Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!ima!minya!jc From: jc@minya.UUCP Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards Subject: Re: Request for human interface design anecdotes Message-ID: <421@minya.UUCP> Date: Mon, 30-Nov-87 23:10:43 EST Article-I.D.: minya.421 Posted: Mon Nov 30 23:10:43 1987 Date-Received: Thu, 3-Dec-87 22:43:54 EST References: <10579@brl-adm.ARPA> Organization: home Lines: 28 Summary: Yeah, and we've forgotten the original question... In article <10579@brl-adm.ARPA>, bzs@bu-cs.bu.EDU (Barry Shein) writes: > > Gak, this discussion comes up every few months doesn't it? And, > predictably, not one poster ever offers anything beyond the thinnest > anecdotal evidence. No research papers or even informal, controlled > studies, nothing. Just introspective, armchair psychology. Yeah, and have you noticed that most of the postings have casually ignored the original question, and just gone on to a trivial discussion of novices who can't handle rm? This is a unix.wizards discussion? I'm disappointed with y'all! Here I was expecting some really juicy examples of bad system design. All that's appeared is a hacker's version of Trivial Pursuit. > I do know that AT&T has made MegaSagans of US$'s with a user interface > that requires people to type in long strings of digits to contact > their friends and business associates. And IBM makes similar income from JCL. Perhaps good user interfaces are a bad marketing idea. I mean, if you want to be the size of Apple, maybe you can sell a good user interface. But if you want to be the size of IBM or AT&T, you should sell incomprehensible interfaces. Which has the market rewarded best? [OK, so I've confused cause and effect; let's see the evidence that I'm wrong. :-] -- John Chambers <{adelie,ima,maynard,mit-eddie}!minya!{jc,root}> (617/484-6393)