There’s nothing in there that you don’t already know, and many of Raskins arguments are based on outdated concepts. Thanks for your time, I look forward to questions and comments, and have my flameproof suit at the ready.Īvid BeOS don’t buy “The Humane Interface”. Let’s stop wasting time with the little things, and focus on the road ahead, where forthcoming technologies like 3D interfaces will make even what I’m saying here today a moot point. That, my fellow readers, is what I perceive as the real meaning of the article. Fine, I’m ok with that, but I think it’s time we took a hard look at the OS’s we use, and decide on a way to make it more productive too. The x86 platform is most famous for these days as being the gaming platform. It is no wonder that the Macintosh platform, given it’s wonderful asthetics and “interface”, makes working on it a charm.Ĭontrast that to Linux, Windows, and even BeOS, where the interface is nowhere as near finished, and just “feels” wrong, it’s no wonder we decide to customize it ourselves, and waste time playing with preferences and choices instead of doing actual work. The original motivating factor that started off the entire computing industry was to get work done. It’s not just for running little programs or playing the latest mp3. The real subtext that needs to be discussed is the fact that every operating system out there, (including my beloved BeOS) has interface design flaws, and what we as humans are doing to them is adapting THEM to our own weird needs.īy this, I mean we are putting our own physical worldview into the virtual wokscape which we call an operating system. The article is not merely about skinning, and theme support in an OS. I get the feeling that people here have read the article, and still don’t understand the importance of it. Raskin needs a more logical case for his. Euclid’s geometry was demonstrated to be better that the legion of his modern rivals. What we certainly don’t need are need scientists, try with rats. The opinionated fact Eazel made an undisciplinated interface, is a low strike that doesn’t prove his weird science of the unchangeability. Thanks God he is not designing my keyboard, ’cause I’m not using the so called superior DVORAK. I guess it’s an obsession the man has, the `interface science`. “Interface design is no difference”, so what? Jef Raskin is too intelligent for those horrible syllogisms, I’m still wondering what makes him talk like that. They designed systems not to have floppy disks. The original, not Kelly McNeill’s impersonations. Yes Themable OS’s should have a safe mode, for stupid users &, well, bastards.Īlways a pleasure to read about Jef Raskin anyway. So your argument against themes is not “I’m a bastard”. Good point on a Work Desktop, on my home computer surely I have the right to “waste” my time making it feel like my computer, not some UI Expert’s. They waste the time of the user in changing them. This is a matter of how well the skinning is done, and how well the apps use the skins, if the skinning interface includes a number of abstract functions (such as “DrawBox”, “UI_COLOUR”, a lot of time & effort would be needed to create the right balance, but doable) then apps are able to look and feel like the rest of the system. You lose some consistency with any interface change OK, with Linux this can be a bugger, but if it was a simple window, with a list of themes? And one un-uninstallable, well designed default theme. When you move from one system to another that is the same in name but in fact has been customizedĪs long as change the skin is not hard, why is this a problem?
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |