Plasma User Types

[Michael Rudolph]

On Saturday 12 April 2008 11:17:23 Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
> On Friday 11 April 2008, Michael Rudolph wrote:
> > ruled that answer out in a previous blog post, Celeste, I think,
> > that "everyone" is the description of the typical plasma user type.
>
> we are creating a framework upon which interfaces get built that get
> used by the "everyone" set, but the group we keep in mind while
> designing things does not need to be the "everyone" set. indeed, it
> can be rather focussed. where that focus gets applied is the purpose
> of this conversation.

Hello everyone,

thanks, Celeste and Aaron, for your clarifications. I'm still not really 
convinced.

My point is, that all user types are important and that I don't really 
see the benefit of splitting them up. But I see dangers that this 
splitting up bears.

When we start to look isolated at the socialite, for example, we will 
come up with personas and scenarios that may very well contain a 
twitter applet, some facebook or myspace integration and many other 
things. And if we do this, please excuse my strong words, we would have 
been better of with just doing a KDE3.6. No one, never ever, in his 
right mind never wants to use twitter, ever! People want to 
communicate! We have to look at what the user is actually trying to do.
When we look at users in terms of their experience or their background 
on Linux or Windows, we are already way too deep entrenched in all the 
concepts that make current user interfaces so wrong.

My favorite way to clarify this is hanging up a picture. Say you got 
that new Picasso for your dorm room and are driving a nail into the 
wall as your roommate walks in and asks what you are doing, standing on 
a ladder there. What do you say? - I'm putting this picture up. No one 
would say: I'm using a hammer. Because a hammer has a good user 
interface. The user doesn't even realize he uses one. He is completely 
concentrated on doing, what he is actually trying to achieve. If hammer 
designers went about as we do, they would create a docking station for 
the hammer, customizable decals for the shaft and exchangeable 
versatile heads, that make the hammer so fragile that you cannot slam 
it, but have to tenderly pet the nail. Users would be more occupied 
with their hammer, than with their actual task.
You are also not aware of the ladder, you just use it. Because it has a 
good user interface. To use a KDE ladder, you'd probably have to log 
in, and you'd have to reboot for every rung you wanted to take.

I'm not sure I can spark a constructive discussion around that issue, so 
I'll just let you guys go on for now, but the important questions we 
need to ask ourselves right now, have little to do with experience or 
curiosity levels, in my point of view.

michael