Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:35:52 -0500
From:      Technical Information <tech_info@threespace.com>
To:        FreeBSD Chat <chat@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: EzBSD aint for me! Was: A breath of fresh air..
Message-ID:  <4.3.2.7.2.20011212181551.015734a8@threespace.com>
In-Reply-To: <15382.34479.632853.153669@guru.mired.org>
References:  <20011211140107.A67653@FreeBSD.org> <0112071641320B.01380@stinky.akitanet.co.uk> <01121010202100.00345@stinky.akitanet.co.uk> <20011211144049.A14693@acidpit.org> <20011211214943.A4489@tisys.org> <15382.29599.349155.309028@guru.mired.org> <20011211230257.A5157@tisys.org> <20011211140107.A67653@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 05:20 PM 12/11/2001, Mike Meyer wrote:
>You are both right. However, whenever I try to claim that Windows
>isn't as user-friendly as FreeBSD because it won't do what I, as a
>user, want it to do (see the ratpoison port for an example of what I
>want it to do) people tell me I'm crazy.

Well, I won't say you're crazy, but I disagree slightly with your point. :-)

I think that what you're referring to as "user friendly" is what I refer to 
as "flexible"--being adaptable to a variety of tasks and conditions.  Many 
times the cost of flexible software is that it's a little harder to learn, 
i.e., a little *less* user-friendly.

But most of us on this list are atypical computer users.  We'd gladly trade 
a limiting cookie-cutter design for a more powerful, flexible design any 
day.  But this ignores that we are in the computing minority.  And having a 
rather de-facto standard design elements certainly helps the masses even if 
it is constricting to the individual.  There's nothing like sitting down at 
another UNIX user's personal computer and trying to get accustomed to his 
personalized mouse button mapping, follow-the-pointer window focusing, or 
even directory structure.  There's a reason why no car company tries to 
alter the arrangement of the clutch, gas, and brake pedals, for instance.

But my litmus test for ease-of-use tends to be this: How quickly could 
someone with relevant skills but zero training sit down and figure out how 
to accomplish a given task?  I'm sure anyone on this list could plop down 
at any Windows box and quickly get a browser, e-mail, spreadsheet, 
you-name-it going and be doing practical work in a matter of minutes.  How 
long would it take a Windows user to figure out how to do the same on a 
UNIX system?  I shudder to think.

Of course, one of the things that continues to confuse me about this 
ongoing thread is that typically when people cite their reason for loving 
one OS more than another, they bring up a pet application or feature that 
has nothing inherently to do with the operating system of choice.  X 
Windows System-style focusing?  Your favorite application XYZ?  Multiple 
simultaneous users?  Remote administration?  Yeah, the other operating 
systems have got all that too *if* you're willing to learn to use it.

I guess that, ultimately, what's user-friendly or easy-to-use depends on 
the user.

--Chip Morton


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4.3.2.7.2.20011212181551.015734a8>