Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!lavaca.uh.edu!uhnix1!sugar!ficc!peter From: peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.misc Subject: Re: Xerox sues Apple! Message-ID: <7340@ficc.uu.net> Date: 18 Dec 89 18:12:53 GMT References: <172@comcon.UUCP> <7326@ficc.uu.net> <9320@hoptoad.uucp> Reply-To: peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) Organization: Xenix Support, FICC Lines: 55 In article <9320@hoptoad.uucp> tim@hoptoad.UUCP (Tim Maroney) writes: > Spoken like a true techno-nerd, Peter. Nothing like starting an argument off with an insult to promote rational discussion. > I have personally observed > highly intelligent and skilled UNIX programmers who could not remember > from one minute to the next what each button on their three-button > mouse did. So, because X-windows has a horrible user interface then multi-button mice are bad. Have a look at some systems that use multiple buttons consistently, like the Xerox Star or the Amiga. > People find it intrinsically easier to keep mental distinctions > straight if there are significant differences between the things Like maybe each key on the keyboard had a different shape? I think you have oberved a phenomenon in isolation and applied your prejudices (learned from the Macintosh marketing literature) to it, rather than trying to figure out what the real problem was. > Part of the real-world metaphor approach to improving learning curves. > When working with a file on a real desktop, one almost always brings it > to the top of the stack first. Bt not always. And there are two seperate actions involved. On my desktop, I sometimes slide something out from the bottom of a pile a few inches. I can't do thet on the Mac. > [double-clicking] On the Xerox Star you run an application by dropping a document into a processor (mailbox, editor, printer, whatever). This is much more intuitive than double-clicking. > You really haven't looked into the > psychological basis of graphical interfaces at all, have you? Right. Just because I don't agree with you I must not have thought about it. > It seems your approach is simple. "If the Mac uses it, I'm against it." Not at all. There are *other* aspects of the Apple UI that are nice. Having scroll bars that vary in size according to the percentage of the objects displayed is nice. Click-and-drag for rubber-band lines is nice. Automatically detecting diskette insertion is nice. But the single- button mouse, and the kludges necessary to use it, isn't. -- `-_-' Peter da Silva. +1 713 274 5180. . 'U` Also or . "It was just dumb luck that Unix managed to break through the Stupidity Barrier and become popular in spite of its inherent elegance." -- gavin@krypton.sgi.com