On Friday 05 January 2007 19:26, Les Mikesell wrote: > On Fri, 2007-01-05 at 19:14 +0000, Anne Wilson wrote: > > On Friday 05 January 2007 18:32, Scott van Looy wrote: > > > This is how software *should* be developed. Programmers all too > > > frequently forget that they are servicing the user, not telling them > > > what to do. > > > > Absolutely true. But let's not forget that if you were the first tester > > and I was the second they would probably see entirely different actions > > and reactions. Human differences can't be ignored, and to expect any > > programmer to know what is perfect for every user is beyond all sense and > > reason. > > There's also the difference between the first-time testing experience > and > your acquired tastes after familiarity sets in. True. This is probably why we often hear complaints about applications being windows-like. It's what most people are used to. If they have always used M$Office they need something reasonably familiar when they make the switch, or they lose too much functionality. The fact that I never used M$Office does mean that I have different expectations. > These are much like > the differences you want in tutorials vs. reference manuals. After > you have been through a tutorial you probably never want to see it > again. > Software is often designed to be attractive to first-time users and > perhaps has to be, but once you have learned it's tricks and it has > learned your preferences it should adapt to stay more out of the way. > Maybe it's terminology that we are arguing about. I am quite happy with software that allows me to turn off features I don't want and turn on those I do. Anne
Attachment:
pgp9yTDmJC8fQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
