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

List:       kde-usability
Subject:    Re: Few miscellaneous suggestions
From:       Brad Hards <bhards () bigpond ! net ! au>
Date:       2004-07-24 6:55:32
Message-ID: 200407241655.35817.bhards () bigpond ! net ! au
[Download RAW message or body]

On Sat, 24 Jul 2004 16:36 pm, James Richard Tyrer wrote:
> Brad Hards wrote:
> > On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 07:51 am, James Richard Tyrer wrote:
> >>In this case, although the reasons have validity, the action is wrong.
> >> Keramik is 'really cool' but it is not very usable.  This is a problem
> >>that needs to be fixed.  Actually, this issue should have been considered
> >>more carefully before it was made the default.  Now, it needs to be fixed
> >>ASAP.
> >
> > Do you have any objective evidence that one window style is more or less
> > useable that any other window style (or theme, whatever)?
>
> Yes.
>
> My assertions are based on on the viability of icons, widgets, and window
> decorations.  And, I base my conclusions on classic information theory. 
> Stuff with less information, or with more noise, isn't as easy to see. 
> When you compare (the window decorations and to a lesser extent the widget
> style) Plastik to Keramik, Plastik not only have more information, but
> Keramik has more noise. It is simple: S/N ratio.
I disagree. Your use of information theory argument is both misleading 
(because a UI isn't a single channel, so it doesn't hold) and subjective 
(because your references to "signal" and "noise" are unsubstantiated by 
objective test results).

If you don't have controlled test results, you are just expressing an opinion. 

Brad
_______________________________________________
kde-usability mailing list
kde-usability@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-usability
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]