"A lot of bandwidth has been wasted arguing over the lack of usability in open-source software/free software. Some people say that bad usability is endemic to the entire OSS world, while others say that OSS usability is great but that the real problem is the closed-minded users who expect every program to clone Microsoft. Some people contend that UI problems are temporary growing pains, while others say that the OSS development model systematically produces bad UI. In an effort to understand usability in the OSS world, I've researched the stories behind my favorite - and least favorite - OSS programs. I've found a fascinating variety of personalities, design philosophies, and project organizations. Although I've only scratched the surface, there are already themes that come up again and again."
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2006-06-03
A car is designed solely to drive, it goes forward, backward and turns corners. If you're lucky, you have the added functionality of a CD player, or buttons to control the windows. Some people even have both!
Whereas a computer is designed to do everything, playing media, communicating, analysing data, research, creating documents, there is very little that a computer hasn't been programmed to do. All of these are controlled through one interface (Keyboard/Mouse). Imagine being able to operate your toaster from the dashboard of your car, and you begin to have a fair compariason.
Member since:2005-11-10
A car is an API (or more accurately, an ABI). You have a very complex system, that is abstracted by a user interface. You say that a car "goes forward, backwards and turns corners", because the interface is so simple that that is the case! What if you had to have the car in a certain "mode" in order to steer? What if the car had six gear sticks instead of one?
If the car has a different engine, the interface remains the same to the user. It's well designed.
I understand that a computer does more, and is more complex; but it still stands that the interfaces are not optimal at all. If as many people could use a computer as well as they drive, then there'd still be bad drivers, but overall, mankind would wield incredible engineering and productive prowess.
Just imagine how many m/billions in money and hours are wasted because the populace cannot use them easily enough.
It isn't about functionality, to have one tool you can use well is better than to have six you cannot.
Member since:2005-08-28
Member since:2006-03-23
Or perhaps they can operate a car because they spend time learning it by taking a drivers license. and mind you, the car really has limited functionality, sure, you have to know traffic rules and stuff, but i ask you... how many times do the users of cars do something wrong? at this very moment theres almost certainly a car crash somewhere..
Member since:
2005-11-10
I work with regular people every day, and some of them are more humble, well spoken and many times more intelligible than you.
The fact that a regular user can operate a complex machine like a car without issue, and then have so much trouble operating a complex computer shows that there's a wealth of engineers, UI designers and people like you that are mentally backwards when it comes to the importance of machine interface.
The end user is _not_ stupid. Any mistake they make, is, as a programmer, almost entirely your own fault. And technical people don't like to admit they're wrong, they just call the user stupid for not understanding their poor workmanship.