Re: Stop the bling, fergawdssake!

My bloviated meandering follows what Greywolf graced us with on 
11/13/2011 1:33 PM:
> On 13/11/2011 1:35 PM, Sailfish wrote:
>> Did you get just as upset that ATT dropped the rotary UI and went to
>> touch-tone? Do you use the Jitterbug phone since it has a simple UI? How
>> about TVs, do you pine over the good ol' days when you could use a
>> rotary dial to change the channel?
> 
> You're missing my point. I'm not objecting to new UIs, I'm objecting to 
> changing existing UIs for no reason other than "It's sweet..." or "It's 
> cool..." or some other irrelevant reason.
> 
I already explained why they changed it (using usage metrics), the 
"sweet/cool" adulation comes from the users who find the change a 
definite improvement, so your claim is a non sequitur.

> To use your examples: I would've objected strenuously to changing the 
> placement of the numbers on the rotary dials. I think you would, too.
> 
uh, touch-tone phones changed the entire UI, number placement, number 
selection movement, number selection speed, &c. I found touch-tone 
phones much more user friendly.

> For that matter, apart from the arrangement of the numbers, it seems no 
> two cell/cordless phones use the same buttons or the same arrangements 
> of those buttons. Re,mote controls for TVs etc are even worse. This 
> causes all kinds of bafflements, and sometimes worse. No doubt some 
> dumb-ass "intellectual property" crapola prevents makers from using a 
> standard set and arrangement of buttons. Or some silly superstition 
> about "freedom of choice." Imagine the chaos if we had the same 
> "freedom" in the number and arrangement of the controls of a car.....
> 
Yet, people seem to be able work through it. I, for one, purchased an 
"add-on" for my entertainment system, a Harmony remote (think of LotR, 
"One remote to rule them all") so now I can swap in/out system 
components assured in the fact that I can easily upgrade my system 
without worrying about learning a new device. I see this as an 
improvement since it gives me more choice, just like I see Firefox UI 
changes doing.

> If the FF UI were a brand new design, I wouldn't object. But it's not. 
> The changes are just tweaks to an existing design. I'll repeat: new 
> features and a wider range of options for customising existing features, 
> are Good Things. Hiding stuff that was visible, or moving stuff from one 
> menu to another (something that MS is notorious for doing), etc, are Bad 
> Things.
> 
For some, sure. But for the majority, removing UI clutter is a good thing.
> 
>> To paraphrase Omar Khayyam:
>>
>> The Moving Technology changes; and, having changed,
>> Moves on: nor all your Piety nor Wit
>> Shall lure it back to cancel half a UI element,
>> Nor all your Tears wash out an Icon of it
> 
> Nicely done. ;-)
> 
> If the FF UI were new technology, your revision would very apt.
> 
> But the FF UI  is a rotary dial trying to look like a touchtone phone.
> 
A rather dubious observation, methinks.
> 
> PS: We have kept one rotary phone, it's the only one that will work when 
> the power goes out.
> 
You should upgrade to, minimally, a Princess touch-tone, it works on 
power-out situations as well. Actually, any newer corded phone should 
work. :)

I've set follow-up to mozilla.general

-- 
Sailfish - Netscape Champion
Netscape/Mozilla Tips: http://www.ufaq.org/ , http://ilias.ca/
Rare Mozilla Stuff: https://www.projectit.com/