At 11:48 AM 24-11-1999 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> > would you like it to work? What parts are too complicated? If they only
>> > *appear* to be so, then this is a documentation deficiency, otherwise
we'd
>> > need to think about it.
>> I think the concept of user friendly design is universal. There should be
>> one button in the middle of the screen you push and everything is done for
>> you :) (refer to technical support if you need to know more :)
>
>I refer to this as "helmet-ware". The software reads your mind, figures
>out what you want it to do, and does it.
And halfway you change your mind :).
So it's still not fool proof.
You need futureware. It'll predict what is really wanted and do that
instead ;). In fact it doesn't need MVCC and stuff like that, since it
knows what's going to happen. It'll have an Advanced Multi Universe
Concurrency Control.
Seriously tho. For things to be useful, there will always be a need for
humans to make decisions.
For databases and much software a single "Install Yes/No" is not
satisfactory in sufficient cases to require additional decisions to be made
during installation.
The challenge is to organise the decisions/choices in as optimal a way as
possible. For example: The useful and popular choices are more
accessible/apparent, and the less popular ones don't clutter the others. At
the same time, making them obvious and understandable.
Not easy. Easy to go wrong. If you put only one button, sometimes the
actual choice will be "Remove crappy software? (Yes/No)".
Hey, how about putting this option: "Global Thermonuclear War? (Yes/No)".
Of course that is only if Pg compiled with humour.h included.
Cheerio,
Link.