Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!think!mit-eddie!mit-amt!mob
From: mob@mit-amt.MIT.EDU (Mario O. Bourgoin)
Newsgroups: net.ai
Subject: Re: Xerox Dandelion vs. Symbolics?
Message-ID: <322@mit-amt.MIT.EDU>
Date: Wed, 10-Sep-86 06:35:40 EDT
Article-I.D.: mit-amt.322
Posted: Wed Sep 10 06:35:40 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 10-Sep-86 19:52:43 EDT
References: <7608@tekecs.UUCP> <3500016@uiucdcsp>
Organization: MIT Media Lab, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 26
Summary: Does this mean that you agree?

In article <3500016@uiucdcsp>, hogge@uiucdcsp.CS.UIUC.EDU writes:
> >...I spent about 4 days using
> >the Symbolics, and my initial reaction was that the user interface was out
> >of the stone age.....
> 
> Four days *might* be enough time to get familiarize yourself with the help
> mechanisms, if that's specifically what you were concentrating on doing.

Four days to learn the help mechanisms?   Come on, an  acceptable user
interface should give you control  of help within  minutes _not days_.
Seriously  folks, it took  me  less than 10   seconds to  learn  about
ZMACS's apropos on the old CADRs and before the end of the day, I knew
about a lot more.  Have you ever used the "help" key?  The Symbolics's
software isn't much  different from the CADR's.  I'll  grant that  the
lispm's presentation of information isn't that obvious or elegant  but
it isn't stone age and doesn't require 4 days to get a handle on.

If you're arguing internals, I haven't worked with the Dandelion  so I
can't provide an opinion on it. The CADR's user interface software was
certainly featureful and appeared to my eyes to come  from a different
school than what  I later saw of  Xerox's software.  It  is useful and
manipulable but didn't look  intended to be  programmed by anyone just
off the street.   If you want  to  learn the  internals  of  the  user
interface, _then_ i'll grant you four days (and more).

--Mario O. Bourgoin