Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 16 Mar 2002 12:08:11 -0600
From:      Chip Morton <tech_info@threespace.com>
To:        FreeBSD Chat <chat@freebsd.org>
Subject:   The Great GUI Debate (was Re: Free BSD)
Message-ID:  <4.3.2.7.2.20020316112644.01b11558@threespace.com>
In-Reply-To: <15507.31402.448552.648331@guru.mired.org>
References:  <4.3.2.7.2.20020316100234.01b21638@threespace.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20020315181331.01b26160@threespace.com> <20020314204235.L152-100000@pogo.caustic.org> <15505.28725.937368.158235@guru.mired.org> <4.3.2.7.2.20020315190230.01b2a4f8@threespace.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20020316100234.01b21638@threespace.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 11:02 AM 3/16/2002, Mike Meyer wrote:
>Leaving the steaming heap that Apple/MS has foisted off on us as an
>interface is the worst idea I've seen since the last time I talked to
>an MS support rep (~1982).
>
>Of all the behavior models for windowing systems that I know of,
>that's the least efficient one.

Look, if you or Lambert or Raskin or anybody else think that you have a 
better idea, then have at it.  If you build a mousetrap that is truly 
better than the one we use now, then I'm sure the world will quickly beat a 
path to your doorstep.


>Most major manufacturers put an acceleration control on the steering
>wheel, at least for their high end cars. I'm pretty sure one of the F1
>teams did the same.

I can't afford high-end cars, and neither can most folks.  But I don't 
believe it's not done because it's a "high-end" concept; I believe it's not 
done because the benefits are outweighed by other negative factors, notably 
the "re-learning curve."


>"Shoved down our throats"? You mean, like DVDs are being shoved down
>our throats, and like DIVX was shoved down our throats?
>
>I don't know about you, but the first time I heard a CD player, *I*
>wanted one. I waited until I found one that could pass a blind A/B
>test against a thousand dollar turntable before I got rid of my
>turntable, but nobody forced people to buy CDs instead of cassettes.
>
>The rule for this stuff is very simple: to get the public to change,
>it has to be perceived to be at least an order of magnitude better for
>the same price.
>
>CDs pretty clearly qualified: they sounded better(*), they were more
>damage resistant, and they could be played in the car.
>
>DVDs, ditto. They look better(*), they are wear better, and they offer
>lots extra features that people seem to like.
>
>DIVX, not ditto. It was DVD, only with a sucky pricing structure and
>requiring a new player.

Well, real-time recording onto CDs and DVDs is still a dream here in 
America, so for my use, CDs/DVDs aren't so clearly better than casettes and 
VHS videotapes.  And this denies that there have been other comparable form 
factors that the industry didn't push as eagerly--MDs, DATs, and laserdiscs 
come to mind quickly.  I think the issue for the music industry is less 
about the quality of our listening experience than about content control.


>Unfortunately, while the steaming heap of a GUI most people use is
>indeed the least efficient, it's at worst a factor of two worse, not a
>factor of 10. So the only way it's going to get changed is if MS
>manages to shove it down our throats. Having monopoly power, they can
>do that.

And I think this is the crucial point here.  Raskin's ideas may be better, 
but are they so much better that the masses will be willing to switch?  I 
don't think so.  Even if I spend a whole hour per day doing window 
operations, my savings is three minutes per day.  But now I hate using my 
computer.  So where's the gain?  And how much time did I waste trying to 
learn this new, improved way of doing things.


> > The actual look of a window manager (or car, or woman, or anything else)
> > only matters very early up front.  You may be wowed by the look of the
> > windows and widgets early on, but after that it really doesn't matter to
> > you while you're working.
>
>Actually, it does matter. If you notice them, then you're not
>working. That's why the look matters. Being wow'ed early on is usually
>a bad sign, not a good one.

Again I disagree.  Over a long period of time, people will get used to 
whatever shiny baubles they were impressed with early on.  My candy-colored 
scrollbars don't make me any more/less efficient than if I had a simple 
two-color scrollbar.  I don't pay them any attention any more until I have 
to scroll something.

And if you're NOT using the system for a long time, then the efficiency 
gained from changing things isn't worth the time it would take to relearn them.


> > Sure, I don't like the look of twm, but I would
> > be no more/less productive by using it.
>
>That depends on what you're using now. If it's the MS/Apple stuff,
>then using a properly configured twm would be about 5% more efficient
>- meaning it takes about 5% less time to do things with it than the
>MS/Apple stuff. That should translate into more productivity.
>
>
> > In fact, I might argue that the pleasure I get out of having an
> > attractive, colorful windowing system with my girlfriend on the
> > wallpaper would actually make me more productive on the whole.
> > Productivity isn't just about the milliseconds saved in dragging the
> > mouse from one corner to the next.
>
>True enough. But since you can do that with almost any GUI, it's sort
>of irrelevant.

It's not irrelevant because you and Raskin just argued that these sort of 
amenities detract from my productivity.

The problem I see with this argument is that it tries to measure human 
productivity in machine cycles.  My saving five minutes per day in improved 
productivity may be pointless if I hate using my ugly window manager.  The 
benefits here are not without a cost.


> > Like I said, he can develop his 1-bit WM and then he can have it.
>
>He already did, and he already does.

Then he should be happy and stay off happy users' screens.



>         <mike
>
>*) I know the sound/looks point is arguable, but compare them on the
>kinds of A/V system your average consumer has, *not* the kind that
>someone who'd lay out a grand for a turntable has.  Under those
>conditions, CD/DVD clearly has better quality.
>
>--
>Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org>                      http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/
>Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4.3.2.7.2.20020316112644.01b11558>