C++ problem -Problems
zhouhui at wam.umd.edu
Tue Aug 31 09:12:57 PDT 2004
On Tue, 31 Aug 2004, Miguel Bazdresch wrote:
> * Hui Zhou <zhouhui at wam.umd.edu> [2004-08-31 14:50]:
> > Look at the number of people who are happy (or not
> > hating) windows, don't you guys think there is parts of it are *good* or
> > at least worth learning from?
> Thing is, I don't see anything in the windows GUI that is truly
> original, except maybe some cosmetic details, or some incremental
> improvements in some areas. So, when you talk about learning from
> windows, I'm not sure what you're talking about.
Come on, you know what I am talking about :)
So it is not learning from windows, how about learning from windows that
how it put things together and made system quite accessible?B (maybe this
is not the right word again, too lazy to think what it should be :-)
Original does make a big deal on a thing's true value, but being original
should not be the primary goal of a design if it's not just for
competition. Look at the history of microsoft, tell me what's the value of
original? Attually, little in linux is original either.
> The windows GUI has the merit of having distilled elements of many other
> systems into a somewhat coherent, consistent, very minimalistic
> interface. I think the 'minimalistic' part is sometimes overlooked --
> the windows gui is extremely feature-poor.
I agree here in some degree, but I won't use the extreme words. Browse
through freshmeat and you will find tons of design more minimal or
feature-poor than windows (even the part supplied by M$)
> > I believe, for some time now, your above statements are the reason that
> > many linux developers avoid GUI, disregard the difficulty level. Because
> > once they try to design a GUI, it always at some parts behave (if not
> > looks) like windows, which make them loathe.
> As I said above, it's actually the other way around.
Windows developers tring to avoid the resemblance of linux? or Windows
developers going for GUI because in console it would behave like linux?
Could you show me the other way around :)
> > OK, what is a good UI anyway if intuitive is not one of its criteria?
> What about giving me control to do what I want, quickly?
> > There is nothing wrong that the linux community think windows is all junk,
> > and there is nothing wrong that some people enjoy console more than
> > anything else. I just don't think a system or software developed by this
> > group of geniuses will ever be remotely as popular as windows --- at least
> > not in this age.
> The question to ask here is: is that because 99.99% of computers come
> with windows pre-installed, *and* because the windows GUI is at least
> serviceable, or is it because people actually see the options and choose
> it over the competition.
I am afraid that even windows is not pre-installed, and windows is free as
linux, most users will choose windows. See the options? If linux took much
more steep learning curve to see the advantage, many people will just
avoid seeing it.
> > Also, one needs to be aware that many open-source projects don't have
> acquiring large popularity as an objective. Many, many people couldn't
> care less if the rest of the world keeps chugging along using windows or
> whatever, as long as they can keep using what works for them. These
> people tend not to be very loud so one can end up with the impression
> that world domination is something we need to strive for.
Completely agreed and that is what I am saying. The thread went on as
someone sighs at people blindly choosing linux, and I am telling from my
observations that actually quite a portion of linux developers didn't
intend those *blind* people to choose linux. And for some developers that
do dream about world domination, the success of microsoft should be
seriously considered after the big laugh at the jokes.
More information about the lfs-chat