How to make the computer obey the person, and not vice versa
Hello.
Under the cut - thoughts about the convenient user interface of the OS.
Windows XP, Windows Vista
The ideal system for PC-gamer and in combination the most popular system. Positioned as a simple and massive solution.
')
Linux user-friendly
With this vague wording, I famously unified many popular distros, allegedly taking “a step towards the user” with leaps and bounds. Why do I think otherwise? About this below. For clarity, I place Ubuntu, Fedora, Mandriva, and other popular “simple” Linux systems in this category.
How is Linux positioned? Complex issue. These distributions focus on ordinary users, but in our country, a rare simple user knows about the existence of anything other than Windows. That is, the amazing simplicity we are not talking about.
MacOS
Personally, I didn’t work for poppy seeds, so I don’t have the right to judge :) Obviously, this is an image product that has been gaining popularity recently.
Windows 2000/2003, FreeBSD, Linux versions other than those described
Not suitable for our review, as they have a pronounced server positioning.
Those who needed the computer badly bought it for a long time. Now it is mastered by those who need it for use at the lowest level. Gradually, there is a tendency to “personal laptop for each family member,” to which we are gradually moving away from “computer to every family.” In the transition to such an ideology, I consider it most important to pay attention to the “housewives” market segment. So far, it is trying to develop Windows.
“I would like the computer to be used as easily as a mobile phone. My dream came true - now I don’t even know all the functions of my mobile phone. ”
Stroustrup, free transcription
I consider it quite natural to have a system on my home computer that will allow me not to think about how to work with it, but just start working with it.
At the same time I can, but do not have to know:
Approximately such criteria will allow the operating system to be as understandable for housewives as mobile phones are.
Consequently, the OS should not be at all. Sounds like idiocy? Not really.
OS from the point of view of the programmer - a program code that allows the hardware to interact with high-level user applications. Consequently, the visual part of this program code can be minimized (OS settings and software install / uninstall interface).
What is it for? Compare the OS of mobile phones and computers. Everything is simple and clear in the phone: there is a hierarchical menu that gives access to the programs. Sometimes there are “bookmarks” - the ability to customize hot keys, or the panel of frequently used applications. The bottom line is that mobile phones, with rare exceptions, are simple.
Now we present the typical housewife who turned on the computer. What does she see? Desktop with shortcuts, start button, taskbar, keyboard layout indicator, tray program icons, clock.
“Well, what is this all about? Another reflection on the theme of a perfect OS? ” - think habrachelovek. No, this is a reflection on the possibility of creating the most user-friendly linux-based interface. The existing solutions, KDE and Gnome, do not meet the simplicity requirements that I cited above much. Habr is an elite IT community. Who, if not habra people, is moving progress?
[UPD] Of course, some of these thoughts have already been implemented in part in various user interfaces. The basic idea is to combine them together and provide a unified work environment in which you do not need to minimize and maximize windows, constantly switch between ways to send messages - for example, in ICQ and in mail, not to separate the browser, file manager and file rocking another.
I look forward to discussing the usefulness of such an idea in kamentah :)
To be continued.
Under the cut - thoughts about the convenient user interface of the OS.
A small preface in the form of a classification of different operating systems regarding the scope of application.
Windows XP, Windows Vista
The ideal system for PC-gamer and in combination the most popular system. Positioned as a simple and massive solution.
')
Linux user-friendly
With this vague wording, I famously unified many popular distros, allegedly taking “a step towards the user” with leaps and bounds. Why do I think otherwise? About this below. For clarity, I place Ubuntu, Fedora, Mandriva, and other popular “simple” Linux systems in this category.
How is Linux positioned? Complex issue. These distributions focus on ordinary users, but in our country, a rare simple user knows about the existence of anything other than Windows. That is, the amazing simplicity we are not talking about.
MacOS
Personally, I didn’t work for poppy seeds, so I don’t have the right to judge :) Obviously, this is an image product that has been gaining popularity recently.
Windows 2000/2003, FreeBSD, Linux versions other than those described
Not suitable for our review, as they have a pronounced server positioning.
At the expense of whom is the computer audience expanding?
Those who needed the computer badly bought it for a long time. Now it is mastered by those who need it for use at the lowest level. Gradually, there is a tendency to “personal laptop for each family member,” to which we are gradually moving away from “computer to every family.” In the transition to such an ideology, I consider it most important to pay attention to the “housewives” market segment. So far, it is trying to develop Windows.
“I would like the computer to be used as easily as a mobile phone. My dream came true - now I don’t even know all the functions of my mobile phone. ”
Stroustrup, free transcription
Obviously, for "housewives" the computer should be as simple as possible.
I consider it quite natural to have a system on my home computer that will allow me not to think about how to work with it, but just start working with it.
At the same time I can, but do not have to know:
- I do not need to know which programs for which operating systems are running. I want everything to work for me that says “it suits you,” and on what doesn't work, it says “it doesn't work for you” even before I start downloading it. Or show me a window where all the programs I can download will be with descriptions (Linux repository)
- I do not need to know that I have an operating system
- I do not need to know what viruses are and how to protect against them. I just need to perform my simple actions.
- I do not need to know what firewalls are, ports, sockets, protocols, IP address, mac address, DHCP, DNS, NAT, TCP / IP, UDP, http, ftp, and other smart things. I just want to work with files on my home computer from work and vice versa. I agree that for this I need to turn on both computers and not pull out the network cable :)
- I don't need to know what my file system is.
- I don't need to know that I have a file system at all.
- I don't have to know where things are. But he should know how to use the search.
Approximately such criteria will allow the operating system to be as understandable for housewives as mobile phones are.
Axiom: The user works with programs, not the OS.
Consequently, the OS should not be at all. Sounds like idiocy? Not really.
OS from the point of view of the programmer - a program code that allows the hardware to interact with high-level user applications. Consequently, the visual part of this program code can be minimized (OS settings and software install / uninstall interface).
What is it for? Compare the OS of mobile phones and computers. Everything is simple and clear in the phone: there is a hierarchical menu that gives access to the programs. Sometimes there are “bookmarks” - the ability to customize hot keys, or the panel of frequently used applications. The bottom line is that mobile phones, with rare exceptions, are simple.
Now we present the typical housewife who turned on the computer. What does she see? Desktop with shortcuts, start button, taskbar, keyboard layout indicator, tray program icons, clock.
What am I proposing?
- Do not produce windows beyond measure. There are tabs, they have been used for a long time in all normal programs.
- massive integration of programs into each other
- fewer programs for the same type of action
- fewer options for basic programs, more user-friendly interfaces. You do not need to make a Word from a notebook, you do not need to make a development panel of your site from a browser. For these tasks, there are still other, more functional programs. Paint - not photoshop, but it can also be useful.
- All file navigation is in one place. With rare exceptions, the user doesn’t care if he works with a remote FTP server, a shared folder from a neighbor, or with the contents of his own USB flash drive. It is important to provide quick and easy access.
- less thoughts a person has about a computer, more thoughts around a computer about a person. I want the computer to offer (and remind) me that it is necessary to specify folders for regular backup, that you need to catalog the photos that were merged yesterday from the camera, that you need to sort the torrents accumulated during the week. And carefully offer your option, and if he didn’t come up - draw conclusions about how the person did it and study, study, study again. Sometimes it is possible to extract a lot of valuable information from file attributes - so why does a person use it, but not an OS? I want to drag a folder with a photo onto the desktop and click “ok” when the system prompts you to put this album in D \ Photo \ Date_Flow_of_attribute_file \. I want regular OS tools to search for files on a computer like in Google - that is, in 0.2 seconds and not strictly in the text, but given the relevance.
“Well, what is this all about? Another reflection on the theme of a perfect OS? ” - think habrachelovek. No, this is a reflection on the possibility of creating the most user-friendly linux-based interface. The existing solutions, KDE and Gnome, do not meet the simplicity requirements that I cited above much. Habr is an elite IT community. Who, if not habra people, is moving progress?
[UPD] Of course, some of these thoughts have already been implemented in part in various user interfaces. The basic idea is to combine them together and provide a unified work environment in which you do not need to minimize and maximize windows, constantly switch between ways to send messages - for example, in ICQ and in mail, not to separate the browser, file manager and file rocking another.
I look forward to discussing the usefulness of such an idea in kamentah :)
In the following part of the article:
- How to achieve a situation in which you do not need to rummage through subfolders in the hope of finding something, and then find out that it is hopelessly outdated
- how to communicate simultaneously in ICQ, Jabber, Twitter, LJ, Skype, on social networks and by email and not to clutter up with a bunch of windows
- how to make the browser the basis of the OS
- how to stop configuring the OS and start working
To be continued.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/43897/
All Articles