Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!pequod.cso.uiuc.edu!dorner
From: dorner@pequod.cso.uiuc.edu (Steve Dorner)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.system
Subject: Re: System 7 talk: Hierarchial Apple Menus
Message-ID: <1990Jun14.185425.640@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
Date: 14 Jun 90 18:54:25 GMT
References: <68207@cc.utah.edu> <8655@goofy.Apple.COM> <13407@wpi.wpi.edu> <41889@apple.Apple.COM> <69651@cc.utah.edu>
Sender: usenet@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (News)
Reply-To: dorner@pequod.cso.uiuc.edu (Steve Dorner)
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Lines: 26

> The current implementation is very simple to explain and understand,

The following things were also simpler:

1. MFS
2. No slots
3. No SCSI
4. Single finder

I each case, the "simple" was discarded because it didn't have enough
depth to handle complexity.

IMHO, we have an exact parallel between MFS and a flat apple menu.  The
same mistake is being made; you just can't provide users with too many
tools for dealing with complexity.
[Yes, I know that disks manage more docs than the apple menu is likely to.
Yes, I know that the Finder's "pseudo-folders" made MFS more confusing than
it might have been.  The analogy still holds.]

The suggested "folder-means-hier-menu" would provide a valuable tool,
but would cost nothing for the novice.
[As for the "but a novice might use an expert's machine," argument, I detect
a definite red coloration and fishy smell...]
--
Steve Dorner, U of Illinois Computing Services Office
Internet: s-dorner@uiuc.edu  UUCP: {convex,uunet}!uiucuxc!dorner