Re: A Few Ideas

[Quantum Seep <qseep technojunkie com>]

On Fri, 18 Sep 1998, Tim Moore wrote:

> On Fri, 18 Sep 1998, J.W. Bizzaro wrote:
> 
> > Haukur Hreinsson <hawk@london.is> wrote:
> > ...
> > the "cryptic commands"?  If GNOME is to make Linux/UNIX on
> > par with Windows and the Mac in ease-of-use (as all these
> > magazine articles are claiming it will), shouldn't there be
> > a *graphical* way to do something like this? That's all
> > I'm saying.
> 
> Frankly, doing system administration of a Unix system is not and, IMO,
> will *never* be something that a newbie can handle. The superuser/normal

I see this argument all the time.  "Let's make a GUI way to do XYZ to make it
easy for the newbies."  "The newbies won't want to do XYZ, so let's not."

Did anyone ever think that the expert users might want a graphical way to do
XYZ?  That they'd rather not have to always jump into the shell?

Frankly, I think GUIs today don't nearly exploit their potential.  Shells
have evolved to do some pretty powerful things.  The UNIX philosophy says
each tool should "do one thing, and do it well."  Then, using powerful
synthesis mechanisms such as shell control constructs, pipes, and
environment variables, these tools can be combined to do whatever you want. 
I think the GUI could do the same thing, if we want it to.  Drag-n-drop is
one way.  It's a start.

Just as the newbie doesn't care about pipes in a shell, they could be
ignorant of the advanced GUI features, and be happy and smiling.

Instead, GUIs today cater to the newbie.  "This program does X, then Y, then
Z," complains the expert.  "I want to do X, then J, then Z."  "Sorry," the
GUI designers reply.  "Use the shell."  There has to be a way to make *both*
happy.

/-------- Quantum Seep, qseep@iname.com ---
  "His funny bone's connected to the M-bone"
   PGP fingerprint: 5B 3B 7B EC AA 5B 4B 7F  65 7D 2A CD 69 11 29 2A