__/ [ Rick ] on Monday 08 May 2006 02:03 \__
> On Sun, 07 May 2006 19:15:46 +0000, Tim Smith wrote:
>> In article <11607691.nnlEDedBNt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>> That's just what I tell my mom about Thunderbird, but she never wants to
>>> /explore/ an application unless she has a soft cover book at hand, from
>>> which she can learn step-by-step. It is something to do with antiquated
>>> notions and mental barriers.
>> Actually, it's probably more to do with learning that exploring
>> applications is usually a bad idea, at least on Windows and on Linux,
>> because of poor user interface design. It doesn't take getting burned
>> with a lost document, or a crashed application, more than a few times
>> before you learn to get a book, and not deviate from what the book tells
>> Applications *should* be things that you can learn without risk by
>> exploring them, but that's far too rare, unfortunately.
> What complex tasks in the real world can you learn by just exploring and
> taking no risks?
There is no risk in exploration, provided that the user has common sense.
A spreadsheet application, for example, will not have menu entries which
reset the computer or delete auxiliary files. Change to default settings
is easily reversible as well.
All it takes is experimentation. If you must follow guidance, there are
help files and online handbooks.
@Tim: you are so overly fascinated by the Mac UI, but you fail to realise
that the GNOME and KDE teams (among many others) include usability profes-
sionals, who /may/ work for free iduring their spare time:
As regards the Mac protecting the user from self, I will have to prove you
Many comments there are mine and they discuss the superior handling of sc-
anerios as such in KDE.
Roy S. Schestowitz | while (sig==sig) sig=!sig;
http://Schestowitz.com | Open Prospects ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
4:40am up 10 days 11:37, 7 users, load average: 0.35, 0.36, 0.45
http://iuron.com - knowledge engine, not a search engine