Plasma User Types

[Robert Knight]

Hi,

> 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.

I have a prototype for an amazing new user interface.  Can you find me
an "everyone" person to test it with?  

> 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.

One of the themes in the document is curiosity.  Some of the user groups
identified do not want to learn new things or are only prepared to
tolerate a certain amount of change from the status quo.  If it is
decided that KDE should be accessible to them then that has to be taken
into account.

Regards,
Robert.

On Sat, 2008-04-12 at 14:24 +0200, Michael Rudolph wrote:
> 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
> _______________________________________________
> Panel-devel mailing list
> Panel-devel at kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/panel-devel