RE: Different, Original user level proposal. Was: Proposal for default panel layout w/ some modifications to thepanel

["Gerry Chu" <gerry-list gerrychu com>]

Responding to the key combo being hidden:

Well, you could put "To activate options, hold down ALT" at the bottom of
windows and in manuals. But the fact that it is hidden isn't really a big
deal. As long as every program consistently obeys the key combo, then once
the key combo is learned, it is hard to forget. It's like the close window
button: usually an "X". The meaning is hidden. But since every program uses
the "X" to close the window, users have no problem with it.

Responding to perpetual intermediates:

Yes, I throughly believe most people are perpetual intermediates.

So why did I only include beginner and advanced levels in my user level
proposal?

Let's first of all establish that in referring to user levels, I am refering
to user levels in regards to configuration options.

I wouldn't even use the words beginner and advanced anywhere. They're not
needed. All users need to know to use the system--they don't have to
classify themselves into a user level--is "To activate options, hold down
ALT"

Perpetual intermediates are intermediates in regards to their use of the
computer. Being an intermediate does not mean that you only like to tweak
"intermediate options" ! Beyond choice of desktop background, I doubt that
most people, perpetual intermediates included, care about changing UI
options at all. They might want to change it to be more like their old OS,
but such an option only makes GNOME a slave to the UI of Windows.

It is easy to differentiate between people who change options and those who
don't. It is harder to differentiate between the options that a so-called
"intermediate" group changes and a so-called "advanced" group changes.

Besides, I don't like UI options at all. Do we really make things an option
to benefit a specific class of users, or do we do it because we can't agree
on this list?


Gerry