Re: SEUL: Text editors.

[Kevin Forge <forgeltd@pop.netaddress.usa.net>]

Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
> 
> > <sigh> If this is to be Single End User Linux, I am for it. If it is to be
> > Stupid End User Linux, count me out.  SEUL must also be something that I as a
> > relatively experianced Unix user would be willing to use.  If you want ti to be
>
Stupid is a relative term.  In offices I have visited SEUs are only
considered 
stupid if they staple floppies to a note, or use the CD-ROM drive as a
cup 
holder.  Being unable to find the start button after a weak may also get
you that title :)
> 
> yes, but the default configuration should be optimised for a beginner not
> a guru. To keep it expert friendly, it must be configurable.
>
true. 
>
> I never said that we should "emulate microsoft". But we shouldn't try to
> force unfamiliar conventions on our users unless they really gain
> something. I don't see how Olwm conventions are that much more efficient.
> The most efficient way to do these cut and paste operations is to forget
> about the mouse and use the keybindings.
>
Emulating Microsoft would mean making something that works 60% of the
time 
and an interface that is not configurable at all.  borrowing a few
common 
keystrokes and the concept of a start button is a good idea.
Even a Program manager would be preferable to something SEUs have never
used before.
Macs are difficult for Windows users.  
After you finish laughing you can go out and introduce a Win95 only user 
to a Mac and watch the bewildered look as this pore sole trys to figure
it 
out.  S/he will in an hour or 2 but it will still not be obvious.
>
> > Well, for a second or two, once they understand it, the other way seems silly.
> 
> Not really. Not to me, it doesn't. Remember, the pulldown menus are just
> there so that the users aren't required to know the keybindings, which are
> ultimately the fastest way to do things.
>
If memorizing key bindings was an option for SEUL vi would be the
default 
editor.
>
> FVWM2 (as well as Afterstep ) is a good example of what I think our
> users could handle. Familiar enough not to be totally confusing, but adds
> power and functionality (virtual desk space) . To me, fvwm95 always seemed
> to be trying too hard to look like win95. KDE also did something good by
> labelling the buttons to change desks ( It's not obvious to the beginner
> how the pager and the virtual desk space work. They just wonder why their
> windows keep vanishing at random intervals... )
>
The only problem with KDE as far as SEUL goes is the QT license, apart 
from that they have chosen a good mix of old conventions ( Mac, Win95, 
OS/2, FVWM, Motiff ).  
I ( a Windows veteran ) find it extremely intuitive.  I would suggest
the
GNOME project ( which is not very far along ) should try for such an 
obvious interface, and not make the mistake of creating something 
revolutionary.
>
> BTW, I'd suggest that we don't need a gui editor on the rescue
> floppy. Especially since ee and pico are very small ( < 70 k ) compared to
> the gui alternatives.
> 
If you can get the GUI started you don't need a rescue floppy.
> -- Donovan

-- 
: "Through the firewall, out the router, down the T1, across the
: backbone, bounced from satellite, Nothing but net."
: 	remove BAD.SPAM or your replies will go astray.
: "OpenScape 5.0 ; The Browser of the future" : http://www.openscape.com