Buying A Re-furb PC ?

On 7/15/2017 12:57 PM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , Wolf K
writes:
On 2017-07-14 18:43, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , Wolf K
writes:
[...]
Donald Norman has written a book which among other things shows why
arbitrary changes to non-intuitive user-interfaces (such as GUIs) are
I'd say GUIs are more intuitive than command-line ones. Far from
totally
so, granted.
[]

Norman points out that any machine whose workings are hidden from the
user has an arbitrary interface. A hammer is intuitive, because
there's really only one way to hit a nail with it. But machines are
all more less non-intuitive. Even doors aren't that obvious. Do you
push or pull? Without well-designed visual cues, you don't know. If
you need words, the door is badly designed.

A good example: IMO, there should never be a handle (including the
vertical bar type) on the side of a door that you push.
[]
My class example is the cordless handset. No two manufacturers arrange
the buttons the same way. The displays function differently, too.
Compare the old analogue phones, the dial worked the same way on all
of them.

Good point: I never saw one where you turned the dial anticlockwise.
(Though I don't think I'd have had any difficulty using one that did.)

We need far more standards than we have. If industry won't establish
them, then government will have to do it.

Hmm, I'm not sure they're good at it either.

But back to GUIs: certainly, from first principles, they're not
intuitive. But there are many things that have become established over
time, to the extent that it's now a surprise - and usually an unwelcome
one - when a new piece of software doesn't implement them. And when MS
changes something about how Windows works, that's also usually unwelcome.

I wonder how much copyright and patents have to do with it?
It's hard to advertise that yours is better if it has the same name and
same user interface and does the same thing.

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

But back to GUIs: certainly, from first principles, they're not
intuitive. But there are many things that have become established over
time, to the extent that it's now a surprise - and usually an unwelcome
one - when a new piece of software doesn't implement them. And when MS
changes something about how Windows works, that's also usually unwelcome.

You mean, like the time Microsoft created Metro applications,
without the "X" in the upper-right hand corner ? :-)

And then had to put it back, later.

Paul