Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 27th Jan 2009 13:46 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 345726
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
and the most disturbing consequence of said change would be that he or she will be forced to repeat the "pattern learning process" once again, possibly without much thinking of what has changed and why.
That right there is the important bit. An expert user of any UI will be less productive if the UI changes, no matter if that change is a good one or not. The office 2k7 UI is a great example of this, there was a hell of a lot of thought and usability testing put into it, and still the pro users were doing the sky is falling song and dance.
RE[2]: Comment by mithnae
by Soulbender on Tue 27th Jan 2009 16:24
in reply to "RE: Comment by mithnae"
Computers exist to make things more efficient.
A lot of the interface changes in Windows just dumb things down and takes more clicks to get to where you need to be to do whatever you want to do. I don't mind change, I care about productivity.
This is also why, especially for technical people, things like UAC are really stupid.





Member since:
2006-03-29
The more advanced the user of a certain application desktop env. is, the more is hist or her productivity vulnerable to any change made to such application.
If one uses only 10% of most basic functionality of such application, and all his knowledge comes from learning patterns by hard with minimal concious reflection about the underlying mechanisms, then any change made will affect such user only marginally, and the most disturbing consequence of said change would be that he or she will be forced to repeat the "pattern learning process" once again, possibly without much thinking of what has changed and why.