[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-usability
Subject:    Re: Parallel versions of KDE
From:       "Manuel Amador (Rudd-O)" <amadorm () usm ! edu ! ec>
Date:       2003-04-17 0:14:32
[Download RAW message or body]

Rene Horn wrote:

> Please CC me.  I'm not on the list.
> 
> I'm sure by now everyone here has read Mosfet's and Havoc's three articles ( \
> http://www.pclinuxonline.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=4505 , \
> http://www106.pair.com/rhp/free-software-ui.html , \
> http://www.mosfet.org/free-software-rebuttal.html ), and I wanted to bring in a \
> third perspective on the entire issue. 
> I feel that both camps are right, and that both camps should be satisfied.  It \
> isn't fair to the average home user to clutter their desktop with a whole bunch of \
> options they don't understand and are likely to never use, but it's also not fair \
> to take those capabilities away from the more advanced user, or make their life \
> more difficult by making them edit obscure config files. 
You are right that both approaches aren't fair to a group of users.  
But, given two evils, you need to choose between the lesser evil.  If 
you assigned impact ratings and calculated populations for every group 
(from risk assessment theory):

Ig * Ng = a
Iu * Nu = b

"a" would be the sum of all negative impacts for each Geek (power user), 
while "b" would be the sum of all negative impacts for each User 
(regular user).  Now, I think it's pretty evident that "b" is always 
larger.  So B is the largest evil, hence the one to avoid.  This all by 
way of reasoning means that if anyone should be favored, it's the 
Regular Users who should.

Paths to favor the Regular User:
- removing "unbreak-me" preferences
- clearly wording preferences
- removing superfluous (i.e. infrequently used) preferences
- removing preferences in reverse order, based on use frequency or 
importance or some other criteria

The first three result in favorable impact for both groups of users.  
The fourth arguably has a negative impact on Power Users.  Thus, 
programmers should concentrate on the first three paths, and, barring 
anything else, should favor Regular Users.  If a dialog has two 
preferences, there's no reason to remove them.  But if it has 20, 
damnit! you really need to think if you're programming an idiotic piece 
of crap!

It all ends up being about writing quality software.  Making software be 
smart, foresee things the user might not see and resist breakage.  
Programming while being sensible and thoughtful of Users' (Regular Users 
in this context) needs.  In short, having empathy (the simple question 
"would this be understood by a regular user? should I test it before an 
user?" goes a long way in telling if some pref or component has any value).


_______________________________________________
kde-usability mailing list
kde-usability@mail.kde.org
http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-usability


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]