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)