To unsubscribe from SURVPC send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
unsubscribe SURVPC in the body of the message.
Also, trim this footer from any quoted replies.
