Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site wivax.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!wivax!haungs From: haungs@wivax.UUCP Newsgroups: net.cog-eng Subject: Long names and menus Message-ID: <19001@wivax.UUCP> Date: Wed, 30-Nov-83 09:22:34 EST Article-I.D.: wivax.19001 Posted: Wed Nov 30 09:22:34 1983 Date-Received: Thu, 1-Dec-83 05:19:37 EST Sender: haungs@wivax.UUCP Organization: Wang Institute, Tyngsboro, Ma. 01879 Lines: 60 All you folks embroiled in this "long names" discussion are missing an important point about the nature of many current and lots of future computing machinery. The Unix "command" orientation may have been great for 300 baud yellow-paper TTY's, and it may be becoming the most standard thing since Wonder Bread, but I hardly think that its obscure syntax, and dumb-terminal orientation are the wave of the future. Some people (myself included) don't know a heck of a lot about Unix, and don't need to. I use it to read my mail, and do some simple editing, but that's all. People who use it all the time and/or don't/haven't used anything else, sometimes don't see that there are *lots* of other ways to build user interfaces. Please note that I don't work for any of the following vendors; I'm just making some observations. Many systems (Perq, Sun, Lisa, Lilith) use high-resolution bit-map screens where menus are not only fast, but they are small and precisely to the point in the current context. I've used the Lisa quite a bit, and am amazed both at the number of things I can do without ever touching the keyboard (which is almost never), and also at the number of things I don't have to remember. I was delighted to discover that I could sit down at the machine with no documentation or experience whatsoever, and create documents, graphs and drawings with **NO** help! Not only that, but the user interface is so remarkably consistent that I could jump from application to application and use the same "commands" I had already learned because the menus WERE THE SAME BETWEEN APPLICATIONS! If ever I didn't remember something, it was there on the menus to remind me. In addition, the manipulation of objects such as documents and graphs was direct and immediate. If I wanted to delete a document, I clicked the mouse and dragged the document over to the garbage can icon, and let go. To copy it, I just moved it to the floppy icon. This generalized superbly to 90% of the things I wanted to do. Since I do work for Wang, the next discussion is slightly biased. I've used the VS system for more than five years, and have never typed (or forgotten) a command, because the entire operating system, including utilities and applications is menu-driven via PF keys. The workstations have a 64K Z80 in them for local processing, so the full 24x80 screen goes up much faster than you can read or type. In this context, menus are fine even for experienced users. With the addition of type-ahead, you can type characters and program-function keys ahead of the system's response. It becomes a matter of muscle memory after awhile. I don't require short names because menu navigation is a matter of a single keystroke, and menus are rarely more than three or four levels deep. I think the broader issues of interface design, particularly regarding user mnemonics for casual users, are very important. I hope that with the advent of powerful desktop machines, the current arcane command languages will be replaced by direct manipulation of symbolic entities in the application domain, rendering the whole syntax issue obsolete. -- Jim Haungs -- {decvax,linus}!wivax!haungs -- Wang Institute Haungs.Wang-Inst@CSnet-Relay -- (617) 649-9731 Wang Laboratories, Mailstop 1379 1 Industrial Avenue Lowell, MA 01851 (617) 967-6430