[NTLUG:Discuss] Open Source

[Daniel Hauck]

> So... it's a challenge, sure... that is, coming up with
> a decent environment for the unwashed, but I think it's
> doable.  Just might have to specify everything end-to-end..
> that is... the peripherals, etc. that your custom
> Linux will operate with.
> 
There should be books and studies on the subject... not that there 
aren't already I'm sure, but there's a lot of research to be done and 
accepted when it comes to "user psychology."

For example: People toss around words like "intuitive" when describing a 
user interface.  There is no such thing as an intuitive interface. 
That's marketing speak.  What DOES exist are levels of expectation built 
upon previous experiences which are built upon compounding previous 
experiences.  So what might seem "intuitive" to one user would be 
completely foreign to another.  Try living in another country for a 
short while and see how "intuitive" another culture might feel to you. 
So there is no agreed upon or central human level of intuitiveness 
anywhere in any context other than things like "up and down" and "light 
and dark" and even that could be debatable.

So what I'm driving at is "user expectation."  A user's expectation is 
largely built on Windows.  Prior to Microsoft's dominance, a user's 
expectation was a LOT more loosely defined and flexible.  To test my 
assertion, most people continue to repeat the myths of Apple and MacOS; 
MacOS is "intuitive" and "easy."  Windows users who have never used 
MacOS will cite the same notion.  But let an experienced Windows user 
play with MacOS and you will see how lost those users actually become! 
Why?  Isn't MacOS supposed to be the king of all intuitive and easy to 
use interfaces?  It is if that's what you're used to... if that is your 
user's expectations are met.

So when a user with expectations run into problems with an OS they 
aren't familiar with, they call the OS 'inadequate' or 'not ready' or 
some other such thing.  But when a user with expectations runs into a 
problem on the OS they are most familiar and comfortable with, they 
accept it as 'if it can't be done here, then it can't be done' or 
something along those lines.  The point is they can take 'no' for an 
answer under Windows (if that's what they are used to) where they can't 
under alternatives.

So it's all about user expectations and whether or not something lives 
up to them, but also it's about a user's level of acceptance of the OS 
regardless of its perceived shortcomings.  (People know Windows crashes 
a lot.  People know Windows machines need to reboot frequently.  People 
know that Windows machines are prone to failure, corruption and malware 
infection.  It's all a part of their accepted expectations and it 
doesn't matter if something else may be better... they are familiar, 
happy and content in their filth like pigs in the mud.)