Conducting a Unix Desktop Usability Study? 313
cyclop asks: "I am a close friend of a Ph.D. student on human interface usability. She's now working to tailor a KDE-vs-Gnome usability study (a pretty hot topic these days), and I have been called to help, as a long time GNU/Linux desktop user. What kind of advice -- both technical and theoretical -- would you give us on conducting a deep and objective study on the Unix desktop, that can be useful for the developers and the OSS community?"
"She has installed GNU/Linux and used both KDE and Gnome to get to know them, while I provided her a number of links on background information and previous usability studies on both DE, and advised her to subscribe to relevant mailing lists of both projects. However, I feel that it's not enough and that there are a lot of potential pitfalls and misconceptions that wait for us, me being a geek and she being a Linux newbie. Moreover, she found that most of the previous studies on the web were quite sloppy, in comparison with common usability research standards."
Allow power-users to tweak settings first. (Score:4, Insightful)
The out-of-the-box setup is a compromise at best; and shouldn't be used to judge the overall usability for people who use the system more than once.
Re:Allow power-users to tweak settings first. (Score:2)
Well, it would make a comparison useless IMHO.
I think we should go for defaults instead. I feel the distro closest to vanilla desktop settings are Gentoo and Debian, we'll probably run one of these two, but if you have advices please tell me.
Re:Allow power-users to tweak settings first. (Score:3)
You don't want to compare GNOME to KDE to Windows because GNOME and KDE aren't operating systems. You should compare *Fedora* against *Ubuntu* against *Mac OS* against *Windows*.
Fedora and Ubuntu make customizations to GNOME because they feel they are doing a better job of usability than upstream. Fine, let them. Tell us how they compare.
No one (sane) will give a newbie an uncustomized Gentoo box or Debian setup, so compare realistic things
Re:Allow power-users to tweak settings first. (Score:3, Insightful)
Tainted vs Ignorant users. (Score:5, Insightful)
#1. The ignorant users: These have never used a desktop before. These aren't as easy to find anymore. I worked with one woman back in the mid 90's who could not even use a mouse. She had to hold it still with one hand while she clicked the button with her other hand. After a week of solitare, she had the necessary muscle coordination to start learning the system.
#2. The tainted users: These have experience with systems other than the one you're testing. If your system isn't 100% like the one they're used to, they'll waste time clicking around where the functions are on their systems.
#3. Friends: These have worked on the system that they're being evaluated on.
Now, a system that is easy to learn for the "Ignorant" class may be incredibly un-friendly for more advanced "Friends".
Determine what functionality you want to measure and what GROUP you want to measure it for.
The real "ease" on an interface comes down to 2 things:
a. Can you quickly guess where a function is based upon your existing experience with it?
b. Once you know where a function is (you guessed at it before, you asked someone, you went to training), how easy is it to remember that 24 hours later, 1 week, 1 month, 6 months later?
Re:Tainted vs Ignorant users. (Score:2)
Re:Tainted vs Ignorant users. (Score:3, Interesting)
I totally disagree with this. what percentage of your potential audience has "never used a desktop before". Very close to zero, and getting lower all the time. MSFT did do one thing, and that was teach everday people what a desktop was, and how to more-or-less get around a computer.
There is no reason to try to design anything for this class of user, it is such a small portion of the populace that it can be said to be zero.
In the USofA, that is mostly correct. (Score:4, Insightful)
Not to mention that an interface with settings 1-10 (1=brand new user, 10=expert) would make a lot of non-experts more comfortable with their computers.
An ideal interface would evolve with the user's experience level. Not trap an experienced user with a pre-school interface nor confuse a new user with expert-level options.
Tailor the choices available to the level of the user and let the USER choose how complex the interface he uses is. Just like books. When you started reading, you didn't read the books you read today. Those books followed very careful patterns on what words were used and how often they were repeated.
But since none of the interfaces out there are doing that yet, it really doesn't matter for this discussion.
Re:Tainted vs Ignorant users. (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Tainted vs Ignorant users. (Score:3, Interesting)
My sister's owned a computer since 1998. She's a whiz when it comes to email, using Word, or manipulating her photos in Photoshop. Her first machine was a Gateway monstrosity that she paid way too much for. Now she's got a G5.
A couple of months back, she was absolutely flabbergasted when she saw me switching between open windows... all this time she's had no idea that one can minimize a window to the taskbar and continue on in another.
You missed one last (Score:5, Interesting)
(In fact that was my case when I started learning both KDE and Windows 95 in parallel)
The best system ever should be as easy as possible for #1 out of the box, but need to be very easily configurable to whatever complex system #3 and #4 need.
If the system is newbie-friendly but can't evolve you'll end with Clippy and this kind of stuff that gets in the user's way with pointless tips (tips that would have helped a total beginner, but sorry now I know exactly what I want). Attracts #1 users, but repels #3 and #4.
If the system is configurable to extreeme you end up with emacs or vi : the most powerfull tool around you can't ever dream of in your wildest dreams, but you can't do anything without unless you've spent the first year learning it the harsh way. #3 only are interested, #4 must ponder if they want to re-learn everything once again (albeit they do it faster), #1 will prefer to commit suicide.
#2 are pointless, they won't accept anything that isn't their original system, they're the one that will never switch to MacOSX or Linux because it's not Windows+Office, and they'll cry each time MicroSoft revamps the interface and everything is moved around (Windows 3.11 -> Windows 9x -> Windows 2k -> Windows XP -> Windows Vista and same for the Offices). Just wait until the next "GUI is completly changed one more time" period, and they'll be as good as #1 users (or #4 if it's not their first change around).
Re:You missed one last (Score:3, Insightful)
I disagree. Group #2 is probably the most important group. Keep in mind that being tainted does not only mean being exposed to Windows+Office, but also to any other desktop environment, including Linux, OS X or others.
This includes for instance the Linux FVWM users who will be frustrated that the default GNOME window manager does not
Re:The key would be selectability. (Score:5, Funny)
I'm a level 137 Microsoft Win-zard, I can now wield the CLI of fortitude and I've unlocked the 5th ring of the registry.
That will surely make the level 1s in this world eager to learn.
Re:The key would be selectability. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Tainted vs Ignorant users. (Score:3, Interesting)
Its not just the users who are dummies.
I was TOLD to take out passwords and logins on a database connected to the internet because "its too much bother for the workers to log in."
So if you know the server and the directory, you can "administer" it. Add inventory. Reprice inventory. Remove inventory. Make a contract selling a $10,000 item for $1.99. Change descriptions. And since it also rebuilds the web site, change the product pictures for pr0n and add links to competitors.
Re:Allow power-users to tweak settings first. (Score:2)
But for the tweaking, I would not answer questions about how you can set up things a certain way.
You could even conduct a usability study on how easy it is to change the settings; in that case, you *should* start with defaults.
Simple (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Simple (Score:5, Funny)
No, but "KowboyNeal" [slashdot.org] is.
Good Lord (Score:2, Insightful)
Ha. Ha ha. Ha ha ha heh heh hee hee hee hee ha ha HAA HAA HAA HAAA HARRRRRR. You might as well do a study on whether apples are better than oranges, or settle the One True God question once and for all. It's hardly possible to do a deep and objective study on the merits of the Linux kernel vs. the FreeBSD kernel even though that's reducible to a purely technical inquiry.
It *does* sound like perfect academic paper fodder.
for meaningful results... (Score:5, Interesting)
3-6 months perhaps?
"Usability" imho, in the usual meaning of the term, is a load of wank.
Who cares if the first time someone uses the environment that it takes a little orientation to get used to? In the real world, if a couple of weeks of pain makes you much more productive after that, it's a net benefit imho - the remainder of your time using the environment outweighs the significance of the learning time.
I'm not saying that initial learning is not important, but I think that these studies need to show both sides of the equation...
smash.
Depends on Intended use... (Score:3, Insightful)
A work desktop must be quickly learnable and facilitate productivity of intermediate to advanced users.
Learning should be built into the system. (Score:4, Insightful)
How about, how many repetitions of instruction does it take for an average user to remember how to perform one action after a week of not using it?
And, once one function is explained, how quickly can the average user deduce/guess at related functions? This is how you select "bold" text. Then let them find "italics" and "underline".
Re:Learning should be built into the system. (Score:2)
Oh boy, have I got a DE [wikipedia.org] for you!!
(Sorry, sorry, sorry...)
Re:for meaningful results... (Score:2)
3-6 months isn't enough, 3-6 years sound much more resonable.
Exactly. Spend a few months with KDE, and... (Score:3, Insightful)
Exactly. On the face of it, KDE and GNOME can appear to be similar to some people. You may even dislike KDE's Qt interface for a while until you get used to it. However, KDE has amazingly powerful technology underneath. Spend a few months doing all your work on KDE, giving yourself time to discover (discovery learning is good) its hidden strengths, and you'll never look back.
I don't often agree with Linus, but what he said about GNOME and KDE was spot-on: when you take the time to try them both, you'll s
My thoughts (Score:5, Insightful)
It is probably also worth noting that most people (apparently including Linus) consider KDE more powerful, so KDE is kinda at a disadvantage.
Re:My thoughts (Score:5, Interesting)
most people have used windows at one time and expect things to have that type of layout.
children who havent gotten used to what windows is like might find it a bit easier/harder to move around in.
you could have 2 groups of children
set one group of children to use gnome for the first week/month/year and kde for the second week/month/year whatever
and set the other group to use kde for the first week/month/year and gnome for the second week/month/year
and compare there reviews of how easy it is to move around.
however it might be better to test it out on teenagers are they will be able to take more infomation in.
Re:My thoughts (Score:3, Insightful)
Also, a lot of the tasks you'd be interested in testing a child wouldn't know about. If you were to ask, for instance, the user to write a formal letter in a word processo
Will they be testing as Linus uses it? (Score:2)
But
We have people at work who are really scared that they'll do something wrong with their computers. If ANYTHING changes, they need to be walked through it for a few days.
Re:Will they be testing as Linus uses it? (Score:3, Informative)
Open Parent -> Alt+Up
Open Location -> Ctrl+L
Close Parent Folders -> Ctrl+Shift+W
Close All Folders -> Ctrl+Q
Close -> Ctrl+W
Home Folder -> Alt+Home
Notice that we're using Alt key combinations, Ctrl key combinations, and Ctrl+Shift key combinations. My biggest problem with using nautilus effectively is mixing u
Re:My thoughts (Score:2)
Yeah, good idea. It would be very interesting to me to see if there is a correlation (either positive or negative) between this and what I mentioned about users' ability to perform tasks and/or solve their own problems.
The Nipple? (Score:3, Funny)
Go for it!
(If you're wondering about the subject of this comment, the nipple is one of the most intuitive human interfaces btw).
Re:The Nipple? (Score:4, Funny)
maybe on a woman... but I don't consider my own very intuitive; I can't figure out what its purpose is.
Re:The Nipple? (Score:5, Funny)
You're a geek, so just use the process of elimination. All you have to do is remove your nipples, then wait and see what stops working.
It's not rocket science...
Re:The Nipple? (Score:2)
Long-Term Efficiency (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Long-Term Efficiency (Score:2)
I find the gnome interface a little "cleaner", but several things in KDE just work better for me. The KDE IOslaves (fish, etc) just rock - excellent for web development, etc - they're a huge productivity boost for me.
Ripping CDs in whatever format with full CDDB support etc with drag and drop to another folder just rocks.
Having said that, right now at home I'm running ubuntu 5.10 with gnome. I find it less cluttered to navigate, but in terms of actual application use, right now K
Re:Long-Term Efficiency (Score:3, Insightful)
As for doing a usability study, you first have to decide what to measure, then to decide what your users are. "everything" and "everybody" are hopeless non-answers.
On what to measure, you could focus on several things: time spent dealing with the desktop rather than your work; number of desktop related problems run int
My advice? (Score:5, Insightful)
My advice? Don't have someone who's been a long time GNU/Linux user assisting her. Chances are, you're fond of either KDE or Gnome. Before the study has even started, I'm alarmed by potential bias. Let her do the study on her own, gather the facts and come up with her own conclusion. Isn't that what Ph.D.'s do?
"[...] while I provided her a number of links on background information and previous usability studies on both DE, and advised her to subscribe to relevant mailing lists of both projects."
To me, the study is already flawed. You've dropped a load of information onto her lap, while a complete "newbie" doesn't have that same luxury. How can a usability study be unbiased in this manner? Who's to say you didn't provide her with REALLY good links to KDE information, while giving half-assed links to Gnome?
Re:My advice? (Score:4, Informative)
You didn't understand. She will conduct the study, but that's not she will judge what's more usable and what's not. This would not be a usability study, it would be a -1,Flamebait article. She plans instead to put categories like WinXP-proficient people,MacOSX-proficient people and total computer noobs (if any still exists) in front of Unix desktop enviroments and see their reactions and if and how they can be proficient with them. She's using them to understand them and for obvious curiosity, and I gave her info to help her tailor the study.
Not good. (Score:3, Informative)
No. All she is "testing" there is how closely the desktop they're being "tested" on resembles the one they're used to.
... where's Outlook? Wh
Novell did this already.
http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/10/11/ 146202&tid=223&tid=106 [slashdot.org]
So, to send email
Re:My advice? (Score:2)
No, thats actually a good start. User X gathered some information from various links and tries to work with this little knowledge. Its the same in Windows. There are tons of Windows help sites, ti
no. she needs to become an expert in _everything_ (Score:2)
in order to make a comparison.
she needs to _locate_ suitable dumb-idiots who haven't been thingied.
biased. and intelligent people. etc.
but she needs to _become_ a geek - to know the pitfalls and
advantages of the various setups - in order to not _accidentally_
introduce bias.
if she were one of the _subjects_ of the test, that would be
a different matter.
Re:My advice? (Score:4, Insightful)
The researcher won't be a subject. You can't do a usability study that way. You need to recruit a bunch of people who match the kind(s) of user you're studying, get them to do a range of tasks, and observe various aspects of their performance. If you're your own subject, you're not doing research. You're just airing your opinion.
Speaking as a PhD student, one of the most important things we are expected to do is a literature survey. That means we have to go out and read studies that are relevant to our research topic, and critique them. If the researcher fails to discuss them, her supervisors should ding her for not having done her reading. If she can't judge the worth of the studies for herself, she's not working at PhD level yet. She should have a good grasp of what constitutes good research by now.
I know I'd be thrilled to have a load of pointers to relevant studies dropped in my lap. I'll judge their degree of assedness myself, thank you very much.
objectivity schmuctivity (Score:5, Insightful)
Some examples:
* A novice might look for how obvious it is to do a certain task, whereas an expert user might instead prefer what can be done fastest (e.g. notepad vs. emacs).
* Related: How much time does this person use a computer/this application can be an important factor. If I rarely do 3d design, I want to be told how to do everything, and have obvious controls (i.e. > 3 parameters might boggle my mind). However, if I work for Pixar, the verbose messages, and dumbed down controls (i.e. 30 parameters might just not cut it for what needs to be done).
* Certain paradigms might make sense to people who are used to using certain types of systems. Files and folders make perfect sense to many people, but certainly not to everyone (e.g. my mother). We think these simplified analogies work better for novices, but that isn't always the case. People think differently, and different analogies will make more/less sense dependent on their world view.
Some suggestions (Score:3, Interesting)
*) Count the times you had to look in a manpage, in google, and how often you had to fire up a console for doing simple things (like creating a shared folder, browsing the internet, installing some plugins like flash etc.) Keep in mind: SIMPLE things! Trivial tasks done by the casual user.
*) For each system you need to learn how to use it, thats a fact. Unix users have to learn the concept behind the filesystem (nothing too fancy, but basic knowledge about what mounting is for example). This is comparable to the knowledge about the drive letters in Windows, the usage of backslash for separation in paths, that
*) Review the help system and documentation. Among other things, look for technical mumbo-jumbo. This is a common error. Stuff like SSH, SSL, CORBA, FUSE, pthreads etc. should never occur in enduser documentation.
*) Have a look at the menus. Are they cluttered or usable? How long did you have to search something in the menu?
don't do it! (Score:5, Insightful)
Instead compare either or both against Windows or Macintosh for tasks that your _specific target userbase_ would do. [If you haven't defined one or more use cases you've already lost.] This would be much more valuable.
Better yet, switch your topic to focus exclusively on accessibility (a11y). Every DE out there needs some accessibility love.
Re:don't do it! (Score:2)
The problems of Linux are usually not on that "KDE or Gnome" level anymore. KDE serves all my needs, I also like Gnome and I am more productive than on Windows on both.
The comparison is flawed because, I mean, think of webbrowsing. I use Konqui, Gnome users would use Epiphany or Galeon. But here I currently use Firefox on KDE.
So what use has a KDE vs. Gnome comparison here?
What me annoys on Windows is that opening a PDF in Acrobat o
Personally I think Apple has... (Score:2, Interesting)
Currently they have it working on two different processor families (the IBM Power series, and Intel).
Yes, it is proprietary, but that does NOT mean that "Aqua" is not a GUI desktop running on a UNIX system.
Why not compare the other UNIX desktops with what may be the best UNIX desktop running?
Don't get excited, it's just an honest question. After all, just because it was done by a comme
Re:Personally I think Apple has... (Score:2)
Re:Personally I think Apple has... (Score:3, Interesting)
> core (the Darwin flavor of freeBSD).
Well, this is no real option.
Because for Apple users it is irrelevant whether it is build on foosys or Unix. When you run a C64 emulator on Linux which is distributed as a game console to play games you cannot say "this is a real Linux" only because a techie can open a linux console. For the average use it is C64. And for the manufacturer it it was a rather technical choice wh
I used a Solaris CDE Desktop from 1992 to 1999 (Score:2)
Frankly, I don't see why this is needed...people have been using it for years.
There...Can I please have my doctorate now?
Re:I used a Solaris CDE Desktop from 1992 to 1999 (Score:2)
Bravo. (Score:2)
Re:I used a Solaris CDE Desktop from 1992 to 1999 (Score:2)
I found Solaris CDE to be kickass for usability, but fairly fugly. So why not just come up with a pretty CDE? I would think people to pick that any day over KDE, Gnome or XFCE/Fluxbox.
Here's a suggestion: (Score:2)
*cough!*
Don't ask the experts (Score:2)
You want an unbiased opinion?
Don't ask us.
For one its not GNU/Linux Desktop. It's KDE vs GNOME.
KDE runs under BSD as well as Linux. Gnome runs under Solaris.
Of course the GNU people probably want to start calling *BSD running GNOME GNU/*BSD because of all the GNU code in it.
Oh, wait. Its not that popular.
Re:Don't ask the experts (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Amount of help & documentation (Score:2)
Re:Amount of help & documentation (Score:2)
K-D-E? G-n-o-m-e? (Score:2)
decide your goals and personas (Score:2)
The Power User may turn out to be the more typical linux user (from the standpoint of HP/IBM), so the reactions of Joe Clueless may just not be useful. Good to have a specific goal in mind while running this study. Are you trying to help developers understand power users better?
Or trying to help a company make ma
Don't assume. (Score:3, Interesting)
First acquire body armour (Score:2)
Linus say: Gnomes for dummies! (Score:2, Interesting)
That must be some university. (Score:2)
For god's sake, woman. Read some Norman for the theoretical background (his older book, not his newer shite which pisses all over his previous work without any real reason to other than to shine his own "i'm a high priced consultant" knob now. Then, and this is serious though it's
Some suggestions: (Score:4, Interesting)
Get some novices (people who have never used the interface before) in, and a list of tasks to complete. Let some of them muddle through it on their own, and give others pointers on use of the help system, google, and man pages. (One of the tasks for the first group could be -finding- help on some of the things they won't be able to complete on their own.) This will help represent the range of people coming into it-some will have absolutely no idea what they're doing, others will have at least some support from other knowledgeable users who can at least point them in the right direction.
You also might want a broad cross-section of users-some who rarely or never use a computer at all, some who use one relatively frequently, and some "power users" from other operating systems. This could lead to a very interesting picture-do those that already "know how" on a different interfacee have a harder time with something new, or are they able to translate most of their knowledge and pick up more quickly?
As to a comparison between the two, you may wish not only to time how long it takes the users to complete their task lists, but also include feedback from them-were the help pages actually helpful, or did they just confuse the issue more? Was the experience relatively smooth and welcoming, or aggravating and frustrating? Was there anything the user expected to be/work a certain way that did not do as expected? Did the user find it necessary to work in CLI at any point, and if so, was this disorienting or frustrating, or relatively smooth? Did they ever think they had done something right when they really had screwed it up, and were any clues/warnings given them to this effect if so?
All these are factors in usability, and I'm sure anyone can list plenty that I missed. In the end, usability is determined by-well, the user. Since it is somewhat subjective (I find working in a command line far easier and more convenient then use of a GUI most of the time, but there are many that would disagree!), focus on what the end-user, presented with the interface for the first time, thinks of it overall.
My advice? (Score:2)
What type of user (Score:2)
Funding (Score:2)
Tipps (Score:2)
2. Linux Desktop is always perfect when it works. The real problems are: It takes to much time to get it to work.
* unsupported hardware and broken hardware detection
* what happens if one component breaks, how are problems in hardware handled. (how to get rid off popup annnoyances), e.g. your cd drive is not detected, how does your music player handle the problem and help you, during instal
Re:Tipps (Score:2)
2) Windows is always perfect when it works.
* better integration of distribution functionality with the DE. DE or both DE are able to set standards and dictate them to all distributions which do not want to hack, they should better do that.
* quality checks. E.g. manpages for all applications? Translations 100%? x-projects
* system conformity checks.
* unify DE registry and standardize setting file data formats.
* buildserver
* bridge some desktop functionality
sooo make it more like windows?
Re:Tipps (Score:2)
Depends on the dynamics (Score:2)
Is she testing against newbies or experts or in between? Choice of distro will make a HUGE difference here.
An absolute newbie will have an easier time with Ubuntu even compared to windows (windows does not have a gui to download and install new apps without thought.)
While ubuntu will cause fits to 15 year Linux vetrans that cut their teeth on making their own distro or slackware.
Everything depends heavily on the perception of the users tested and the distro used. KDE and Gnome und
don't trust /. (Score:2)
improve apon betterdesktop (Score:3, Informative)
Improve apon betterdesktop [del.icio.us]. The site is a collection of usability data with a focus on Linux apps. The front page gives more detail
Mac OS X (Score:2, Insightful)
Keep it simple (Score:2)
OS X (Score:2, Insightful)
While OS X doesn't occupy the majority of desktops it is
a commercial success.
Consider the users' backgrounds (Score:2)
One thing might be to get longtime Mac users, longtime Windows users, and complete novices (though, this might be hard, because most people have used a computer at some point, and usually it was a Windows machine), and se
The Study should be Double Blinded (Score:4, Insightful)
Also, make sure to use more than Gnome or KDE! Use XFCE, Fluxbox, and other XWindows managers.
And don't forget to make sure that the study has the appropriate "power"!
And make sure that everyone is using the same system configuration (motherboard, processor, underlying flavor of linux)
The most overlooked item is (Score:4, Interesting)
Using the OOMA method, let's say it takes a user on one system 2 minutes to figure out how to send an email, and 1.95 min on anther system. What the hell does that mean?
If you use other items as some sort of bench mark, people might begin to get a feel for the numbers.
Lets say it take 45 seconds to figure out a new blender, 5 minutes to use a new remote, 20+years to set the clock on the VCR. Now people reading your study have a reference they can relate to.
It would also help companies trying to make applience computer to know where they stand in relation to appliances.
Simple usabilty study (Score:2)
1. Make a list of tasks to be performed (this can be done with the subject if you would like an objective list).
2. Think about the range of problems that can occur during the performing of the task. Make a subtask for every possible system failure.
3. Confirm that your subject is in total control.
4. Tell your subject that he or she is not to be judged according to his/her skills, but that the program (or in this case, distribution) is being judged. Faults
Don't ask us (Score:2, Insightful)
Or you could go down the simple route... (Score:2, Troll)
No different than any other UI usability study (Score:2, Interesting)
2) Which brings me to my next point. Hire HCI experts, or take some classes on HCI. Testing OSS interfaces isn't any different than testing those of commercial software. You can do either user evaluations or predictive evaluations (w/o users). In fact, doing the latter first AND then the former is [usually] the b
Well... (Score:2)
disconnected from internet (Score:2)
windows, gnome, kde - and see whether people find it useable or even useful.
another:
http://kde-look.org/ [kde-look.org] and http://gnome-look.org/ [gnome-look.org] (when they're back up/online)
set something up that is MAC-like. see how much it takes to set up a MAC look-alike
(use kroller.sez - search for it on kde-look.org or even just kroller)
use the MAC kde theme (baghira i think it is).
try to do the same thing on gnome (which is near impossible).
but mo
Don't get my hopes up. (Score:4, Interesting)
Well, since Unix has *NEVER* had an objective study of it's desktop done, you will make history as a pioneer. Since it's survived so many smear campaigns, yours will, unfortunately, just add to the hot air. What, exactly, is the *point* of such a study, anyway? What does it change? I have yet to read a single such study that swayed my choices one iota.
Sadly, you're off on the wrong foot already. KDE-vs-Gnome. Hey, Dr Kinsey, there's just a few other test subjects you're failing to interview: http://xwinman.org/ [xwinman.org]. So actually, you're flunking already. You are not doing a "Unix desktop study". You are doing a "KDE-vs-Gnome" study, and your results will no more be applicable to Unix in general than a study of Coke-vs-Pepsi would apply to all beverages.
It does not go without saying: Don't be paid Microsoft shills. Don't be paid by *anybody* for that matter.
Now, if I studied dogs, I wouldn't start with everything I know about cats and try to fit it all around that by comparing dogs with cats at every possible point. Similarly, Unix never gets taken as an operating system on it's own right. Everything is instead stated "It is not as good as or just like or better than Microsoft." How about judging something just once based on it's own merit, the way anybody studying anything else is expected to do in any other field? Consider your subject as if other operating systems did not exist. God knows, Microsoft is talked about in this manner.
Unfortunately, the focus will of course be on KDE and Gnome, the Heckyl and Jeckyl whose sole point of contention is "I'M a perfect clone of the Windows environment!" "No, I am!" "No, me!" "NO, ME!" So in fact, you're not the least bit interested in considering even KDE or Gnome on it's own right - this will be a Windows-impersonator contest. Never mind that counting from the invention of computers: http://ei.cs.vt.edu/~history/Babbage.html [vt.edu], computers have been around for one hundred and eighty-two years, and only the last 20 years http://members.fortunecity.com/pcmuseum/windows.ht m [fortunecity.com] has seen the existence of a desktop system known as Windows. For a ratio of 0.10989011 of computer's history, you are going to compare the one system whose sole claim is that it made a lot of money in the United States to two other desktops expressly written to mimic it.
I'm really sure the world will be enlightened.
Problem, Action and Result (Score:4, Funny)
Action: Perform UNIX GUI usability studies every few days, post repeatedly on Slashdot.
Result: UNIX GUI usability studies improve, UNIX GUI usability stays same.
KDE, Gnome and other (Score:3, Insightful)
Phrasing may be important too (Score:3, Interesting)
Tell her to check back her notes. (Score:3, Insightful)
Human interface usability is properly tested one way and one way only. By watching real people interacting with them. You can use muckups (drawn or computerized), storyboards, etc, but nothing beats putting the fat asses of a few users in front of a computer and collecting their impressions.
If you possibly can you tailor your investigation to a particular group of people, ideally one that would make the study useful to you (if you are testing usability for software in kindergartens you don't want to do your usability test in a bank's trading floor).
The laughable suggestions to use children only, experienced users only or unexperienced users only as the correct or more accurate way of gauging usability is, as the British say, a load of pants. People suggesting this should jump of a clift like the gerbills they are.
One would do such a think only if there is no choice or if one has particular reasons for doing so, but never as the preferred criteria for a generalized useful study, what may be good for children may be crap for old timers and viceversa, experienced users may find some things annoying that new users find useful and viceversa.
The first thing that many people fail to understand is that usability is a wholy subjective thing. Linus loving KDE (yeah, that Linus) is only probe that for Linus (yeah, that Linus) KDE is more usable. All the KDE zealots implying that this is the God given truth regarding usability in Linux should be forced to use Gnome untile the know better.
Usability should be studied only on groups with similar patterns of usage for it to be any useful. The wider you make your target group study, the more difficult it will be to find meaningful results.
If you target all Linux users, then you are in for the most subjective, meaningless, most likely useless study.
If you target Linux users with less than one year experience using Linux then you are into something. If you target Linux users with more than 10 years experience degrading penguins you would also find more useful results.
Target your audience and you will find good results for that group of people.
Make your sample too wide and be welcome to the scrapyard of useless studies.
Re:If you are pursuing a PhD in interface design.. (Score:2)
I'm going to ask what kind of quirks and pitfalls the specific subject of the study should we take care. By the way, I'm NOT going to pursue a PhD in interface design. My friend is going. I'm a PhD student, but in biophysics.
Re:Answer is simple .. (Score:2)
That, for me, would be the absolute most productive desktop around.
Your problem is that you're taking your own personal preferences about which arbitrary mappings of keys to actions works best for you, and you're assuming that it would work best for everyone. As s
Re:Answer is simple .. (Score:2)
I mention these specific apps because I use them frequently
Re:Answer is simple .. (Score:2)
1. Ctrl+C (Copy), Ctrl+X(Cut) Ctrl+A (Select All) Ctrl +V(Paste) Ctrl+P (Print)
works in all applications you open out of the box.
2. You open up a file Browser, go to the folder you wanna browse and type the first letter of the file and the cursor takes you there.
One has to agree, whatever follows MS Windows closely.
In this case that would be kde handsdown
Gnome works the same (as does, I believe, most other DE:s out there).
Why is it, byt the way, always kde-users that se
Re:I believe simpler window managers are more usab (Score:2)
Re:Sanctimonius Know It All Desparate for Attentio (Score:2, Insightful)
I had a nice rant all written up, because this is definitely not News for Nerds, or even Stuff that Matters. But its not worth it. Its already a lost cause when people ask slashdot to do assignments that they should be lerning from for them.
Going to the dead tree repository (you know, what we used to call a library) and doing some basic research on design in other fields completely unrelated to computers would be more useful, but lazy, unmotiviated students can't be bothered.
Nope the answer is "Teh In