HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva)
Subject: Re: GUIs Considered Harmful
Keywords: n
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 16:25:40 GMT

In article <17j149INNi9r@stanley.cis.Brown.EDU> plutchak@pilsner.geo.brown.edu (Joe Six-pack) writes:
> In article <id.Q4NS.1SE@ferranti.com> peter@ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
> >In article <1992Aug21.182548.2932@nntp.uoregon.edu> johnm@cajal.uoregon.edu (John Martin) writes:
> >> For kicks sometime, take a person who is used to a CLI and put them on a Mac.
> >> I guarantee that they will not be able to do *anything* useful until they have
> >> either read the manual or experimented a lot.

> >To put it bluntly, this is complete balderdash.

>    Not completely.  How does a CLI person know how to do common things
> like file copying, renaming, moving, etc?

Try it and see.

> I *still* can't remember
> whether dragging & dropping a file icon between directory windows
> on the Macintosh will do a move or a copy, and have trouble remembering
> what bizarre key/mouse combinations it takes to do "the other one."

What bizarre combination? You select copy from the menu.

> At least with VMS and Unix you have 'HELP' and 'man' if you forget
> how to, for example, get confirmations on file deletion.

Well, you used to.

% man: Command not found.

:-<

> (And don't get me started on the idiocy of insisting on a one-button
> mouse, when it just forces you into keyboard overload mode--
> shift-ctrl-click-unshift-drag-doubleclick-unctrl-applekey. :-)

Oh, I don't disagree with that. It's as bad as Emacs' Control Meta
Cokebottle keys.
-- 
Peter da Silva                                               `-_-'
$ EDIT/TECO LOVE                                              'U` 
%TECO-W-OLDJOKE Not war?                        Have you hugged your wolf today?
Ferranti Intl. Ctls. Corp.      Sugar Land, TX  77487-5012       +1 713 274 5180
Xref: sparky alt.religion.computers:689 comp.human-factors:2071 comp.windows.misc:1337 comp.windows.news:630 comp.windows.x:16187
From: kelly@nmt.edu (kelly)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.computers,comp.human-factors,comp.windows.misc,comp.windows.news,comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: GUIs Considered Harmful
Date: 4 Sep 92 01:37:25 GMT
Article-I.D.: nmt.1992Sep4.013725.16493
Organization: New Mexico Tech

KR = Ken Rawlings <krawling@banana.ucs.indiana.edu>
MN = Matthias Neeracher <neeri@iis.ethz.ch>


KR        #1: Send a postscript file to the printer.

MN  Can't be done without a special program, but I know how to find it :-)

KR        #2: See this file sitting on the Hard Drive? Execute it. No, I don't
KR            care that you think it's a "Document", just trust me and run the
KR            damn thing.

MN  So convert these .hqx files with Stuffit, or Compact Pro, or
MN  tickle. Would you expect to read uuencoded files on unix without
MN  uudecode ?

But at least most UNIX systems come bundled with uudecode ... yet to
get ``higher productivity'' or downright usability out of the Mac,
you've got to add these third party products.  It's even worse for a
PC.  After the second TSR and the third CONFIG.SYS entry, the next
little utility to make your life easier becomes nothing more than an
incompatibility generator or a machine crasher.

But, we've digressed from the GUI issue.

--k
Newsgroups: alt.religion.computers
From: nelson@reed.edu (Nelson Minar)
Subject: Re: GUIs Considered Harmful
Organization: Reed College, Portland, OR
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 18:45:09 GMT

We have a lot of NeXT machines with 8 megs of RAM in them. We were
told that we could get them with that little RAM, and they'd work just
fine. WRONG. Sure, they work, but good god are they slow. 16 megs
seems to be minimal, and 24 megs preferred.

NeXT is going the way of the Macintosh.
-- 
                __
nelson@reed.edu \/           Fortune presents gifts not according to the book
From: bri@pegasus.mit.edu (Brian D. Carlstrom)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.computers
Subject: Re: GUIs Considered Harmful
Keywords: n
Date: 26 Aug 92 20:34:39 GMT
Organization: mit

>Once upon a time, there was a complete development environment with editor,
>compiler, linker and overlay manager.  It was called Turbo-Pascal version
>3.00 from Borland for the PC machine.
not only the PC, but CP/M systems as well...
>It fitten on one diskette and the size of that complete development
>environment was:  40k.  Forty Kilobytes.
Once upon a time? i know people who still use 3.0 for quick hacking
and for the editor. i myself soemtimes accidentally use the wordstar
commands in emacs :^)
>einari@rhi.hi.is

-bri
Newsgroups: alt.religion.computers,comp.windows.misc,comp.windows.news,comp.windows.x,comp.human-factors
From: ghm@ccadfa.cc.adfa.oz.au (Geoff Miller)
Subject: Re: GUIs Considered Harmful
Organization: Australian Defence Force Academy, Canberra, Australia
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 23:32:27 GMT

neeri@iis.ethz.ch (Matthias Neeracher) writes:

>.... The Mac GUI doesn't get in the way of a
>programmer wanting to do this. Two further examples of combined GUI/command
>line programs are the MPW Shell (A development environment) and the A/UX shell
>(a Un*x shell), which are command line oriented but allow the use to specify
>command line options with a dialog instead.

But these are things you have to buy, not a part of the Mac GUI as such.
So what you're saying is that after buying a Mac (which is already 
overpriced for what it provides), if I want an acceptable interface I
have to buy _more_ software.

OK, someone working full-time on Mac software development may find it
worth while to get the MPW Shell, but I question whether even the power
users would.

>The medium and high level user usually knows how to extend the user interface
>to his/her liking. I don't wnat to offend anybody, but I think most of the
>complaints about the fixed nature of the Mac UI are made by people who are
>power users of other machines, but casual users of the Mac.

But I thought that the great advantage of the Mac was supposed to be that
it provided power to the casual user.

Geoff Miller (g-miller@adfa.oz.au)  |   Don't steal.  The government
Computer Centre                     |   hates competition.
Australian Defence Force Academy    |   (via Jeff Cooper)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.computers
From: kilroy@acme.gen.nz (earthbound misfit, I)
Subject: Re: GUIs Considered Harmful
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 92 08:33:45 GMT
Organization: ACME BBS - Public Access Usenet, Palmerston North, New Zealand
Summary: Ignore this post! Old computer nerd joke ahead!
Reply-To: kilroy@acme.gen.nz (earthbound misfit)

andy@research.canon.oz.au (Andy Newman) writes:

> -- 
> Andy Newman (andy@research.canon.oz.au)		"int - God's own type"

But but but I was told that God is Real.

						- k
						(I know. But at least it's
						 appropriate for the newsgroup)

-- 
Craig Harding            kilroy@acme.gen.nz             ACME BBS +64 6 3551342
"Jub'f Xvob?"
Xref: sparky alt.religion.computers:681 comp.human-factors:2058 comp.windows.misc:1328 comp.windows.news:622 comp.windows.x:16148
From: nazgul@alphalpha.com (Kee Hinckley)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.computers,comp.human-factors,comp.windows.misc,comp.windows.news,comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: GUIs Considered Harmful
Date: 3 Sep 92 21:29:38 GMT
Article-I.D.: alphalph.1992Sep3.212938.6346
Organization: Alfalfa Software, Inc.
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

krawling@banana.ucs.indiana.edu (Ken Rawlings) writes:
>         #1: Send a postscript file to the printer. Just shove that baby down
PS downloaders are available from Adobe and may PD locations.  But you seem
to be asking the Mac to supply everyone one of your needs perfectly.  Frankly
you can't do the opposite thing on Unix without getting outside software
(or writing your own either).  Try printing a text file to a postscript printer.
That's a bit more common a desire.

>         #2: See this file sitting on the Hard Drive? Execute it. No, I don't
...
>         These are two _real_, non contrived problems I have encountered
This isn't contrived?  If you want to download software then you should
be using programs that know how to download software.  You can't execute
it anymore than you can execute a uuencoded file on Unix without using
uudecode.

-- 
						nazgul@alfalfa.com

I'm not sure which upsets me more: that people are so unwilling to accept
responsibility for their own actions, or that they are so eager to regulate
everyone else's.
Xref: sparky alt.religion.computers:639 comp.windows.misc:1285 comp.windows.x:16023 comp.human-factors:1995
From: dsmith@aa.cad.slb.com (J. Daniel Smith)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.computers,comp.windows.misc,comp.windows.x,comp.human-factors
Subject: Re: GUIs Considered Harmful
Date: 2 Sep 92 03:01:09 GMT
Organization: Schlumberger CAD/CAM; Ann Arbor, MI (USA)

[I've removed "comp.windows.news" from the Newsgroups: line... JDS]

In <1992Aug21.214738.22848@sei.cmu.edu> goodsenj@ajpo.sei.cmu.edu (John Goodsen) writes:
>       GUI      CLI       Callable Interface
>
>        |        |          |
>        |        |          |
>        +--------+----------+
>                 |
>            
>             Application
>
>This isn't always make sense, in particular when design
>applications which inherently are graphical in nature
>such as CAD systems, CASE tools (to some degree), etc...
Actually, even large CAD systems can come pretty close to this ideal
in many respects.  

We're in the process of putting a Motif user interface on our
CAD/CAM/CAE system; one of the things that is making the job easier is
the fact that large portions of the underlying system can be controled
via a CLI or a Callable Interface.

   Dan
-- 
============================================================================
J. Daniel Smith                     Internet: dsmith@aa.cad.slb.com
Schlumberger CAD/CAM                          dsmith@aaaca1.sinet.slb.com
Ann Arbor, Michigan (USA)               UUCP: uunet!sharkey!applga!dsmith
Newsgroups: alt.religion.computers,comp.windows.misc
From: andy@research.canon.oz.au (Andy Newman)
Subject: Re: GUIs Considered Harmful
Keywords: n
Organization: Canon Information Systems Research Australia
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 08:34:10 GMT

peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva) writes:
>(then there's the question of WHY IT TAKES SO MUCH GODDAMN MEMORY... but that's
> apparently considered normal these days... I understand WNT will require 8 MB)

This is something a few of us discuss quite a lot. Although not
really old hands we've been around these beasts for 15yrs or so and
are amazed at the memory required by some systems. The machines we've
got at CISRA need well over 16Mb before they start working reasonably.
The machine I'm using (well known black computer) didn't start being
responsive until it had 32Mb! These figures seem quite incredible to
us who remember running 50 people+ in 6Mb on a VAX 780 running UNIX!
Okay it was pretty slow and we only had ASCII terminals but it was
pretty much as useful (well nearly:-) Is it just that the memory
management has become pretty terrible these days or what?

-- 
Andy Newman (andy@research.canon.oz.au)		"int - God's own type"
Xref: sparky alt.religion.computers:579 comp.windows.misc:1217 comp.windows.news:534 comp.windows.x:15757 comp.human-factors:1915
From: zwicky@erg.sri.com (Elizabeth Zwicky)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.computers,comp.windows.misc,comp.windows.news,comp.windows.x,comp.human-factors
Subject: Re: GUIs Considered Harmful
Date: 27 Aug 92 22:40:11 GMT
Organization: SRI International, Menlo Park, CA

In article <1992Aug26.175124.19683@twg.com> "David Herron" <david@twg.com> writes:
>Lots of people point at 3d borders on widgets and try to make fun of them.
>Look at it from the other slant for a moment.. throw away the 3d borders
>and use a Mac (pre System 7) or something written with Athena Widgets.
>How does the user tell the difference between a button and a text entry 
>box?  They both look *the* *same* (a box with text inside).  But on Motif 
>(for instance) the button looks like a button because it's raised, while 
>text entry areas look like text entry because they're sunken. 

I don't make fun of 3d borders; I deprecate them. Why does sunken=text
and raised=button? Shouldn't sunken be a depressed button? (In fact,
sunken often *is* a depressed button.) Couldn't
this be done with *much* greater clarity by some means other than fake
3d? Like, for instance, the text areas have lines under them just like
the lines on a form where you're supposed to write things.

In the old NeWS toolkit, you had checkboxes. When they were selected,
they had great big check marks in them. I comprehend this. In
FrameMaker, unselected items have little raised squares, selected
items have sunken squares. I do not comprehend this. Sometimes I think
the sunken ones are supposed to be off. Yes, I know, I'm supposed to
think of them like the kind of button that sinks in when you press it,
but a) they don't really look like that b) no button I've ever seen
goes raised->sunken; they either go raised->less-raised or
flat->sunken and c) it just doesn't work for me.  The sunken ones are
also darkened, which means that in a one-of-many selection, the item
that's currently selected is the least visible; it looks almost greyed
out, like it's inaccessible or something. Plus sometimes if you press
on something sunken it pops out, sometimes it does nothing, and
sometimes it acts as if you selected it again. If this 3-d stuff is
supposed to mean something, instead of being glitz, I don't know what
it is; I can't find a consistent meaning.

	Elizabeth D. Zwicky
	zwicky@erg.sri.com
Newsgroups: alt.religion.computers,comp.windows.misc,comp.windows.news,comp.windows.x,comp.human-factors
From: joet@dcatlas.dot.gov (Joe Trott)
Subject: Re: GUIs Considered Harmful
Keywords: n
Organization: U.S Dept. of Transportation
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 14:56:09 GMT


Whose desk is clean enough, 100% (or close) of the time in order to use a
Rat?  Some tasks require the keyboard anyway, so it isn't as if you can
exchange one input device completely for the other.
I'm content to use the DOS command line for my work.  I can work the way
I want to, not the way some gooey writer wants me to.  When the [graphics]
application calls for it, I'll clear a space for my Rat, but otherwise the
keyboard suits me just fine.

That's another nice feature of DESQview; it can be operated without being
within AUs of a Rat, including window placement, cut & paste, etc.

-JTT

Xref: sparky alt.religion.computers:660 comp.human-factors:2031 comp.windows.misc:1306 comp.windows.news:609 comp.windows.x:16098
From: minow@Apple.COM (Martin Minow)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.computers,comp.human-factors,comp.windows.misc,comp.windows.news,comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: GUIs Considered Harmful
Keywords: Mac, Window, Throw
Date: 3 Sep 92 16:11:48 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA

In article <1992Sep2.171407.11876@news.cs.indiana.edu>
krawling@banana.ucs.indiana.edu (Ken Rawlings) writes:
> ... There are two relatively simple things that I want to do on a Mac that
> I _still_ have no idea how to do, ...
>
>        #1: Send a postscript file to the printer.

Use the LaserWriter Utility program that was included in your LaserWriter
distribution. It is described in the manual.

>        #2: See this file sitting on the Hard Drive? Execute it.

This is a more difficult problem. The Macintosh recognizes applications
(programs) as files with a particular file type. (Unix, VMS, and other
operating systems do the same, using different techniques.) If a file is
not marked as a program, the operating system assumes it is data (document)
to be executed/evaluated by an application. Applications register the
file types they understand, so double-clicking on a document starts the
appropriate application and tells it to open the document you chose. To
my somewhat biased mind, this is more intuitive than requiring the user
to make the mental connection between document and its application. Your
mileage may vary.

You also note the problem of dealing with .hqx files. These are, as far
as the Mac operating system is concerned, just text files. The Mac uses
application type codes and file type codes to classify files, not file names.
This is essential if the user is to be able to rename files without restriction.

Several commercial and shareware applications do understand Unix-style file
naming conventions and let you process *.hqx or whatever, however this is
not a general part of the Mac O.S. To understand the problem better, try
convincing a Unix C compiler to compile a file named foo.bar (i.e., not
foo.bar.c).

You also complain about "unstandard" serial ports. What do you mean by
"standard"? DB-9? DB-25? RJ-11? Serial line cable standards have been
changing over the years. The Mac cables have not changed in four years,
and are readily available for about $15. You probably want a "Hayes-compatible
modem cable."

One of the interesting things about the Mac is that the interface is
intuitive enough, and there is enough core commonality among applications,
that people believe that there is no need for documentation, training,
or consultation. While this is a worthy goal, we haven't reached it
with watches, cameras, or, for that matter, VCR's, much less computers.

Martin Minow
minow@apple.com
The above does not represent the position of Apple Computer Inc.
Newsgroups: alt.religion.computers,comp.human-factors,comp.windows.misc,comp.windows.news,comp.windows.x
From: jgd@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (John G Dobnick)
Subject: Re: GUIs Considered Harmful
Originator: jgd@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Reply-To: jgd@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 23:35:24 GMT

From article <1992Aug28.113502.24092@walter.cray.com>, by toma@romulus.cray.com (Thomas Arneberg):
> 
> 
> For a beginner, what good does a man page do if you don't remember whether
> the command is "rename," "change_name," "move," etc.

That's what the "apropos" command is for.  Of course, it helps if the
manpages have _useful_ header lines.  :-)

-- 
John G Dobnick                          ATTnet: (414) 229-5727
Computing Services Division             INTERNET: jgd@uwm.edu
University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee     UUCP: uunet!uwm!jgd

"Knowing how things work is the basis for appreciation,
and is thus a source of civilized delight."  -- William Safire
From: djohnson@cs.ucsd.edu (Darin Johnson)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.computers
Subject: Re: Help for thesis
Date: 31 Aug 92 19:22:54 GMT
Organization: =CSE Dept., U.C. San Diego

>that would be the Lisa, which when it came out, was less powerful than
>the original Mac and cost US$10,000.  it was neat, though.

Less powerful?  It's software (OS) was light years ahead of the crap on
Macs nowdays :-)
-- 
Darin Johnson
djohnson@ucsd.edu
    Macintosh - you can buy better, but you can't pay more!
Newsgroups: alt.religion.computers,comp.human-factors,comp.windows.misc,comp.windows.news,comp.windows.x
From: twl@cs.brown.edu (Ted "Theodore" W. Leung)
Subject: Re: GUIs Considered Harmful
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, Brown University
	<1992Sep3.152523.11437@news.cs.indiana.edu>
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 13:26:47 GMT

>>>>> On Thu, 3 Sep 1992 15:25:16 -0500, "Ken Rawlings" <krawling@papaya.ucs.indiana.edu> said:

Ken> Anyway, I think these issue point out a central problem of a
Ken> "Total" GUI based operating system: If the functionality is not
Ken> already there, it's damn hard to get something new done.

Actually, this issue points out a central problem in systems with a
typed file system.  It has nothing to do with GUI/CLI.  If you had a
CLI that operated on Mac files and respected the type information
about files, you would find yourself equally unable to do what you
wanted.  Both GUI's and CLI's will have to provide a method for
changing the type of a file in order to solve your problem.  ResEdit
comes to mind as such a program.  I do believe, however that your .bin
file needs further conversion -- changing the type to APPL probably
won't work.

Ted
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Internet/CSnet: twl@cs.brown.edu 	| Ted "Theodore" Leung
BITNET: twl@BROWNCS.BITNET		| Box 1910, Brown University
UUCP: uunet!brunix!twl			| Providence, RI 02912
Xref: sparky alt.religion.computers:561 comp.windows.misc:1209 comp.windows.news:524 comp.windows.x:15651 comp.human-factors:1879
From: ucacmsu@ucl.ac.uk (Mr Stephen R Usher)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.computers,comp.windows.misc,comp.windows.news,comp.windows.x,comp.human-factors
Subject: Re: GUIs Considered Harmful
Keywords: n
Date: 26 Aug 92 09:48:10 GMT
Organization: Bloomsbury Computing Consortium, London

In article <BtKrw1.EEy@mtholyoke.edu> jbotz@mtholyoke.edu (Jurgen Botz) writes:
>In article <id.3AOS.4A2@ferranti.com> peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva) writes:
>>(then there's the question of WHY IT TAKES SO MUCH GODDAMN MEMORY...
>>but that's apparently considered normal these days... I understand
>>WNT will require 8 MB)
>
>Like Apple's System 7 "requires" 2 MB.  The developers version of NT
>is pretty crammed in 12 MB.  Let's call it 16 MB.  (But then, by the
>time NT is released, 64 Mb DRAMs might be in production.)
>--
>Jurgen Botz                  |   Internet: JBotz@mtholyoke.edu
>Academic Systems Consultant  |     Bitnet: JBotz@mhc.bitnet
>Mount Holyoke College        |      Voice: (US) 413-538-2375 (daytime)
>South Hadley, MA, USA        | Snail Mail: J. Botz, 01075-0629

Maybe the new technology NT stands for means the new computer technology
neded to run it!

Steve

--
Addresses:-
JANET:-		ucacmsu@uk.ac.ucl or	steve@uk.ac.ox.earth (preferable)
Internet:-	ucacmsu@ucl.ac.uk or	steve@earth.ox.ac.uk (preferable)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.computers,comp.windows.misc,comp.windows.news,comp.windows.x,comp.human-factors
From: cj@eno.wpd.sgi.com (C.J. Silverio)
Subject: Re: GUIs Considered Harmful
Reply-To: cj@sgi.com
Organization: SGI TechPubs
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 19:16:06 GMT


In article <Btv1sC.79B@mtholyoke.edu>, jbotz@mtholyoke.edu writes:
|I've never quite been able to figure out what exactly NeWS is... I
|know it stands for Network Extensible Windowing System and that it's
|based on Postscript, but I don't think I've ever seen a machine
|running it by itself.  [...]

Find one of Silicon Graphics' machines running IRIX 3.*.  NeWS
and the SGI 4Sight window manager was quite nice.  I enjoyed
using it, and I hated the performance hit my workstation took
when SGI switched to X (under IRIX 4.*).  Apparently SGI's
customers preferred the standard X, though, and NeWS died.

[Obviously, my opinions are not SGI's.]

---
cj@eno.wpd.sgi.com      C J Silverio/Brahms Gang/Berkeley CA 94720
"Software developed in an environment actively hostile to the 
programmer costs what the selectors of such an environment
deserve to pay." --Kent Paul Dolan
Newsgroups: alt.religion.computers,comp.human-factors,comp.windows.misc,comp.windows.news,comp.windows.x
From: bbrown@infonode.ingr.com (Bailey Brown)
Subject: Re: GUIs Considered Harmful
Organization: Intergraph Corporation, Huntsville, AL.
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 20:38:23 GMT




mark@zeus.ocs.com (Mark Wilson) writes:


>        Boxes with checkmarks are intuitive.  Boxes with X's
>        (like Windows, I'm sorry to say) are NOT.  My personal
>        first assumption when I saw the X: 'X' must mean
>        "UNselected"... but 'blank' means unselected... maybe 'X'
>        means OFF, blank means no choice yet, and check will be
>        ON... No, that don't work, it just toggles between 'X'
>        and blank... *sigh*... I guess 'X' means ON...

Is it really this hard?  What if someone handed you a 
a paper questionaire he had just filled out using 'X's instead
of check marks.  Would you have trouble figuring out which
boxes he had selected and which ones he had not selected?

------------
Bailey Brown                               "Above all else, confusion reigns."
Intergraph Corporation                                  
bbrown@casca.b11.ingr.com                              Procol Harum
Xref: sparky alt.religion.computers:603 comp.windows.misc:1239 comp.windows.news:554 comp.windows.x:15871 comp.human-factors:1946