On Mon, 25 Jul, 2005 at 03:35PM -0400, Lee Revell spake thus: > On Mon, 2005-07-25 at 12:47 -0700, eviltwin69@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > > On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 14:34 , Lee Revell <rlrevell@xxxxxxxxxxx> sent: > > > > >On Mon, 2005-07-25 at 10:46 +0200, Mario Lang wrote: > > >> That is the point, I absolutely dont feel reading up on something > > >> is necessarily a bad thing. My hair stand up if I watch > > >> a typical no-clue windows user more or less randomly hitting > > >> buttons in the interface until "something" works. I do feel this > > >> "it has to work out of the box without me having to know anything > > >> about it" attitude is childish. > > >> > > > > > >I disagree violently with this line of reasoning. Software should > > >ALWAYS work the way the user expects it to unless there is a DAMN GOOD > > >REASON, for example if you are offering a much more powerful interface > > >than the user is used to. > > > > > >For example, most apps (Firefox and IE) use "Ctrl-F" to 'Find in page'. > > >Except Evolution, which forces you to use "Ctrl-S" to 'Find (Search) in > > >page', because they have already bound Ctrl-F to 'Forward message'. > > > > > > Ah, but Ctrl-S has been search in all versions of Emacs for the last couple > > of decades. I think that predates IE and Firefox. They must not have felt like > > doing it in the normal way ;-) And you don't need to point out that Emacs isn't > > a browser since Evolution isn't one either. > > > > Correct, but I'm talking about the modern UNIX GUI desktop, the one that > we expect to be intuitive to Mac and Windows users. You know, KDE or > Gnome, Firefox, OpenOffice, Evolution or kmail. The type of stuff that > will meet the needs of 99% of computer users (yes we all know we are in > the other 1%). For better or for worse, >Emacs is not a part of that. *sobs* > Lee > > -- "I'd crawl over an acre of 'Visual This++' and 'Integrated Development That' to get to gcc, Emacs, and gdb. Thank you." (By Vance Petree, Virginia Power)
