Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

What is a Browser?

3 views
Skip to first unread message

Snit

unread,
Feb 13, 2010, 11:30:25 PM2/13/10
to
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4MwTvtyrUQ>

Gives you an idea of what the man (or woman) on the street thinks.


--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]


owl

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 12:04:02 AM2/14/10
to
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4MwTvtyrUQ>
>
> Gives you an idea of what the man (or woman) on the street thinks.
>
Sort of puts your favorite argument into the proper perspective.

ZnU

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 12:20:51 AM2/14/10
to
In article <C79CCA71.64ACB%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:

> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4MwTvtyrUQ>
>
> Gives you an idea of what the man (or woman) on the street thinks.

Exactly. The geeks take this stuff for granted, but the truth is that
understanding how desktop computing works requires understanding a whole
raft of complex abstractions and the relationships between them, and
most people haven't got a clue.

Some absurd fraction of users, for instance, have no idea what the
browser location bar does:
http://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/02/11/facebook-login

--
"The game of professional investment is intolerably boring and over-exacting to
anyone who is entirely exempt from the gambling instinct; whilst he who has it
must pay to this propensity the appropriate toll." -- John Maynard Keynes

7

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 4:46:48 AM2/14/10
to
Snit wrote:


> Gives you an idea


Its snot drooling over a some p0rn mags.

Thats teh old fashioned meaning of 'Browser'.

Eeek!

Clogwog

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 8:25:45 AM2/14/10
to
"7" <website_...@www.enemygadgets.com> schreef in bericht
news:cEPdn.39864$Ym4....@text.news.virginmedia.com...
Ohhhhh, nice selfnuke, you don''t know either!
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAH!!

Ezekiel

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 8:34:46 AM2/14/10
to

"ZnU" <z...@fake.invalid> wrote in message
news:znu-17BC0A.0...@Port80.Individual.NET...

> In article <C79CCA71.64ACB%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4MwTvtyrUQ>
>>
>> Gives you an idea of what the man (or woman) on the street thinks.
>
> Exactly. The geeks take this stuff for granted, but the truth is that
> understanding how desktop computing works requires understanding a whole
> raft of complex abstractions and the relationships between them, and
> most people haven't got a clue.

I always laugh at the people that like to claim how 'it's easy to open a
terminal and from the CLI and compile the Linux driver you need....'
because they clearly have zero idea what they're talking about. They seem to
conflate what's "easy for them" and think that everyone can do it.

At current-job we develop enterprise level software that's basically used by
experienced IT folks. At previous-job we were developing and selling
software to "consumers" which is the average home user - not some IT geek.
Since it was a consumer product we did a lot of end-user testing. The
company asked employees to find friends, neighbors, etc (non computer types)
to come in for a usability session and we'd pay them $50.

We recorded the sessions and for anyone who works in this field - it would
be a 'Funniest home videos' show. The average computer user is completely
clueless. Before they actually used our product we had them do several
simple tasks like copy a file, rename a file, open a browser and go to
Amazon.com, etc in order to get a "baseline" of their computer skills.

IIRC a double-digit percent of the people could not copy a file. More than
half of the users went to Amazon.com by using Google to search for
"Amazon.com" and then clicking on the search results. *That* is the skill
level of the average user. It was a lot of working trying to make our
product simple-enough for the average user to use.

This was the first time that I've ever viewed an end-user usability session
and it was an eye opening experience as to just how much average users
struggle with a computer.

Snit

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 8:55:23 AM2/14/10
to
owl stated in post xsf4ra...@rooftop.invalid on 2/13/10 10:04 PM:

It is amazing how much we "techies" take for granted in our knowledge set.


--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]


Snit

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 8:56:52 AM2/14/10
to
ZnU stated in post znu-17BC0A.0...@Port80.Individual.NET on
2/13/10 10:20 PM:

> In article <C79CCA71.64ACB%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4MwTvtyrUQ>
>>
>> Gives you an idea of what the man (or woman) on the street thinks.
>
> Exactly. The geeks take this stuff for granted, but the truth is that
> understanding how desktop computing works requires understanding a whole
> raft of complex abstractions and the relationships between them, and
> most people haven't got a clue.
>
> Some absurd fraction of users, for instance, have no idea what the
> browser location bar does:
> http://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/02/11/facebook-login

Very true. How many in COLA would predict that people would be this
ignorant of technology? Many assume others share our specialties and cannot
imagine how they do not. Look at how many times folks call those who are
not "techies" idiots or the like.


--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]


Snit

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 8:58:15 AM2/14/10
to
7 stated in post cEPdn.39864$Ym4....@text.news.virginmedia.com on 2/14/10
2:46 AM:

Not surprisingly, 7 shows he has not idea what type browser is being asked
about.


--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]


Snit

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 9:01:01 AM2/14/10
to
Ezekiel stated in post hl8u5l$s7b$1...@news.eternal-september.org on 2/14/10
6:34 AM:

>
> "ZnU" <z...@fake.invalid> wrote in message
> news:znu-17BC0A.0...@Port80.Individual.NET...
>> In article <C79CCA71.64ACB%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
>> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>
>>> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4MwTvtyrUQ>
>>>
>>> Gives you an idea of what the man (or woman) on the street thinks.
>>
>> Exactly. The geeks take this stuff for granted, but the truth is that
>> understanding how desktop computing works requires understanding a whole
>> raft of complex abstractions and the relationships between them, and
>> most people haven't got a clue.
>
> I always laugh at the people that like to claim how 'it's easy to open a
> terminal and from the CLI and compile the Linux driver you need....'
> because they clearly have zero idea what they're talking about. They seem to
> conflate what's "easy for them" and think that everyone can do it.
>
> At current-job we develop enterprise level software that's basically used by
> experienced IT folks. At previous-job we were developing and selling
> software to "consumers" which is the average home user - not some IT geek.
> Since it was a consumer product we did a lot of end-user testing. The
> company asked employees to find friends, neighbors, etc (non computer types)
> to come in for a usability session and we'd pay them $50.

I have worked with such groups as well... and many, many students of all
ages (K-12, college, seniors)



> We recorded the sessions and for anyone who works in this field - it would
> be a 'Funniest home videos' show. The average computer user is completely
> clueless. Before they actually used our product we had them do several
> simple tasks like copy a file, rename a file, open a browser and go to
> Amazon.com, etc in order to get a "baseline" of their computer skills.
>
> IIRC a double-digit percent of the people could not copy a file. More than
> half of the users went to Amazon.com by using Google to search for
> "Amazon.com" and then clicking on the search results. *That* is the skill
> level of the average user. It was a lot of working trying to make our
> product simple-enough for the average user to use.

And, just as important, not dumbing it down for techies.



> This was the first time that I've ever viewed an end-user usability session
> and it was an eye opening experience as to just how much average users
> struggle with a computer.

Curious what you think of the iPad. Do you think the average users would be
able to figure something like that out? Hard to know for sure without hands
on experience, but any ideas?



>> Some absurd fraction of users, for instance, have no idea what the
>> browser location bar does:
>> http://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/02/11/facebook-login
>
>
>

--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]


Ezekiel

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 9:02:01 AM2/14/10
to

"7" <website_...@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote in message
news:cEPdn.39864$Ym4....@text.news.virginmedia.com...

> Snit wrote:
>
>
>> Gives you an idea
>
>
> Its snot drooling over a some p0rn mags.

See.... he's not some lying "European inventor of the year" con-man with a
nanobot fraud scheme. He's just zany!!!

Ezekiel

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 9:14:45 AM2/14/10
to

"Snit" <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in message
news:C79D502D.64B46%use...@gallopinginsanity.com...

The sessions that I saw all had adults. We may have had students (college)
in other sessions but I'd be surprised if we brought in young kids. But they
weren't who we positioned our product for either.


>> We recorded the sessions and for anyone who works in this field - it
>> would
>> be a 'Funniest home videos' show. The average computer user is completely
>> clueless. Before they actually used our product we had them do several
>> simple tasks like copy a file, rename a file, open a browser and go to
>> Amazon.com, etc in order to get a "baseline" of their computer skills.
>>
>> IIRC a double-digit percent of the people could not copy a file. More
>> than
>> half of the users went to Amazon.com by using Google to search for
>> "Amazon.com" and then clicking on the search results. *That* is the skill
>> level of the average user. It was a lot of working trying to make our
>> product simple-enough for the average user to use.
>
> And, just as important, not dumbing it down for techies.

We wanted to appeal to the largest number of consumers which (if you look at
the "Bell curve") means aiming for the middle of the curve.


>> This was the first time that I've ever viewed an end-user usability
>> session
>> and it was an eye opening experience as to just how much average users
>> struggle with a computer.
>
> Curious what you think of the iPad. Do you think the average users would
> be
> able to figure something like that out? Hard to know for sure without
> hands
> on experience, but any ideas?

As someone who's been working with computers for a long time I find it
interesting. Whether it's a flop or a huge success is to be determined but
the idea is certainly interesting. I personally know of several people that
would be a good fit for the iPad because's it a device that would be usable
by them. A laptop/netbook might be able to do 10x as much but these users
can barely use a normal computer. The iPad may do less, but they'll end up
being able to do more with the iPad than they can with a normal computer.

It'll be interesting to see what happens and as someone who's been working
in the field for a while - I'm curious how it will all play out.

Chris Ahlstrom

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 9:25:47 AM2/14/10
to
Ezekiel pulled this Usenet boner:

I think you give exchanges between Snit and 7 (or anyone, actually) too much
credence.

--
You may be recognized soon. Hide.

Snit

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 9:39:02 AM2/14/10
to
Chris Ahlstrom stated in post hl915b$t6o$1...@news.eternal-september.org on
2/14/10 7:25 AM:

Why is that?


--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]


Snit

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 9:43:33 AM2/14/10
to
Ezekiel stated in post hl90gk$58a$1...@news.eternal-september.org on 2/14/10
7:14 AM:

...

>>> I always laugh at the people that like to claim how 'it's easy to open a
>>> terminal and from the CLI and compile the Linux driver you need....' because
>>> they clearly have zero idea what they're talking about. They seem to
>>> conflate what's "easy for them" and think that everyone can do it.
>>>
>>> At current-job we develop enterprise level software that's basically used by
>>> experienced IT folks. At previous-job we were developing and selling
>>> software to "consumers" which is the average home user - not some IT geek.
>>> Since it was a consumer product we did a lot of end-user testing. The
>>> company asked employees to find friends, neighbors, etc (non computer types)
>>> to come in for a usability session and we'd pay them $50.
>>>
>> I have worked with such groups as well... and many, many students of all ages
>> (K-12, college, seniors)
>>
> The sessions that I saw all had adults. We may have had students (college) in
> other sessions but I'd be surprised if we brought in young kids. But they
> weren't who we positioned our product for either.

The products I did testing for were actually not only adults but largely
people in the tech industry. The lack of knowledge of "basic" things was
eye opening for me.

Teaching the different levels I have, from Kindergarten kids to people in
Electronics businesses to college students to people at blind centers to
seniors to high school students, etc. has shown me what "average" people can
do.

>>> We recorded the sessions and for anyone who works in this field - it would
>>> be a 'Funniest home videos' show. The average computer user is completely
>>> clueless. Before they actually used our product we had them do several
>>> simple tasks like copy a file, rename a file, open a browser and go to
>>> Amazon.com, etc in order to get a "baseline" of their computer skills.
>>>
>>> IIRC a double-digit percent of the people could not copy a file. More than
>>> half of the users went to Amazon.com by using Google to search for
>>> "Amazon.com" and then clicking on the search results. *That* is the skill
>>> level of the average user. It was a lot of working trying to make our
>>> product simple-enough for the average user to use.
>>>
>> And, just as important, not dumbing it down for techies.
>>
> We wanted to appeal to the largest number of consumers which (if you look at
> the "Bell curve") means aiming for the middle of the curve.

Target 80%. Decent rule of thumb.

>>> This was the first time that I've ever viewed an end-user usability session
>>> and it was an eye opening experience as to just how much average users
>>> struggle with a computer.
>>>
>> Curious what you think of the iPad. Do you think the average users would be
>> able to figure something like that out? Hard to know for sure without hands
>> on experience, but any ideas?
>>
> As someone who's been working with computers for a long time I find it
> interesting. Whether it's a flop or a huge success is to be determined but the
> idea is certainly interesting. I personally know of several people that would
> be a good fit for the iPad because's it a device that would be usable by them.
> A laptop/netbook might be able to do 10x as much but these users can barely
> use a normal computer. The iPad may do less, but they'll end up being able to
> do more with the iPad than they can with a normal computer.

The power of a computer is not what the computer can do, but what people can
do with the computer. I think the iPad, from what I have seen, is a very
powerful computer. (Now wait for my second sentence to be pulled out of
context).



> It'll be interesting to see what happens and as someone who's been working in
> the field for a while - I'm curious how it will all play out.

Same here...


--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]


Hadron

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 11:09:13 AM2/14/10
to
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> writes:

Because his master Roy told him.

Ezekiel

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 11:21:16 AM2/14/10
to

"Chris Ahlstrom" <ahls...@launchmodem.com> wrote in message
news:hl915b$t6o$1...@news.eternal-september.org...

Regardless of what's often said about people... I've read enough posts here
to have my own impression of who's really who and which posts I take more
seriously than others.


Chris Ahlstrom

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 11:27:14 AM2/14/10
to
Ezekiel pulled this Usenet boner:

> "Chris Ahlstrom" <ahls...@launchmodem.com> wrote in message
> news:hl915b$t6o$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>> Ezekiel pulled this Usenet boner:
>>
>>> "7" <website_...@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote in message
>>> news:cEPdn.39864$Ym4....@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>>>> Snit wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Gives you an idea
>>>>
>>>> Its snot drooling over a some p0rn mags.
>>>
>>> See.... he's not some lying "European inventor of the year" con-man with
>>> a
>>> nanobot fraud scheme. He's just zany!!!
>>
>> I think you give exchanges between Snit and 7 (or anyone, actually)
>> too much credence.
>
> Regardless of what's often said about people... I've read enough posts here
> to have my own impression of who's really who and which posts I take more
> seriously than others.

I try to go more by the contents of the posts.

Although some clowns (e.g. Snit) spew out so much chaff it is not worth the
effort.

--
You have had a long-term stimulation relative to business.

Ezekiel

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 11:33:59 AM2/14/10
to

"Chris Ahlstrom" <ahls...@launchmodem.com> wrote in message
news:hl9892$bq6$2...@news.eternal-september.org...

> Ezekiel pulled this Usenet boner:
>
>> "Chris Ahlstrom" <ahls...@launchmodem.com> wrote in message
>> news:hl915b$t6o$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>>> Ezekiel pulled this Usenet boner:
>>>
>>>> "7" <website_...@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:cEPdn.39864$Ym4....@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>>>>> Snit wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Gives you an idea
>>>>>
>>>>> Its snot drooling over a some p0rn mags.
>>>>
>>>> See.... he's not some lying "European inventor of the year" con-man
>>>> with
>>>> a
>>>> nanobot fraud scheme. He's just zany!!!
>>>
>>> I think you give exchanges between Snit and 7 (or anyone, actually)
>>> too much credence.
>>
>> Regardless of what's often said about people... I've read enough posts
>> here
>> to have my own impression of who's really who and which posts I take more
>> seriously than others.
>
> I try to go more by the contents of the posts.

I'm trying to start-off the new year this way as well.


> Although some clowns (e.g. Snit) spew out so much chaff it
> is not worth the effort.

My opinion:
Snit + Rick (thread) = way too much chaff
Snit + (<most-others> & !Rick) = not that bad


owl

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 11:41:50 AM2/14/10
to
Yes, and in such a climate of general ignorance, obsessing over trivial UI
inconsistencies is about as meaningful as admonishing the Invisible Man
not to cut off his nose to spite his face.

Snit

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 11:45:49 AM2/14/10
to
Ezekiel stated in post hl98ll$4d3$1...@news.eternal-september.org on 2/14/10
9:33 AM:

>>> Regardless of what's often said about people... I've read enough posts
>>> here
>>> to have my own impression of who's really who and which posts I take more
>>> seriously than others.
>>
>> I try to go more by the contents of the posts.
>
> I'm trying to start-off the new year this way as well.
>
>
>> Although some clowns (e.g. Snit) spew out so much chaff it
>> is not worth the effort.
>
> My opinion:
> Snit + Rick (thread) = way too much chaff
> Snit + (<most-others> & !Rick) = not that bad

Well, I do have fun mocking Rick's non-answers. I do not blame others, at
all, for not wanting to read them.


--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]


Snit

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 11:46:06 AM2/14/10
to
Chris Ahlstrom stated in post hl9892$bq6$2...@news.eternal-september.org on
2/14/10 9:27 AM:

Are you in reference to my fun with Rick?


--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]


Mr. Wonderful

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 11:54:17 AM2/14/10
to

Eeek? You write like a woman. You're no man 7. You know it and I know it.

Snit

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 11:54:38 AM2/14/10
to
owl stated in post s7dfa83...@rooftop.invalid on 2/14/10 9:41 AM:

Huh? Why not work to make the system as usable as reasonably possible for
the novice *and* a more powerful tool for the techie? How is that
"trivial"? Are you saying you think all of the massive data collected by UI
science is wrong? If so, what is your evidence?


--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]


7

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 11:59:26 AM2/14/10
to
Ezekiel wrote:


>>> Gives you an idea
>>
>>
>> Its snot drooling over a some p0rn mags.
>
> See.... he's not some lying "European inventor of the year" con-man with a
> nanobot fraud scheme. He's just zany!!!


You you spoil spurt!

Seriously, is inglish your only language???

Snot asked for what a 'Browser' was and not a 'browser'.

He clearly did not know.

So I had to point him back to his sporty spurting moments.

He is still in denial.

Eeek!


JEDIDIAH

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 11:29:35 AM2/14/10
to
On 2010-02-14, ZnU <z...@fake.invalid> wrote:
>
>
> In article <C79CCA71.64ACB%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4MwTvtyrUQ>
>>
>> Gives you an idea of what the man (or woman) on the street thinks.
>
> Exactly. The geeks take this stuff for granted, but the truth is that
> understanding how desktop computing works requires understanding a whole
> raft of complex abstractions and the relationships between them, and

...and Apple fanboys are bound and determined that no one ever understands
any of this stuff. It helps feed the co-dependent relationship that Apple
users have for Apple Corp. Unfortuantely, it also has the same effect with
Microsoft users.

[deletia]

--


Some people have this nutty idea that in 1997 |||
reading to a hard disk and writing to a hard disk / | \
both at the same time was something worth patenting.

Snit

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 12:14:11 PM2/14/10
to
JEDIDIAH stated in post slrnhng97...@nomad.mishnet on 2/14/10 9:29
AM:

> On 2010-02-14, ZnU <z...@fake.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>
>> In article <C79CCA71.64ACB%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
>> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>
>>> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4MwTvtyrUQ>
>>>
>>> Gives you an idea of what the man (or woman) on the street thinks.
>>
>> Exactly. The geeks take this stuff for granted, but the truth is that
>> understanding how desktop computing works requires understanding a whole
>> raft of complex abstractions and the relationships between them, and
>
> ...and Apple fanboys are bound and determined that no one ever understands
> any of this stuff. It helps feed the co-dependent relationship that Apple
> users have for Apple Corp. Unfortuantely, it also has the same effect with
> Microsoft users.

What? I and ZnU and others look at the *data*. We know that many people do
not get technology (which is not the same as your "no one ever understands
any of this stuff"). You seem to think otherwise.

So where is your *data*? Your *evidence*? Your *support*?

Pretty much you are whining that others support views you do not want to be
true, but you have nothing to counter it. So while many people do not
understand tech, clearly you and many others in COLA do not understand
people. And you resent people who do.


--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]


owl

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 12:14:42 PM2/14/10
to

I'm saying that "UI science" has quite a bigger problem than whether a
developer should use "Exit" or "Quit" in a dialog, when 80+% of the man
on the street don't even know what a browser is. Stop obsessing over
UI trees when the average computer user (i.e. dullard) is looking at
the UI forest and seeing nothing but a big green blur.

Then again, to me these results scream "cloud computing" and "the network
is the computer" more than anything else.

M0she_

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 12:23:47 PM2/14/10
to
On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 08:34:46 -0500, Ezekiel wrote:


> This was the first time that I've ever viewed an end-user usability session
> and it was an eye opening experience as to just how much average users
> struggle with a computer.

I participated in a Microsoft usability study for Vista.
I ended up with a score of 74 of 100, which put me in the top 10
percent for the people they had tested.

The reality is that a 74 is a horrible score for someone who has
used Windows before. Even still, I had never seen Vista before and
this was a tech type conference so the market data would be a
little skewed.
Bottom line is if tech people couldn't do well how does average
Joe stand a chance. Assuming the testing method and metric was
valid.

Snit

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 12:28:15 PM2/14/10
to
owl stated in post eufzdf90...@rooftop.invalid on 2/14/10 10:14 AM:

> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> owl stated in post s7dfa83...@rooftop.invalid on 2/14/10 9:41 AM:
>>
>>> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>>> owl stated in post xsf4ra...@rooftop.invalid on 2/13/10 10:04 PM:
>>>>
>>>>> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>>>>> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4MwTvtyrUQ>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Gives you an idea of what the man (or woman) on the street thinks.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Sort of puts your favorite argument into the proper perspective.
>>>>>
>>>> It is amazing how much we "techies" take for granted in our knowledge set.
>>>>
>>> Yes, and in such a climate of general ignorance, obsessing over trivial UI
>>> inconsistencies is about as meaningful as admonishing the Invisible Man
>>> not to cut off his nose to spite his face.
>>>
>> Huh? Why not work to make the system as usable as reasonably possible for
>> the novice *and* a more powerful tool for the techie? How is that
>> "trivial"? Are you saying you think all of the massive data collected by UI
>> science is wrong? If so, what is your evidence?
>
> I'm saying that "UI science" has quite a bigger problem than whether a
> developer should use "Exit" or "Quit" in a dialog, when 80+% of the man
> on the street don't even know what a browser is.

The terms there are certainly not the only issue!

> Stop obsessing over UI trees when the average computer user (i.e. dullard) is
> looking at the UI forest and seeing nothing but a big green blur.

See how you belittle people who are none techies. But what do you suggest
for UI improvement?

> Then again, to me these results scream "cloud computing" and "the network
> is the computer" more than anything else.

I am not surprised you fail to see the point.

--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]


Ezekiel

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 12:32:01 PM2/14/10
to

"M0she_" <goldee_l...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1de5qj0cqgdjh$.10qb7ozfl3dj0.dlg@40tude.net...

I don't know what the MS usability study was like or how it was
administered. In our case we had random/average people from a variety of
backgrounds in our building "trying" to use a computer. Emphasis on *trying*
to use a computer.


Chris Ahlstrom

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 1:02:31 PM2/14/10
to
Ezekiel pulled this Usenet boner:

> My opinion:


> Snit + Rick (thread) = way too much chaff
> Snit + (<most-others> & !Rick) = not that bad

I dunno, even with TomB's participation I find myself scrolling past the
posts now.

--
Other famous works could easily have been summarized in a few words:
* "Moby Dick" -- Don't mess around with large whales because they symbolize
nature and will kill you.
* "A Tale of Two Cities" -- French people are crazy.
-- Dave Barry

Ezekiel

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 1:14:28 PM2/14/10
to

"Chris Ahlstrom" <ahls...@launchmodem.com> wrote in message
news:hl9drn$tqk$2...@news.eternal-september.org...

> Ezekiel pulled this Usenet boner:
>
>> My opinion:
>> Snit + Rick (thread) = way too much chaff
>> Snit + (<most-others> & !Rick) = not that bad
>
> I dunno, even with TomB's participation I find myself scrolling past the
> posts now.

Good point... let's update the algorithm.

Snit + (<most-others> & ( !Rick | !rand(TomB )) = not that bad

(Note - Otherwise I like TomB's posts when he doesn't get tangled up with
Snit.)


M0she_

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 1:21:44 PM2/14/10
to

It was a dog and pony show to promote Vista at the time.
They gave a T-shirt and gym bag for 45 minutes of your time.

It was mostly the typical kinds of stuff.
Copy files, move files, create shortcuts, install a printer,
browse, run update etc.
Then it got a little more complex involving simulated real life
problems like a defective printer driver etc.

They monitored how *efficient* the people were at the tasks so for
example a person who clicked on the "My Computer" icon on the
desktop vs going to the Start menu to find it would get more
points.

I am very set in my ways which is probably why I didn't do better.
Plus I had never seen the Vista interface before which slowed me
down a little.

ZnU

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 1:47:50 PM2/14/10
to
In article <slrnhng97...@nomad.mishnet>,
JEDIDIAH <je...@nomad.mishnet> wrote:

> On 2010-02-14, ZnU <z...@fake.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >
> > In article <C79CCA71.64ACB%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> > Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >
> >> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4MwTvtyrUQ>
> >>
> >> Gives you an idea of what the man (or woman) on the street thinks.
> >
> > Exactly. The geeks take this stuff for granted, but the truth is that
> > understanding how desktop computing works requires understanding a whole
> > raft of complex abstractions and the relationships between them, and
>
> ...and Apple fanboys are bound and determined that no one ever understands
> any of this stuff. It helps feed the co-dependent relationship that Apple
> users have for Apple Corp. Unfortuantely, it also has the same effect with
> Microsoft users.

I'm not aware of any policies advocated by "Apple fanboys" -- or
implemented by Apple or Microsoft -- that would tend to make it harder
for consumers to learn about the difference between e.g. a browser and a
search engine.

What exactly is your position here, anyway? That computers should be
deliberately designed to be useless to people who don't understand
complex abstractions, because forcing people to learn them will build
character or something?

--
"The game of professional investment is intolerably boring and over-exacting to
anyone who is entirely exempt from the gambling instinct; whilst he who has it
must pay to this propensity the appropriate toll." -- John Maynard Keynes

owl

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 1:49:29 PM2/14/10
to
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> owl stated in post eufzdf90...@rooftop.invalid on 2/14/10 10:14 AM:
>
>> I'm saying that "UI science" has quite a bigger problem than whether a
>> developer should use "Exit" or "Quit" in a dialog, when 80+% of the man
>> on the street don't even know what a browser is.
>
> The terms there are certainly not the only issue!
>

And yet these are the trivialities that rule your world.


>> Stop obsessing over UI trees when the average computer user (i.e. dullard) is
>> looking at the UI forest and seeing nothing but a big green blur.
>
> See how you belittle people who are none techies. But what do you suggest
> for UI improvement?
>

This phenomenon has nothing to do with "techiness." You get similar
results regardless of the subject. The sad fact is that 80% of the
population is borderline retarded when it comes to anything outside
their personal interest boundaries. Very few people explore anything
that they aren't either forced to explore by their job (or school)
or led by the nose to by their friends. As soon as the motivation
for learning goes away, so does the learning. The curiosity factor
is just not there.

I don't give UI improvement much thought unless it gets in my way
by sacrificing functionality in order to please the zombies. My take
on the subject is that those in a position to influence the direction
of personal computing should pay more attention to the needs of those
who are actually *interested* in computing than to the needs of the
masses who could not care less about it. The masses won't even notice
efforts directed to their so-called benefit, and they will come along
for the ride regardless, but only when it suits them.


>> Then again, to me these results scream "cloud computing" and "the network
>> is the computer" more than anything else.
>
> I am not surprised you fail to see the point.
>

And there I was thinking I had a revelation of the obvious.

TomB

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 2:14:49 PM2/14/10
to
On 2010-02-14, the following emerged from the brain of Ezekiel:

Ah well, it's kind of fun having a bitch fight with Snit once in a
while.

--
I am the literary equivalent of a Big Mac and Fries.
~ Stephen King

Snit

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 2:16:25 PM2/14/10
to
Chris Ahlstrom stated in post hl9drn$tqk$2...@news.eternal-september.org on
2/14/10 11:02 AM:

> Ezekiel pulled this Usenet boner:
>
>> My opinion:
>> Snit + Rick (thread) = way too much chaff
>> Snit + (<most-others> & !Rick) = not that bad
>
> I dunno, even with TomB's participation I find myself scrolling past the
> posts now.

Well, when it gets to the silly posts of people just denying science and
facts and me mocking them for it, I cannot imagine why you would read them.
:)


--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]


Snit

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 2:14:05 PM2/14/10
to
Ezekiel stated in post hl9ei2$t43$1...@news.eternal-september.org on 2/14/10
11:14 AM:

TomB is often reasonable, but there are times he makes mistakes and then
just is not willing to admit to it.


--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]


Snit

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 2:33:54 PM2/14/10
to
ZnU stated in post znu-6405AE.1...@Port80.Individual.NET on
2/14/10 11:47 AM:

> In article <slrnhng97...@nomad.mishnet>,
> JEDIDIAH <je...@nomad.mishnet> wrote:
>
>> On 2010-02-14, ZnU <z...@fake.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> In article <C79CCA71.64ACB%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
>>> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4MwTvtyrUQ>
>>>>
>>>> Gives you an idea of what the man (or woman) on the street thinks.
>>>
>>> Exactly. The geeks take this stuff for granted, but the truth is that
>>> understanding how desktop computing works requires understanding a whole
>>> raft of complex abstractions and the relationships between them, and
>>
>> ...and Apple fanboys are bound and determined that no one ever understands
>> any of this stuff. It helps feed the co-dependent relationship that Apple
>> users have for Apple Corp. Unfortuantely, it also has the same effect with
>> Microsoft users.
>
> I'm not aware of any policies advocated by "Apple fanboys" -- or
> implemented by Apple or Microsoft -- that would tend to make it harder
> for consumers to learn about the difference between e.g. a browser and a
> search engine.
>
> What exactly is your position here, anyway? That computers should be
> deliberately designed to be useless to people who don't understand
> complex abstractions, because forcing people to learn them will build
> character or something?

I think he is arguing against the data that shows people do not understand
what he thinks they should. He does not understand how people can be
ignorant about tech in much the same way you and I find it hard to
understand how he can be so ignorant about people.

--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]


Snit

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 2:37:54 PM2/14/10
to
owl stated in post sdf8wa...@rooftop.invalid on 2/14/10 11:49 AM:

> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> owl stated in post eufzdf90...@rooftop.invalid on 2/14/10 10:14 AM:
>>
>>> I'm saying that "UI science" has quite a bigger problem than whether a
>>> developer should use "Exit" or "Quit" in a dialog, when 80+% of the man
>>> on the street don't even know what a browser is.
>>
>> The terms there are certainly not the only issue!
>
> And yet these are the trivialities that rule your world.

Ah, you are just spewing nonsense. OK.



>>> Stop obsessing over UI trees when the average computer user (i.e. dullard)
>>> is
>>> looking at the UI forest and seeing nothing but a big green blur.
>>
>> See how you belittle people who are none techies. But what do you suggest
>> for UI improvement?
>
> This phenomenon has nothing to do with "techiness." You get similar results
> regardless of the subject. The sad fact is that 80% of the population is
> borderline retarded when it comes to anything outside their personal interest
> boundaries. Very few people explore anything that they aren't either forced
> to explore by their job (or school) or led by the nose to by their friends.
> As soon as the motivation for learning goes away, so does the learning. The
> curiosity factor is just not there.

Do you have support for this claim?



> I don't give UI improvement much thought unless it gets in my way
> by sacrificing functionality in order to please the zombies.

OK, you do not give it much thought - you are one of the people who has
little curiosity about things you do not *see* a direct connection to your
life about. And this is on a topic where it *does* have a direct connection
- after all, you use computers a lot. Remember: UI issues are tied to your
productivity, your efficiency, your error rates and even your enjoyment of
using computers.

> My take on the subject is that those in a position to influence the direction
> of personal computing should pay more attention to the needs of those who are
> actually *interested* in computing than to the needs of the masses who could
> not care less about it.

And since UI issues affect those with more technical knowledge even more
than they do novices, the fact you admit to not having much curiosity is
rather telling.

> The masses won't even notice efforts directed to their so-called benefit, and
> they will come along for the ride regardless, but only when it suits them.

Of course people will notice the affects of better usability, reduced error
rates, etc.



>>> Then again, to me these results scream "cloud computing" and "the network
>>> is the computer" more than anything else.
>>
>> I am not surprised you fail to see the point.
>
> And there I was thinking I had a revelation of the obvious.

I do not doubt you had such thoughts.

--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]


Hadron

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 2:32:10 PM2/14/10
to
"Ezekiel" <ze...@nosuchmail.com> writes:

A point of order here : TomB was playing the usual "advocate" game of
twisting things to avoid admitting weaknesses in the Linux UI. Yes Snit
goes on a bit but he WAS right. While I had hopes for TomB his
ridiculous posturings about keeping root windows open, making as root
and "./configure" NOT being the default in the huge majority of build
cases just marks him out as another "advocate" who will twist and slime
in order to argue with a "wintroll".

Snit

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 2:47:53 PM2/14/10
to
TomB stated in post 201002142...@usenet.drumscum.be on 2/14/10 12:14
PM:

I see debates in Usenet as a form of practice or inoculation for any debates
I have in the real world - just as inoculations are sometimes weakened forms
of viruses, the debates in Usenet tend to be weakened forms of debates one
might have face to face or even in forums where there are more informed

Snit

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 2:56:54 PM2/14/10
to
Hadron stated in post tmvl47-...@news.eternal-september.org on 2/14/10
12:32 PM:

> "Ezekiel" <ze...@nosuchmail.com> writes:
>
>> "Chris Ahlstrom" <ahls...@launchmodem.com> wrote in message
>> news:hl9drn$tqk$2...@news.eternal-september.org...
>>> Ezekiel pulled this Usenet boner:
>>>
>>>> My opinion:
>>>> Snit + Rick (thread) = way too much chaff
>>>> Snit + (<most-others> & !Rick) = not that bad
>>>
>>> I dunno, even with TomB's participation I find myself scrolling past the
>>> posts now.
>>
>> Good point... let's update the algorithm.
>>
>> Snit + (<most-others> & ( !Rick | !rand(TomB )) = not that bad
>>
>> (Note - Otherwise I like TomB's posts when he doesn't get tangled up with
>> Snit.)
>
> A point of order here : TomB was playing the usual "advocate" game of
> twisting things to avoid admitting weaknesses in the Linux UI. Yes Snit
> goes on a bit but he WAS right.

I do not deny I tend to go on a bit. Nor do I deny I was right. :)

> While I had hopes for TomB his
> ridiculous posturings about keeping root windows open, making as root
> and "./configure" NOT being the default in the huge majority of build
> cases just marks him out as another "advocate" who will twist and slime
> in order to argue with a "wintroll".
>

--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]


TomB

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 3:02:09 PM2/14/10
to
On 2010-02-14, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:

The feeling is mutual.

--
Women need a reason to have sex. Men just need a place.
~ Billy Crystal

owl

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 3:03:50 PM2/14/10
to
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> owl stated in post sdf8wa...@rooftop.invalid on 2/14/10 11:49 AM:
>
>> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>> owl stated in post eufzdf90...@rooftop.invalid on 2/14/10 10:14 AM:
>>>
>>>> I'm saying that "UI science" has quite a bigger problem than whether a
>>>> developer should use "Exit" or "Quit" in a dialog, when 80+% of the man
>>>> on the street don't even know what a browser is.
>>>
>>> The terms there are certainly not the only issue!
>>
>> And yet these are the trivialities that rule your world.
>
> Ah, you are just spewing nonsense. OK.
>

So you disagree that this is your obsession? Then why do you go on
about it so much?


>>>> Stop obsessing over UI trees when the average computer user (i.e. dullard)
>>>> is
>>>> looking at the UI forest and seeing nothing but a big green blur.
>>>
>>> See how you belittle people who are none techies. But what do you suggest
>>> for UI improvement?
>>
>> This phenomenon has nothing to do with "techiness." You get similar results
>> regardless of the subject. The sad fact is that 80% of the population is
>> borderline retarded when it comes to anything outside their personal interest
>> boundaries. Very few people explore anything that they aren't either forced
>> to explore by their job (or school) or led by the nose to by their friends.
>> As soon as the motivation for learning goes away, so does the learning. The
>> curiosity factor is just not there.
>
> Do you have support for this claim?

A related link from the video you referenced:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJuNgBkloFE&feature=related

>
>> I don't give UI improvement much thought unless it gets in my way
>> by sacrificing functionality in order to please the zombies.
>
> OK, you do not give it much thought - you are one of the people who has
> little curiosity about things you do not *see* a direct connection to your
> life about. And this is on a topic where it *does* have a direct connection
> - after all, you use computers a lot. Remember: UI issues are tied to your
> productivity, your efficiency, your error rates and even your enjoyment of
> using computers.
>

Of course. Don't mess up a functional UI by trying in vain to cater
to the sheep.

>> My take on the subject is that those in a position to influence the direction
>> of personal computing should pay more attention to the needs of those who are
>> actually *interested* in computing than to the needs of the masses who could
>> not care less about it.
>
> And since UI issues affect those with more technical knowledge even more
> than they do novices, the fact you admit to not having much curiosity is
> rather telling.
>

Mess up a functional UI and I'll notice. The sheep will not notice your
"improvements."


>> The masses won't even notice efforts directed to their so-called benefit, and
>> they will come along for the ride regardless, but only when it suits them.
>
> Of course people will notice the affects of better usability, reduced error
> rates, etc.
>

Yet the web browser somehow escaped their notice.


>>>> Then again, to me these results scream "cloud computing" and "the network
>>>> is the computer" more than anything else.
>>>
>>> I am not surprised you fail to see the point.
>>
>> And there I was thinking I had a revelation of the obvious.
>
> I do not doubt you had such thoughts.
>

Maybe you should attempt to show where my insight is off-target in this
regard?

Snit

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 3:07:02 PM2/14/10
to
TomB stated in post 201002142...@usenet.drumscum.be on 2/14/10 1:02
PM:

Fair enough.


--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]


Snit

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 3:13:13 PM2/14/10
to
owl stated in post dyfva...@rooftop.invalid on 2/14/10 1:03 PM:

> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> owl stated in post sdf8wa...@rooftop.invalid on 2/14/10 11:49 AM:
>>
>>> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>>> owl stated in post eufzdf90...@rooftop.invalid on 2/14/10 10:14 AM:
>>>>
>>>>> I'm saying that "UI science" has quite a bigger problem than whether a
>>>>> developer should use "Exit" or "Quit" in a dialog, when 80+% of the man
>>>>> on the street don't even know what a browser is.
>>>>
>>>> The terms there are certainly not the only issue!
>>>
>>> And yet these are the trivialities that rule your world.
>>
>> Ah, you are just spewing nonsense. OK.
>>
>
> So you disagree that this is your obsession? Then why do you go on
> about it so much?

Go on about what, specifically?

>>>>> Stop obsessing over UI trees when the average computer user (i.e. dullard)
>>>>> is looking at the UI forest and seeing nothing but a big green blur.
>>>>>
>>>> See how you belittle people who are none techies. But what do you suggest
>>>> for UI improvement?
>>>>
>>> This phenomenon has nothing to do with "techiness." You get similar results
>>> regardless of the subject. The sad fact is that 80% of the population is
>>> borderline retarded when it comes to anything outside their personal
>>> interest boundaries. Very few people explore anything that they aren't
>>> either forced to explore by their job (or school) or led by the nose to by
>>> their friends. As soon as the motivation for learning goes away, so does the
>>> learning. The curiosity factor is just not there.
>>>
>> Do you have support for this claim?
>
> A related link from the video you referenced:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJuNgBkloFE&feature=related

Under comedy... I am wondering how much they had to record to get that.



>>> I don't give UI improvement much thought unless it gets in my way by
>>> sacrificing functionality in order to please the zombies.
>>>
>> OK, you do not give it much thought - you are one of the people who has
>> little curiosity about things you do not *see* a direct connection to your
>> life about. And this is on a topic where it *does* have a direct connection
>> - after all, you use computers a lot. Remember: UI issues are tied to your
>> productivity, your efficiency, your error rates and even your enjoyment of
>> using computers.
>>
> Of course. Don't mess up a functional UI by trying in vain to cater to the
> sheep.

Mess up a functional UI? What UI? Who wants to mess it up and how?

>>> My take on the subject is that those in a position to influence the
>>> direction of personal computing should pay more attention to the needs of
>>> those who are actually *interested* in computing than to the needs of the
>>> masses who could not care less about it.
>>>
>> And since UI issues affect those with more technical knowledge even more than
>> they do novices, the fact you admit to not having much curiosity is rather
>> telling.
>
> Mess up a functional UI and I'll notice. The sheep will not notice your
> "improvements."

Again you talk about messing up a UI... but who is doing that to what UI?
What are you talking about?

>>> The masses won't even notice efforts directed to their so-called benefit,
>>> and they will come along for the ride regardless, but only when it suits
>>> them.
>>>
>> Of course people will notice the affects of better usability, reduced error
>> rates, etc.
>
> Yet the web browser somehow escaped their notice.

What do you mean by it escaped their notice? They never found it?

>>>>> Then again, to me these results scream "cloud computing" and "the network
>>>>> is the computer" more than anything else.
>>>>>
>>>> I am not surprised you fail to see the point.
>>>>
>>> And there I was thinking I had a revelation of the obvious.
>>>
>> I do not doubt you had such thoughts.
>
> Maybe you should attempt to show where my insight is off-target in this
> regard?

You show no understanding... not insight into anything.

--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]


owl

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 3:29:23 PM2/14/10
to
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> owl stated in post dyfva...@rooftop.invalid on 2/14/10 1:03 PM:
>
>> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>> owl stated in post sdf8wa...@rooftop.invalid on 2/14/10 11:49 AM:
>>>
>>>> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>>>> owl stated in post eufzdf90...@rooftop.invalid on 2/14/10 10:14 AM:
>>>>>

<pathetic sidestepping snipped>

>>>>>> Then again, to me these results scream "cloud computing" and "the network
>>>>>> is the computer" more than anything else.
>>>>>>
>>>>> I am not surprised you fail to see the point.
>>>>>
>>>> And there I was thinking I had a revelation of the obvious.
>>>>
>>> I do not doubt you had such thoughts.
>>
>> Maybe you should attempt to show where my insight is off-target in this
>> regard?
>
> You show no understanding... not insight into anything.
>

I see you would rather attack than discuss. Sad.

Ezekiel

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 3:33:42 PM2/14/10
to

"TomB" <tommy.b...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:201002142...@usenet.drumscum.be...

Most everyone here gets into a good ol' fashion bitch fight once in a while.

Ezekiel

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 3:37:14 PM2/14/10
to

"Hadron" <hadro...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:tmvl47-...@news.eternal-september.org...

It might have been... I really don't know. Unless I'm directly involved I
usually don't follow those long-running threads so I don't know what was
said or the context in which it was said.

Snit

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 4:26:59 PM2/14/10
to
owl stated in post xcvui9...@rooftop.invalid on 2/14/10 1:29 PM:

...

> I see you would rather attack than discuss. Sad.
>

I have asked you questions, very specific ones. You have claimed I "go on"
about something... but have not said what (I assume you mean some subset of
the UI issues I talk about... or maybe all of them... but you do not seem to
know enough about what I talk about to really know what you mean). You also
talked about messing up some functional UI, but you could not say what UI
you mean nor who wants to mess it up and in what way.

I really would like for you to explain what the heck you are talking about
in something other than vague references to... whatever you are trying to
get at.

The reality is you likely have no real point. You just know you do not get
the discussion on UI usability.


--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]


chrisv

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 5:35:12 PM2/14/10
to
Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> trolling fsckwit wrote:
>>
>> Regardless of what's often said about people... I've read enough posts
>> here to have my own impression of who's really who and which posts I
>> take more seriously than others.

Why should anyone care what a known liar, like you, claims to "take
seriously" or not, fsckwit? I know your word isn't worth spit.

> I try to go more by the contents of the posts.
>
> Although some clowns (e.g. Snit) spew out so much chaff it is not worth
> the effort.

Same with most of the Wintrolls, with their snot and their lies.

chrisv

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 5:37:11 PM2/14/10
to
owl wrote:

> I see you would rather attack than discuss. Sad.

Wow. Arguing with Shit was a waste of time. Who would have guessed?

owl

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 5:43:25 PM2/14/10
to

*plonk*

owl

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 5:54:30 PM2/14/10
to

Fuck off, granny.

chrisv

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 6:15:55 PM2/14/10
to
owl wrote:

*plonk*

Snit

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 6:26:38 PM2/14/10
to
owl stated in post sdfiu...@rooftop.invalid on 2/14/10 3:43 PM:

I am not surprised to see you run. You had no point to make... and did not
like when that was called out.


--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]


Snit

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 6:27:06 PM2/14/10
to
chrisv stated in post AsqdnRMDUMI95-XW...@giganews.com on
2/14/10 3:35 PM:

Do you consider Peter K. to be honest?


--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]


Snit

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 6:29:54 PM2/14/10
to
chrisv stated in post AsqdnRIDUMKK5uXW...@giganews.com on
2/14/10 3:37 PM:

> owl wrote:
>
>> I see you would rather attack than discuss. Sad.
>
> Wow. Arguing with Shit was a waste of time. Who would have guessed?

I asked him questions. He ran.

He claimed I "go on" about a specific topic. When asked which one, he had
no answer. I assume he meant some subset of the UI issues I often talk
about... or maybe all of them... but he did not seem to know enough about
what I talk about to really know what he meant.

He also talked about something messing up some functional UI, but you could
not say what UI he was talking about nor who wants to mess it up and in what
way.

He made vague references - and when he was questioned about them he whined
and then ran. He had no point to make.


--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]


Snit

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 6:30:13 PM2/14/10
to
chrisv stated in post AsqdnQ4DUMK2GeXW...@giganews.com on
2/14/10 4:15 PM:

But, gee, you were just siding with his claims. LOL!


--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]


owl

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 6:33:27 PM2/14/10
to

Chris Ahlstrom

unread,
Feb 14, 2010, 10:10:26 PM2/14/10
to

It's just another senseless smear from the Quark troll.

--
They have been at a great feast of languages, and stolen the scraps.
-- William Shakespeare, "Love's Labour's Lost"

jebblue

unread,
Feb 15, 2010, 12:37:35 AM2/15/10
to
On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 21:30:25 -0700, Snit wrote:

> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4MwTvtyrUQ>
>
> Gives you an idea of what the man (or woman) on the street thinks.

That was fun and a wake up call. The UI is everything.

--
// This is my opinion.

Ezekiel

unread,
Feb 15, 2010, 7:55:48 AM2/15/10
to

"jebblue" <n...@n.nnn> wrote in message
news:Io6dnVWWjI8CQOXW...@giganews.com...

> On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 21:30:25 -0700, Snit wrote:
>
>> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4MwTvtyrUQ>
>>
>> Gives you an idea of what the man (or woman) on the street thinks.
>
> That was fun and a wake up call. The UI is everything.

From the video there's a lot of people who "don't use a browser" - but there
are a lot of people who "use Firefox" or "use IE"

And I bet if they had asked people "what operating system do you use"....
most of the people don't use an operating-system, they have Windows or own a
Mac.


Snit

unread,
Feb 15, 2010, 1:22:36 PM2/15/10
to
jebblue stated in post Io6dnVWWjI8CQOXW...@giganews.com on
2/14/10 10:37 PM:

> On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 21:30:25 -0700, Snit wrote:
>
>> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4MwTvtyrUQ>
>>
>> Gives you an idea of what the man (or woman) on the street thinks.
>
> That was fun and a wake up call. The UI is everything.

The the general user, the UI is the computer.


--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]


Snit

unread,
Feb 15, 2010, 1:22:56 PM2/15/10
to
Ezekiel stated in post hlbg8i$4fr$1...@news.eternal-september.org on 2/15/10
5:55 AM:

Completely agree.

--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]


chrisv

unread,
Feb 16, 2010, 8:17:52 AM2/16/10
to
JEDIDIAH wrote:

>On 2010-02-14, ZnU <z...@fake.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> The geeks take this stuff for granted, but the truth is that
>> understanding how desktop computing works requires understanding a whole
>> raft of complex abstractions and the relationships between them, and
>
>...and Apple fanboys are bound and determined that no one ever understands
>any of this stuff. It helps feed the co-dependent relationship that Apple
>users have for Apple Corp. Unfortuantely, it also has the same effect with
>Microsoft users.

Well, God forbid that people actually LEARN SOMETHING about what it
the most important tool of our time...

What are those 16 years of formal education for, exactly?

--
"To idiots like himr... violence is the only answer." - trolling
fsckwit "Ezekiel", lying shamelessly

DFS

unread,
Feb 16, 2010, 8:28:15 AM2/16/10
to
chrisv wrote:
> JEDIDIAH wrote:
>
>> On 2010-02-14, ZnU <z...@fake.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>> The geeks take this stuff for granted, but the truth is that
>>> understanding how desktop computing works requires understanding a
>>> whole raft of complex abstractions and the relationships between
>>> them, and
>>
>> ...and Apple fanboys are bound and determined that no one ever
>> understands any of this stuff. It helps feed the co-dependent
>> relationship that Apple users have for Apple Corp. Unfortuantely, it
>> also has the same effect with Microsoft users.
>
> Well, God forbid that people actually LEARN SOMETHING about what it
> the most important tool of our time...
>
> What are those 16 years of formal education for, exactly?


Real life, not Linux geek life.

Certainly they're not to learn how to set gcc kernel compilation flags or
build a Gentoo system from Stage 1.

JEDIDIAH

unread,
Feb 16, 2010, 10:10:52 AM2/16/10
to
On 2010-02-16, chrisv <chr...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
>
> JEDIDIAH wrote:
>
>>On 2010-02-14, ZnU <z...@fake.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>> The geeks take this stuff for granted, but the truth is that
>>> understanding how desktop computing works requires understanding a whole
>>> raft of complex abstractions and the relationships between them, and
>>
>>...and Apple fanboys are bound and determined that no one ever understands
>>any of this stuff. It helps feed the co-dependent relationship that Apple
>>users have for Apple Corp. Unfortuantely, it also has the same effect with
>>Microsoft users.
>
> Well, God forbid that people actually LEARN SOMETHING about what it
> the most important tool of our time...
>
> What are those 16 years of formal education for, exactly?
>

The younger generation is much more comfortable with this stuff. They
barely acknowledge the differences between operating systems (Windows,
Linux, MacOS). They are naturally able to adapt and explore new interfaces
far more adeptly than the older generations.

This is fortunate since many entrenched vertical apps have horrendous UIs.

--
If you think that an 80G disk can hold HUNDREDS of |||
hours of DV video then you obviously haven't used iMovie either. / | \

Giorgos Tzampanakis

unread,
Feb 16, 2010, 12:59:00 PM2/16/10
to
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in
news:C79CCA71.64ACB%use...@gallopinginsanity.com:

> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4MwTvtyrUQ>
>
> Gives you an idea of what the man (or woman) on the street
> thinks.

Most people answered that the browser is "where you go to
search". How's that wrong?

Snit

unread,
Feb 16, 2010, 1:10:36 PM2/16/10
to
Giorgos Tzampanakis stated in post
Xns9D21B6F10D0CFfd...@127.0.0.1 on 2/16/10 10:59 AM:

A browser is not a search engine... though, yes, you can get to search
engines with a browser.


--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]


Snit

unread,
Feb 16, 2010, 1:21:32 PM2/16/10
to
chrisv stated in post 7j6ln5hbjcm17clv0...@4ax.com on 2/16/10
6:17 AM:

> JEDIDIAH wrote:
>
>> On 2010-02-14, ZnU <z...@fake.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>> The geeks take this stuff for granted, but the truth is that
>>> understanding how desktop computing works requires understanding a whole
>>> raft of complex abstractions and the relationships between them, and
>>
>> ...and Apple fanboys are bound and determined that no one ever understands
>> any of this stuff. It helps feed the co-dependent relationship that Apple
>> users have for Apple Corp. Unfortuantely, it also has the same effect with
>> Microsoft users.
>
> Well, God forbid that people actually LEARN SOMETHING about what it
> the most important tool of our time...
>
> What are those 16 years of formal education for, exactly?

People should learn the tool, but the tool should also be made for people.


--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]


Snit

unread,
Feb 16, 2010, 1:22:21 PM2/16/10
to
JEDIDIAH stated in post slrnhnldb...@nomad.mishnet on 2/16/10 8:10
AM:

> On 2010-02-16, chrisv <chr...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>
>> JEDIDIAH wrote:
>>
>>> On 2010-02-14, ZnU <z...@fake.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The geeks take this stuff for granted, but the truth is that
>>>> understanding how desktop computing works requires understanding a whole
>>>> raft of complex abstractions and the relationships between them, and
>>>
>>> ...and Apple fanboys are bound and determined that no one ever understands
>>> any of this stuff. It helps feed the co-dependent relationship that Apple
>>> users have for Apple Corp. Unfortuantely, it also has the same effect with
>>> Microsoft users.
>>
>> Well, God forbid that people actually LEARN SOMETHING about what it
>> the most important tool of our time...
>>
>> What are those 16 years of formal education for, exactly?
>>
>
> The younger generation is much more comfortable with this stuff. They
> barely acknowledge the differences between operating systems (Windows,
> Linux, MacOS). They are naturally able to adapt and explore new interfaces
> far more adeptly than the older generations.
>
> This is fortunate since many entrenched vertical apps have horrendous UIs.

Are you trying to imply that the younger generation is less affected by
poorly designed UIs? If so, I would like to see the evidence of this.


--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]


0 new messages