* * * * *
An explaination for a frightening minor epiphany on computer user interfaces
Two years ago I had an epiphany about computer user interfaces [1] and at the
time, I said I was still poindering the implications of that.
Then, a few days ago, Dan Lyke [2] had related epiphany [3] to the one I had
a two years ago. One of the comments to Dan struck a chord with me:
> But most users don't want to develop a language with their computer.
>
> I think I may expand on this somewhere else, but the short version: To
> develop a useful and efficient linguistic shorthand takes a long-term
> relationship. My wife and I can communicate vast things in few words, but
> we've been together a long time. Emacs and I have been together even longer
> than that. I don't think most users care to enter that kind of commitment.
>
“Flut terby™! : Point and grunt 2009-05-13 16:54:17.759918+00 [4]”
And then there's today (let us not talk about today, okay?)
But the events of today, plus Dan's observation (and the comment on it) plus
my earlier observation lead to yet another epiphany: While I may be willing
to develop a language to use my computer, I **do not** want to develop a
separate language for each damn computer I use!
It seems that every year or two, how we “talk” to our computers radically
changes and everything you know you pretty much have to toss out the
metaphorical window and start over from square one, do not pass Go, do not
collect $200.00.
I also have to wonder, if it does indeed take 10,000 hours to become an
expert [5] (or five years at 40 hours a week), how anyone in the computer
industry can become an expert, when the technology changes faster than that.
How?
[1]
gopher://gopher.conman.org/0Phlog:2007/05/29.2
[2]
http://www.flutterby.net/User:DanLyke
[3]
http://www.flutterby.com/archives/comments/12206.html
[4]
http://www.flutterby.com/archives/comments/12206.html#artid_42246
[5]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expert#Expertise
Email author at
[email protected]
