On Sat, 2002-05-25 at 03:48, Seth Nickell wrote: > On Thu, 2002-05-23 at 08:41, David Moles wrote: > > On Thu, 2002-05-23 at 06:08, Calum Benson wrote: > > > Alex Larsson wrote: > > > > > > > Usability is important, and so is ease-of-learning. But they are not > > > > exactly the same, although they are quite related. > > > > > > Not pertaining to this discussion particularly, but for anyone who's > > > interested in such things, there does exist an official ISO definition > > > of "usability": "the effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction with > > > which a specified set of users can achieve a specified set of tasks in a > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > > > This is an interesting point and probably a good one to remember -- > > we can't talk about usability without answering the question "for > > whom?" For an experienced emacs user, emacs is extraordinarily > > usable -- an experienced emacs user can efficiently and effectively > > achieve and be satisified with a very large set of tasks. However, > > where ease of learning is concerned, for users with (e.g.) a post- > > Macintosh GUI background, emacs can be like trying to tie your shoes > > while blindfolded, handcuffed, and immersed in a vat of jelly. > > > > Is there an official statement anywhere as to who GNOME's audience > > is, or who GNOME's audiences are? I seem to hear at least three > > different arguments on this list: GNOME is for free software hackers; > > GNOME is for ex-Windows uers; GNOME is for the several billion people > > out there who have not yet had any exposure to computers. > > No. I've been trying to get people to the point that they will agree on > an audience because its hard for me to design when I don't know who I'm > designing for. I don't tihnk we can straddle all three categories well. Perhaps the question should be: "What users we don't expect to be using the system?". I can come up with one group of user who will not be using Gnome2 Linux much at all. The regular home users who might not even know how to install windows, will probably not use linux for years to come. The corporate desktop is off course another story. Linux on the corporate desktop seems viable in the foreseeable future. But even then perhaps only for the less demanding users, or for more technically skilled persons. Just a thought, Aschwin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part