iChat, one man's meat ...
in [UK Mac]
|
From: zoara on 8 Dec 2009 10:08 Jochem Huhmann <joh(a)gmx.net> wrote: > zoara <me18(a)privacy.net> writes: > > >> Next you will be saying that safari is better than firefox for the > >> same > >> reason! > > > > Oh, but it is. For Apple's target market... Again, I prefer Firefox, > > but > > that doesn't mean it isn't a (more) flawed UI... > > And I think it's a very reasonable decision to include some software > for > the clueless beginners (or at least the less demanding users) and have > the more demanding users download some third-party app. Much better > than > having the more clueless ones download and install simpler software... Aye. That's kinda one of the things I was hinting at by referring to "Apple's target market". Apple want to sell machines that the average punter can take home and start doing X, Y and Z on. To that end, their implementations need to be those that can be picked up quickly with little or no prior knowledge or experience. If anyone gets "into" IM, or anything else, they can replace what comes with the machine with something more capable. But Apple is selling "plug it in and have fun" so the UI needs to be as discoverable and simple as possible, even if that sacrifices features. Otherwise people taking home a Mac would be faced with the same complexities and frustrations as people taking home a Windows box, and Apple loses their USP. Anyone reading this post is NOT part of Apple's target market. -zoara- -- email: nettid1 at fastmail dot fm
From: Pd on 8 Dec 2009 11:15 T i m <news(a)spaced.me.uk> wrote: > >I didn't read that whole doohickey business, so I have no idea what you > >mean by it! Whatever it does, I didn't find it hard to use. > > It's just the nick coined by Pd for the prompt you get when the other > person is typing. Don't blame me, blame those Skype programmers and their doohickies and widgadgets. You obviously liked the word, cos you've been using it to describe things you install to get more functions, as well as for the typing indicator wodjimmet. -- Pd
From: T i m on 8 Dec 2009 13:28 On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 16:15:12 +0000, peterd.news(a)gmail.invalid (Pd) wrote: >T i m <news(a)spaced.me.uk> wrote: > >> >I didn't read that whole doohickey business, so I have no idea what you >> >mean by it! Whatever it does, I didn't find it hard to use. >> >> It's just the nick coined by Pd for the prompt you get when the other >> person is typing. > >Don't blame me, Nope, your fault (again). >blame those Skype programmers and their doohickies and >widgadgets. They are luverly. > You obviously liked the word, cos you've been using it to >describe things you install to get more functions, as well as for the >typing indicator wodjimmet. Nope, linear(ish) use all the way through to describe the 'the other party is typing' function, be that an animated pencil, 3 dots or the words 'John Doe is typing'. If you are an infrequent user of IM and / or are happy to miss the subtlety of the function when it's well implemented or just don't care, then that's fine. As I said elsewhere, I don't often make a decision because I 'like' something (rather than dislike / not being able to use it) but this is one of those rare cases. Until your next time then ... ;-) Cheers, T i m
From: Pd on 9 Dec 2009 06:06 T i m <news(a)spaced.me.uk> wrote: > > You obviously liked the word, cos you've been using it to > >describe things you install to get more functions, as well as for the > >typing indicator wodjimmet. > > Nope, linear(ish) use all the way through to describe the 'the other > party is typing' function, be that an animated pencil, 3 dots or the > words 'John Doe is typing'. Nope yerself. Your first use of it was 1 Dec 2009 18:05:10, in reference to Growl: > My point, I install a doohickey to try to overcome a deficiency (as I see > it) in a Mac version of something I'm used to (and I'm blaming Skype there > for this btw) So at that point you were referring to Growl as a "doohickey", and only later started using it to refer to the "other person is typing" spodgum. If you're going to use placeholder words, you have to be prepared to be either unambiguous or misunderstood. I'm just pleased you're arguing the case for a nifty little feedback device, which a previous incarnation of T i m wouldn't have even noticed, let alone felt strongly enough to get all exercised about. It's a welcome and admirable improvement. -- Pd
From: T i m on 9 Dec 2009 06:40
On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 11:06:17 +0000, peterd.news(a)gmail.invalid (Pd) wrote: >T i m <news(a)spaced.me.uk> wrote: > >> > You obviously liked the word, cos you've been using it to >> >describe things you install to get more functions, as well as for the >> >typing indicator wodjimmet. >> >> Nope, linear(ish) use all the way through to describe the 'the other >> party is typing' function, be that an animated pencil, 3 dots or the >> words 'John Doe is typing'. > >Nope yerself. I noped you first (and no returns). > Your first use of it was 1 Dec 2009 18:05:10, in reference >to Growl: >> My point, I install a doohickey to try to overcome a deficiency (as I see >> it) in a Mac version of something I'm used to (and I'm blaming Skype there >> for this btw) PeeDee: 21/11/2009 21:32 "Maybe those Skype programmers are just all about lots of little doohickies and widgadgets on the Windows side," (but nice try). > >So at that point you were referring to Growl as a "doohickey", and only >later started using it to refer to the "other person is typing" spodgum. >If you're going to use placeholder words, you have to be prepared to be >either unambiguous or misunderstood. You were right "Mac people get all confused with too much diddly fiddly going on you know". > >I'm just pleased you're arguing the case for a nifty little feedback >device, which a previous incarnation of T i m wouldn't have even >noticed, let alone felt strongly enough to get all exercised about. I'm glad. >It's a welcome and admirable improvement. I'm not sure it's an improvement. I have always been 'interested' in functionality and require such from most things I use regularly. This hoodickey thing came up because I was missing something I took for granted, like trying to use OSX but without Agent, or knowing that any software that comes with a product will be compatible with my OS (XP) and work with my hardware (mini CD'''s) etc. Apple OS's (and often compatible apps) are (to me, in general and atm) just like the missing wholicky, two much diddly fiddly. ;-) Cheers, T i m |