Article View: comp.sys.mac
Article #44171Re: User interface(was Re: Xerox sues Apple!!!)
From: Larry Phillips
Date: Sun, 17 Dec 1989 23:12
Date: Sun, 17 Dec 1989 23:12
91 lines
4996 bytes
4996 bytes
In <5828@internal.Apple.COM>, casseres@apple.com (David Casseres) writes:
>In article <JACOBS.89Dec18090720@cmos.cs.utah.edu> jacobs@cs.utah.edu
>(Steven R. Jacobs) writes:
>> Menus and mice are great when you are first learning to use a system, but
>> they get in the way of experienced users.
>
>Sorry, but this is an absurd statement. There are many thousands of
>experienced users who are very happy with the Mac interface.
Yes, they are experienced.. in running Macs. There are millions of folks
experienced in doing a lot of things with less than the best tools for the job.
It doesn't follow that using inapropriate tools is A Good Thing.
>> ...An ideal system should
>> allow the user to use _either_ the mouse or the keyboard, based on the
>> preference of the user.
>
>This may be so, but the expense of developing two user interfaces for one
>system would be rather high. The real benefit of a type-in user interface
>comes in being able to write a script of many commands to be executed as a
>batch, and in applications where this makes sense, the application
>developers have provided macro facilities that serve the purpose. For
>programmers, Apple's own MPW offers a highly customizable interface that
>give you just about as much type-in as you want, or as little. There is
>no real need to provide something as specialized as a type-in interface at
>the system level, forcing everyone to pay for it.
Funny you should mention that. If having two user interfaces is so costly, why
are Macs so high priced compared to Amigas?
>> Neither the Mac nor the PC are even close to
>> ideal in this regard. Apple had a great opportunity to make an ideal
>> system with the Mac, but they blew it by forcing the mouse on everyone.
>
>There is nothing in the Mac that forces any application to use the mouse.
>In the early days of the Mac, quite a few developers did quick ports of
>their PC applications, with type-in interfaces, to the Mac. Guess what?
>Nobody would buy them. SOMEBODY wants the mouse whole lot!
In the early days of the Mac, Apple did not see fit to provide cursor keys. At
that time, when it was pointed out that cursor keys might be A Good Thing, the
rationalizations of the Mac owners could be heard proclaiming the superiority of
the mouse for such things. Don't seem to hear that too much any more with
respect to cursor keys. Now it's canged to things like "Providing two
interfaces is too costly", and in general, "The mouse is good for everything I
can do with the mouse, and I don't need to do anything I can't do with the
mouse." Sounds real familiar.
>> Sure, lots of applications will give you a choice in many commands, but
>> this is not part of the standard interface -- you can't even start up
>> the application without using the mouse. This is a bug, not a feature.
>
>No, friend, this is a feature that you don't like.
Call it a feature if you want. I'll go along with it being a bug. Why is it
that every user of a machine with blatant deficiencies wants to justify it and
drag everyone else down to the same level?
>> If keyboards are so evil, then
>> why do so many Mac applications have keystroke "shortcuts" for most
>> of their commands?
>
>Because that is a standard part of the Mac user interface.
>
>> Again, giving the user a _choice_ is a better solution.
>
>Talk to the application developers.
That statement speaks volumes. I'd rather have the manufacturer provide the
right tools, a choice of tools, in ways that allow the user to decide for
himself. You'd rather be bound by the fascism of the manufacturer telling you
what user interface is best for you, and removing choice.
I see no inherent difference between the IBM PC(lones) and the Mac, in that the
OS only provides one way of communicating with the machine, leaving the
workarounds to the application programmers and addon interface writers. Even
with its two user interfaces, the Amiga has its share of folks writing their
own versions of them. That should tell you and Apple something about trying to
force a single type of interface down the throats of the computing public.
-larry
--
" All I ask of my body is that it carry around my head."
- Thomas Alva Edison -
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| // Larry Phillips |
| \X/ lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca -or- uunet!van-bc!lpami!lphillips |
| COMPUSERVE: 76703,4322 -or- 76703.4322@compuserve.com |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<920@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!van-bc!Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!van-bc! From: lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca (Larry Phillips) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac Subject: Re: User interface(was Re: Xerox sues Apple!!!) Message-ID: <920@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca> Date: 17 Dec 89 23:12:00 GMT Lines: 91 Return-Path: <lpami!lphillips> To: van-bc!rnews