command line vs gui
in [General Linux]
|
Prev: micro solution backpack cd-writer hell
Next: "...error while loading shared libraries: libg2c.so.0"
From: Peter T. Breuer on 9 Dec 2005 12:53 In comp.os.linux.misc Lee Sau Dan <danlee(a)informatik.uni-freiburg.de> wrote: >>>>>> "Peter" == Peter T Breuer <ptb(a)oboe.it.uc3m.es> writes: > >> Up till now, Peter's arguments are still unconvincing. He > >> isn't even clear whether his checkboxes are to be ANDed or ORed > >> together, or > Peter> Why should I be clear! (although I am perfectly clear!) It > Peter> is not my job to flesh out my intuition for you! > And I tell you that your intuition is what it is: intuitive and naive. > Not practical. Your ideas about my ideas are interstingly funny. I'd like you to make me laugh some more, but I'm afraid I have to floss my cat's owner. > >> XORed? or NORed? He has no clear idea of the semantics of his > >> GUI > Peter> I have a perfectly clear idea, > But have been failing to express it. I have expressed it. Therefore your fail to express a true sentence. > Peter> thank you, abslutely suitable for my purposes. Would you > Peter> please go speak for yourself. Thanks. > Myself? I say that your design is impractical and difficult to use. It may well be (I don't think so) but is that a problem to you in some way? If you think it is, why don't you suggest a scenario that illustrates your perception - as far as I recall all the test scenarios you have suggested I have been happy to deal with and I take away the impression from tthe exploration that we have jintly conducted that there was nothing impractical or difficult about it! So please stop this kind of non-argument. Go away, learn to discuss, not to pronounce your ill-formed conclusions as thugh they were authoratative, and whatever else may form you into a sweeter personality. Be happy. Peter
From: stan on 9 Dec 2005 12:55 In comp.os.linux.misc Lee Sau Dan <danlee(a)informatik.uni-freiburg.de> wrote: :>>>>> "Robert" == Robert M Riches <spamtrap42(a)verizon.net> writes: : Robert> I'd be a bit skeptical of their supposed "study". The HCI : Robert> folks are not immune to misconceptions and incorrect : Robert> prejudices, either. A few years ago, I took a : Robert> master's-level course titled something similar to : Robert> "Introduction to Human Computer Interaction". The text : Robert> spent a great deal of time preaching that the mouse was : Robert> the only useful way to enter positional information, and : Robert> no trackball could ever be built that would have any : Robert> degree of speed or precision. : Heard of digitizers, which the real professionals doing CAD/CAM often : use? : Robert> Reality is I can get much better speed and precision : Robert> with my Logitech Trackman Marble than I can with a mouse, : Robert> and much better than the figures the textbook quoted for : Robert> mouse input. : You can do even better with digitizers. Indeed- haven't used rodents in many years- have touchpad on laptops and tablet (digitizers) on desktops. Far better almost any way that you can name than a mouse ( except that they cost a little more- but that's well worth it since they are much better ergonomically). In fact , a mouse is a _lousy_ way to enter positional information if you need any sort of precision or repetability. Digitizers on the onther hand are great at this- which is why any serious CAD/CAM is driven by them. Stan -- Stan Bischof ("stan" at the below domain) www.worldbadminton.com
From: Lee Sau Dan on 9 Dec 2005 12:59 >>>>> "Tobias" == Tobias Brox <tobias(a)stud.cs.uit.no> writes: Tobias> - While I in general agree with Breuer that it should be Tobias> possible to make a GUI, I'm not claiming that it will be Tobias> easy to use in all possible cases. It is beeing said that Tobias> an image can express thousands of words Only when the image is approriate. A random image can express no words. A wrong image even causes misunderstanding. So, you should rather say: An *APPROPRIATE* image can express thousands of words. Tobias> - but it is also true that sometimes some few words can Tobias> express more than a thousand pictures. Again, given that those few words are _appropriate_. A few random words won't do any good. Tobias> - While Breuer is correct that any boolean expression can Tobias> be normalized, I think he is overlooking that it's Tobias> actually possible to mix _actions_ into the boolean Tobias> expressions given to find - and honestly, I also Tobias> overlooked that. I think a boolean expression with side Tobias> effects cannot be normalized. Particularly the "prune" Tobias> action is not catered for in the interface below. Oh! I thought this issue would be too difficult for him. He can't even understand that although pure Boolean formulae can be normalized, the normalized form isn't necessarily: 1) easy to comprehend (by human beings); nor 2) more compact; nor So, I have avoided bringing up side effects, which would only confuse him even more. Tobias> - My claim is only that, for somebody not using 'find' Tobias> often, the user interface below in the very most cases Tobias> will be easier to use than the manuals. So, the GUI isn't complete. Tobias> Ok, load up a monospacefont if you don't already have one, Tobias> and here we go: ... Wow! That screen already looks so crowded that it would deter casual end-users. Tobias> To use "and" above, one can either fill in several boxes, Tobias> or use the 'add restrictions'-button. For some few Tobias> attributes, it's possible to do "OR" by multiple selection Tobias> boxes. Except for that, one can simply press the Tobias> "search"-button several times to add the results from Tobias> several queries. Tobias> There should be negation checkboxes above, they are Tobias> skipped for space reasons. Go on and add more features. You'll end up in a mess inevitably. 'find' can do complicated things. You can't pretend that it is simple without hiding the complexities. Tobias> I'll start from the top left: Tobias> * Possibility to enter base dir. Defaults to '.' Tobias> Possibility to add more base dirs by pressing "add dir". That's so inconvenient. In CLI, I simply type in al the search directories, separated by space. No need to do the extra pressing of the "add dir" button. Tobias> * Pressing "execute" or "search" would eventually add to Tobias> the file list, but the program will be smart enough to Tobias> keep out duplicates. Hence reinventing "|sort -u"? Tobias> * It's possible to manually delete and add items to the Tobias> list I can do that by tagging in Emacs's find-dired. :) Tobias> * At last, there is the action menu - what to do with the Tobias> list of files. They can be deleted, the format of the Tobias> file listing can be changed, the list can be saved to Tobias> file, the list can be cleared, etc. When pressing "save Tobias> search", a single find expression is written to disk. Tobias> I.e. if the user is fist building "find -size +6M" through Tobias> the user interface, executes, and then exeuctes "find Tobias> -type d", then the query "find -size +6M -o -type d" is Tobias> saved to the file. No "load search" feature to do the opposite of the "save search"? -- Lee Sau Dan §õ¦u´° ~{@nJX6X~} E-mail: danlee(a)informatik.uni-freiburg.de Home page: http://www.informatik.uni-freiburg.de/~danlee
From: Peter T. Breuer on 9 Dec 2005 12:56 In comp.os.linux.misc Lee Sau Dan <danlee(a)informatik.uni-freiburg.de> wrote: >>>>>> "Peter" == Peter T Breuer <ptb(a)oboe.it.uc3m.es> writes: > >> (A and B and C and D) or E > Peter> Repeat the construction. This time also check E in every > Peter> panel. > So, I have to check E for all 4 panels? It's already checked - a result of pressing "again". > What if it were 10 terms in > with the brackets? Do I need to check E in each of the 10 panels? It's already there. > I can't see how such a GUI is easier or faster to use. Then see. > And what happens if E isn't an atomic predicate, but a Boolean > expression? That's not expressible in that way. Peter
From: Peter T. Breuer on 9 Dec 2005 12:55
In comp.os.linux.misc Lee Sau Dan <danlee(a)informatik.uni-freiburg.de> wrote: >>>>>> "blmblm" == blmblm <blmblm(a)myrealbox.com> writes: > blmblm> Good for you -- and you do seem to be fluent with written > blmblm> English. (When you say "learnt at school" -- starting > blmblm> when? > Kindergarten. That's german. > blmblm> if early enough, it's not a good experiment in learning > blmblm> languages as an adult.) > I started learning German at 28. Is that old enough? Not enough to forget english. > Many don't bother to do it well. They stop caring about perfecting it > or even just brushing it up once they've passed the point that they're > able to communicate. So, these people will never get rid of their > strange accent. It's this attitude that prevents their English from > improving. Interesting. Peter |