Subject:
|
Re: Am I the only person who finds Lego CAD systems infuriating?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto
|
Date:
|
Fri, 2 Sep 2005 00:55:43 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
4352 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, Don Heyse wrote:
> FYI while the committees don't produce the programs, they do provide a
> vehicle for the developers to accumulate and share ideas. The file
> format is perhaps the most visible product of this. Without the
> organization, none of the programs would be able to share their data.
> It's not a perfect process, but it's better than anarchy. Oh wait,
> perhaps you prefer anarchy? Is your own private CTCAD program almost
> finished? I can't wait to see the pictures. It must be really good.
I think you're missing the point of the original post: All this LDraw talk has
produced nothing to effect change on the user interface of the actual software
programs which I (and several others now) have difficulty with.
If you really wish to bring the argument of whether I prefer anarchy or
commmittee, anarchy seems to do just as well as committee when it comes to
building better UIs in this product category. I could take six feral children
and give them a the Forms Editor in Visual Studio. They spend an hour making
random interface designs. That's still a lot better than anything the committee
came up with.
> > And therein lies the rub: You can't product manage volunteer
> > developers, especially not in something most don't really prioritize
> > or understand (user interface) well anyways.
>
> Hmm, is that the problem? You're angry because you (with your valuable
> expertise) are not a member of some committee? If so, you should have
> nominated yourself. Or better yet, start your own usability committee,
> then develop your own program, and show us the results of your genius.
No, I think you're putting words in my mouth. I have no desire to part of a
committee and I don't think making a committee would help. That's what I'm
saying: Committees in general don't help with the usability of free software,
and they usually can't control feature sets either.
> Ahh, now we're getting somewhere. Larry is on committee and you dislike
> him. It's back to kindergarten again. Why don't you take your "lack of
> respect" somewhere else. We know what this is really all about.
> Am I wrong? Prove it by dropping the whining tone and the disrespect
> nonsense and tell us something we don't know.
No, as much as I dislike Larry, this one isn't about him. All I'm saying is
LDraw is hard to use and no amount of committees are gonna help.
> PS. If anyone *really* wants to talk about usability, there are plenty
> of ideas to start with here:
>
> http://karimnassar.com/design/products/artemis2000.pdf
That's a really nice high level specification. Was that the product of the
LDraw working groups/committees?
Calum
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
61 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
