Re: [Usability] Re: [Desktop_architects] Printing dialog and GNOME

[michael bernstein <michael simoniac com>]

On Dec 13, 2005, at 10:12 AM, Mike Shaver wrote:

> On 13-Dec-05, at 12:03 PM, Pedro M (Morphix user) wrote:
>
> > Easy to use and one command for more often task or action is not   
> > subjective.
>
> "Easy to use" is very subjective.  If you don't believe me, ask  
> 10,000 people if a given GNOME app is easy to use or not, and then  
> tell me which objective measure will pick out the wrong answers  
> from the right ones.


I had my mom try gnome.  I had my mom try os x.  I gave her my old  
powerbook when I got the newest model 3 weeks ago.  She's in love  
with it.  Why?  Why is it supposedly easier to use then gnome, where  
one of the large ideas behind gnome is usability?

I feel part of your next statement is the question that we have to  
ask.  On top of that, we should ask this: Why did people who switched  
*away* from GNOME (me as an example) switch from GNOME, what did they  
switch to, and what are the advantages of the system they switched to.

Honestly, I don't think graphics drivers or anything else would have  
kept me using gnome at the time I switched.  Device support was a non- 
issue.  Application support wasn't even that much of an issue since  
there were apps that were good enough (I'm a programmer, so good  
enough for me is *very* subjective) for everyday usage and some that  
were stellar.  I think the underlying problem is the overall feel of  
GNOME, and I think it applies to KDE as well.  They just don't feel  
very good.  Windows isn't exactly the best example of a "feel good"  
interface either, but for most people they are so used to it that it  
doesn't matter anymore.  Vista, from what I've seen is much more user  
friendly while still allowing quite a bit of customization.
>

> I think it's very important for everyone involved in some form of  
> Linux desktop thought-leadership (even people like myself who have  
> no leadership role whatsoever, and are just ISV reps) to step away  
> from "I would like".  You and I are not interesting GNOME users, in  
> part because we already _are_ GNOME users.  The interesting GNOME  
> users are the ones that haven't tried it yet, and we need to figure  
> out why they haven't.  There are lots of things that I want in  
> GNOME, but if they aren't going to bring a hundred thousand of my  
> closest friends along as well, I would hope that nobody goes out of  
> their way to do them.

I personally think that one should look at the successes of various  
opensource applications and compare them to the commercial  
alternatives and examine why certain interfaces are better.   
Personally, I ditched using any kind of linux based desktop for  
opensource development awhile ago for os x (I was a NeXT user before  
that when I was in high school) and although one can argue that OS X  
is constrictive in nature (Steve Jobs has been quoted that he doesn't  
want too many advanced features or whatnot) there is still enough  
wiggle room from a user standpoint that the system can be customized  
nicely and still allow people to have that underlying unix feel.   
That in my opinion is why we see so many opensource enthusiasts  
programming for os x (the interfaces and code for some os x apps such  
as adium are far ahead of more mature projects such as gaim) - at  
least in my opinion.

Why is it that a younger application with fewer developers feels and  
looks more clean while offering the same apparent functionality as a,  
in general, quality application?  Is it the underlying window manager  
or is it the thought process of the developers and their general  
usage of a system that somewhat pushes good usability design in  
applications?  From my experiences, after learning the cocoa and  
win32 api's, I feel that I am a more apt UI developer on other  
platforms as well due to my usage of other systems.  I think there is  
the possibility that people are becoming too focused on a single api  
and neglect the lessons we learn from other applications and their  
interfaces.    On top of that, I think that the GNOME/KDE developers  
tend to lose focus on what the average user feels.  Yes, in the  
business world good enough suffices as long as the applications on  
top of the system are valuable (see anything put out by sun).   
However, more and more home users are looking for something that just  
works, looks pretty with its antialiased text, but can scale to the  
level of power they require out of their computer.

I'm sorry, but Linus saying that something doesn't focus correctly in  
his opinion is a poor example of what mom and pop will want.  They  
just want it to work.  They want it clean, slick, and functional.   
The ipod is a great example of this.  The xbox 360 is trying to  
follow this route.  It's hard to be the jack of everything (look at  
windows and how it fails at *many* things but is highly successful at  
others, OS X and how it is somewhat a niche product that really won't  
make its way into the enterprise server area anytime soon, and then  
linux - which is somewhat limited to the server room at this point or  
to programmers who feel comfortable with it.  I can't name a single  
parent of any of my friends who has ever used linux.  I've had my  
parents try it and honestly, they aren't stupid and hold college  
degrees (and advanced degrees such as medical), but really disliked  
the interface.

I'm not suggesting one would copy aqua's window manager, but it does  
have it's positives and negatives.  However, from a "user feel"  
standpoint it's quite possibly the most enjoyable experience.  Now in  
all honesty, I wish GNOME or KDE were that, because I'd rather not  
have to pay apple for updates.

The best way to solve the issues presented is to have non-linux  
developers develop the UI.  You may say, that sounds ludicrous and  
this reply is getting extremely long and pointless about things that  
have most likely been repeatedly touched upon.  However, for linux to  
be successful on the desktop for normal users, normal users have to  
feel comfortable with it.  Who better to have design it, point out  
the flaws, etc. then normal users?  If it would be possible to get  
everyday people involved in the UI design (either via feedback,  
drawing pictures of what they think it would feel like, etc.) I think  
a lot of headway would be made.  You don't need 3034045$ and  
usability experts to figure this stuff out.  You just need to ask  
your mom what she thinks and at the same time allow methods for  
people to get more power out of the manager.

The interesting gnome users are your mother, your grandparents, your  
neighbor, your doctor, your dentist, your cleaning lady, etc.  THOSE  
are the people that purchase computers in their homes and fuel the  
market.   Those are the people that will decide whether or not linux  
is accepted on the desktop or not.  In all honesty, I see very little  
input from that side of the fence in any opensource project.

People wonder why mac fans are so rabid.  It's because OS X is geared  
towards meeting the needs of the end users vs. the needs of the  
programmers.

</end rant> (sorry for making this so long - I hope I made some sort  
of sense.  If not, I apologize.)