>
I talk to users all the time who are made to feel stupid by their computers. Are they putting too much emotion into the issue? You and I work with computers for a living. We don't mind accomodating to them, but most people out there use them because they have to to get something done. When the computer behaves in a way that confuses them or gets in their way, it interferes with their work. It does leave them feeling frustrated, angry, stupid or other negative emotions.
>

To be honest, I have never dealt with folks that are impacted by their computers to the extent they need therapy. It is like people who get emotional about cars. It is a piece of metal, to be exhanged every few years. It is not something that you should get emotional about. The same is true with a computer. Folks that have tendencies to feel angry, stupid, etc, often suffer from low self esteem. That said, the computer/technology isn't the issue with these type of people. If folks get confused, why is always the computer's fault. Perhaps they don't know how to use the software???

You are advocate/defender for the user. This is the tact that over-cited/over-quoted author Alan Cooper takes. I understand and appreciate the stance you are taking. However, it is a position (liberal) that I don't agree with. That said, we will agree to disagree..


>I was on the phone yesterday with a woman with whom I'm working on a community project. Providing computer support for her is not my job, but I end up doing so regularly because the interfaces for the tools she needs to use so bad that she can't get her work done and she gets frustrated. This is not a stupid woman. I suspect that everyone here can tell many such stories.
>

Again, the problem is with software and the programmer, not the tools that built the programmer used to build the software. Or, it could be that she does not know how to use the software....There are lots of folks like this. However, this is not germane to this discussion. This discussion was centered around web-interfaces and what makes them good or bad.

I fear we are getting into a general discussion that will be a precursor to the a User's UI Bill of Rights....


>
My work in the area of web development is irrelevant to this conversation. The comment that set it off was that I found the interface of the UT difficult _as a user_. However, if it makes you happier for me to say it explicitly, I haven't done web development.
>

Except for one thing. You extrapolated the UT interface to include all web-interfaces. If you have problems with the UT interface, fine. A lot of people do, and at time, I also have problems. However, to indict an entire platform and the whole paradigm behind that platform based on the experiences in a few websites seems shortsighted to me...

>
Wrong, my assertion is that we should hold the designers of web interfaces to the same high standards that we have for the designers of other interfaces. That is, that they must design _user-centered_ interfaces.
>

First of, who is WE. Second, do we really hold designers of other interfaces to "high standards"? If we did, we would not continually see bad UI. With respect to the standards, would you mind enumerating what those "high standards" are? And further, what body promulgated those standards?


>
That's a contradiction in terms. Document-centric interfaces should not depend heavily on the mouse, in my view. Do you use the mouse a lot when you're working in, say, Word? I keep my hands on the keyboard there.
>

I said "lends-itself" to documents... I did not say "depend". And yes, I use the mouse to a large extent with Word and other Windows Software. Sure, at times I rely on the keyboard. However, I see the mouse as a stop beyond what we had to deal with in DOS/Pre-Windows UI. The Wheel is a great innovation.

>> Have you ever used the mouse wheel?
>
>Yes, I have. I haven't decided yet whether I like it or not.
>

Is it really *that* complicated of a decision????


>> However, your opinion puts you in an extreme minority.
>
>In fact, reading this thread, I saw a number of others who agreed that we've let web designers get away with sloppy design.
>

Again, is the issue with the tools or the programmers. I suspect we may be arguing different points. You indicted web interfaces. In fact, your indictment rests with programmers. I'll agree with you there. However, there is nothing inherently bad with web-interfaces. The issue again is with the programmers.

As for letting web-designers do things, you are taking the position that you have some level of control over what web-designers are doing. If you go to a web site that somebody else pays for, what right's/authority do you think you have? Try this excercise... Take the end of your index finger and touch the end of your thumb. The number that makes is the number of rights you have.

Hey, if you don't like it, complain. However, lets not making this a Jihad of sorts in which it pits the self-proclaimed defender of the user - you - against the web-designers of the world.


>>If your mouse is broken, go buy a new mouse.....
>
>What if my mouse is broken and I need to get work done _today_? What if I'm on the road and there's a problem with my notebook? I've had this stuff happen. Haven't you? I've had to navigate in Windows with the keyboard only.
>

Well, if you are a "professional" software developer, chances are you have a few mice laying around. It is all about having a backup/contingency plan. It is like the folks that bitch about losing data when their system crashes. I ask, 'did you have a backup". Usually, the answer is no. To which I say, "I bet the next time this happens, you won't forget to backup your system...."

If you are on the road and you run into a problem with your notebook, you pop in your spare hard-drive. If your livelihood depends on your computer, and if you are a "professional" software developer, you do have a spare hard drive....right? Don't you carry around your windows, office , etc CD's when you are on the road? You are a professional software developer...right????

I often discuss with others how folks take a "home-computing" mentality to the business of "professional software development".

That said, somebody who gets hung up on the things you describe, I would classify them as an amateur "trying" to play in the professional sandbox. If I have a NIC-Card that goes bad when I am on the road, I will go and buy one. Same for a modem or any other device for that matter. If my PC goes bad, at some point, you have suck it up and deal with it. If I am on the road, if it means I have to rent a PC, so bit it. You do what it takes to get the job done.

Simply put, you need to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat... you don't whine and say "Oh, my computer is broken, what am I going to do now????" That is what amateurs do...< s >...

If you really want to talk about holding our peers, and each other to a higher standard, we can have that discussion. However, you may not like my viewpoints....