Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 18th Nov 2007 15:46 UTC
Permalink for comment 286065
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-11-12
as for using a Mac, only have one since January, don't have the time needed for being a fanboy.
Because of the permeating Apple/Jobs hype and the rabid Mac user-base, many are Mac fanboys before their first purchase of an Apple product.
Even if most Mac fanboys became so after their first Mac purchase, it doesn't take long before they become frothing-at-the-mouth, Apple-slogan-spewing zombies.
Here is a quote made by a Mac user immediately following a keynote speech by Steve Jobs: "I've had a Macintosh now for a total of 35 days, and I'm really excited to be part of the Mac community." Keep in mind that this gushing mac user merely bought a computer one month prior.
By the way, this quote can be found in this ABC News article: http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Story?id=2782509&page=2
Who cares about Gimp
Uh, perhaps the 1000s of Gimp users and the hundreds of post-production people in the movie industry who use Cinepaint (a fork of the Gimp) and not Photoshop.
photoshop has a menu in top of the window of which when magnified has its menu on top, as mac does.
Of course, when Photoshop is not maximized the menu is not at the top of the screen -- which is not as Mac does and which is often the case when one has a large monitor.
OSX is *unix if you do not know.
SHAZAM!
As for having more choices, do you know... consistency is a good thing, thinks shouldn't run amok, you don't have to learn different tools for the same job, you can have choice as long as it keeps being the same. If you open a file requester you should be able to choose what kind of file requester is, but it should be transversal along the system, that's what explorer and finder are...
Yes. Consistency is important but not always imperative, and, sometimes, it is advantageous to have certain inconsistencies. Consistency comes under the usability heading of "conditioning" which, as I have said, has been thoroughly covered in this thread.
However, before a user gets conditioned to his gui, the user can make a lot of choices about the configuration of the GUI, without detriment. Also, after the conditioning process, users can often make choices about their gui which are improvements.
The Mac gui does not allow a lot of choice, while most other guis do.
"By the way, GUI menus appeared in the Xerox Alto over a decade before the Amiga. I am not going to bother linking another screenshot -- look at the ones posted earlier in this thread."
Joe User wise? Who cares if some special cult had used/developed it before...
Okay. So, you are saying that Xerox is a special, multi-national-corporation-who-revolutionized-the-gui cult.
In regards to "Joe User," he doesn't care about the Amiga nor the Mac -- he is using Windows (and, soon, probably, Linux: http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS8642294935.html).
they came up with a concept [gui menus], Amiga (and Apple) actually had apps that used that concept
The insidious Xerox cult must have fabricated these screenshots of pre-Mac/pre-Amiga applications showing hierarchical, gui menus, just to fool Joe User:
http://toastytech.com/guis/altorainbow.jpg
http://www.digibarn.com/friends/curbow/star/2/p4-lg.jpg
there's a difference between knowing the path and walking the path...
And I am beginning to realize that point more and more, with each one of your posts.
I have a bachelor in webdesign
Congratulations on that.
I had to learn about usability issues...
Judging from your ignorance of Xerox, the program didn't exactly stress gui usability history. I wonder if there were any other gaps in the curriculum.
"Perhaps you could reference these tests. Did they test varying distances between the starting position and the targets on the screen edge? "
You know that mouse pointer has acceleration or can be made to... as for the tests, please find them yourself, they will enlighten you.
Who said anything about mouse acceleration?
By the way, I read the studies that you have chosen not to reference, and they found that distance affects time/accuracy in reaching pointer targets positioned on the top of the screen, according to Fitts law.
I don't giva a damn with fairy 'use cases' tales, I care with real world real use cases, if you came up with one which belongs to it be my guest otherwise you're talking to the wrong guy and failing to make a point altogether...
I see. You only give credence to real world cases, such as your usability "tests."
I think that most will agree that things get sobering and "real world" almost instantly when one is wagering a serious chunk of money. If you don't believe me, go into Las Vegas casino and try to snatch back a lost US$1000 table bet with your argument that the bet was a "fairy 'use case'" -- you will very quickly find yourself in a real world jail.
So, how about it? As I said earlier in my bet, just because a target is on the screen edge, it doesn't mean that it can be hit within two seconds. If you think that I am wrong, then you could win an easy US$1000, otherwise, you are admitting that I am right and that you are wrong.
Edited 2007-11-23 05:42