Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!panda!husc6!uwvax!uwmacc!edwards
From: edwards@uwmacc.UUCP (mark edwards)
Newsgroups: net.cse
Subject: Re: CS vs. CE
Message-ID: <260@uwmacc.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 15-Sep-86 14:33:38 EDT
Article-I.D.: uwmacc.260
Posted: Mon Sep 15 14:33:38 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 27-Sep-86 11:01:02 EDT
References: <13500008@uiucdcsb> <916@usl.UUCP>
Reply-To: edwards@uwmacc.UUCP (mark edwards)
Organization: UWisconsin-Madison Academic Comp Center
Lines: 78
Keywords: CS, CE,  user interface, AI, other barbs.

In article <916@usl.UUCP> elg@usl.UUCP (Eric Lee Green) writes:
>
>>I would like to see requirements that take into account the importance
>>of user interfaces (graphics, psychology of programming) and
>>application areas other than numerical analysis such as data bases
>>and symbolic math.  Alot more research is needed in these other
>>areas and computer science will eventually be filled out to the
>>extent that the old war-horses of numerical analysis and electronics
>>will become less important.  I'm just getting a little impatient.
>
>1) numerical analysis: Some math should be looked at, since the very
>idea of a computer is an offshoot of the lamda calculas, Turing
>machine, and other mathematical topics, but spending semesters
>grinding through differential equations and linear algebra and other
>stuff that a programmer would never use is a Big Lose. Right now I'm
>working on a problem in regular expression evaluation that makes heavy
>use of set theory in order to really understand the problem and its
>execution, an argument that some higher math is indeed quite useful to
>a programmer.
>
>2) user interfaces, AI, etc.: I see a growing tendency of researchers
>in areas like AI/cognitive science to spend their time moping around
>thinking about vague generalities, and totally ignoring any thoughts
>about the implementation of their fanciful ideas... as for the
>importance of user interfaces, yes, it is important that the user be
>able to figure out how to use the software. Pictures are neat, but
>they don't do anything except sit there, and some people seem to be
>getting carried away figuring out fancy ways to put icons, pull-down
>menus, etc. on their programs, without putting equal thought into what
>their program is supposed to be doing. I think focusing too heavily on
>the user interface is perhaps being snooty, assuming that the user is
>a total brainless slug, and needs his complexity dripped with sugar to
>make it palatable. Let's face it, computer programs are complex
>things, and it will always take quite a bit of doing to operate
>anything that is complex.

    I guess there is a good argument against computer programs being
    complex , and will always take a bit of doing to operate.

    1)  IBM   CM/VMS it seems most things you do using it on a bare
	machine is complex. For an example, editing, compling and
	debugging a C program. Not tough but harder than UNIX.
        It seems that this supports your argument, but....


	Take UNIX a very complex operating system, ( is VM/CMS as
	complex as UNIX ???  I don't know.). But doing things here
	seems to make life simplier. Let's see there is "make", now
	who could live with out that. But wait its making a difficult,
	and complex task ( making sure all your files with changes get recompiled)
	EASY ( of course someone must setup a makefile).

   2)   Look at the first computers, there was not even a compiler
	around, they had to first, set switches on the front panel
	bit, by bit, then came cards and paper punches. Now tell me
	is this not complex. But low and behold, the user interface
	was made simpler, and we have compilers (even though every
	thing runs faster and is more doable in machine code) and
	video terminals to do screen editting !!!!!

  So I guess things that seem complex can be simplified and made 
  transparent to the users, or in other words BETTER USER INTERFACES.

  I am not saying that all user interfaces are good, some may in fact
  be frivolous. It appears that user interfaces, like AI, might be
  a good topic to branch off of comp. sci.

  Last thoughts:

   Picture yourself digging through all the news with out a nice
   tool like, rn, or vn, or whatever. A good user interface sure
   is worth its weight in programmers.

   mark

-- 
    {allegra, ihnp4, seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!edwards
    UW-Madison, 1210 West Dayton St., Madison WI 53706