|
Grex > Coop6 > #16: "What do we want for Grex?" | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 11 new of 110 responses total. |
popcorn
|
|
response 100 of 110:
| 
Dec 17 14:30 UTC 1994 |
Decidedly!
|
remmers
|
|
response 101 of 110:
|
Dec 17 14:58 UTC 1994 |
This is true. However, there's another class of users who are turned
off by excessively hand-holding interface.
|
nephi
|
|
response 102 of 110:
|
Dec 18 10:28 UTC 1994 |
I don't know if they are turned off by the "hand holding". I think that
they might instead be turned off by increased number of steps, slowness, and
limiting of options.
Take Word for Windows, for example. I learned WFW after playing with it
for about five minutes, but it can do anything I could ever dream of and
doesn't require me to jump through a lot of hoops to get done what I need
to. (It *is* a real hog, though.)
|
mdw
|
|
response 103 of 110:
|
Dec 18 11:35 UTC 1994 |
Actually, word can do a fair number of things that aren't well
documented in the menus, and take more than 5 minutes to discover.
There are also plenty of word users, even "expert" worrd users, who
don't discover all those nifty features, even after years of regular
use. One might almost argue the easy menus discourage people from
exploring the more arcane details. Word does have one enormous
advantage that PicoSpan does not have: a full screen bit-mapped display
and speedy screen update time. Even tho it's faster, such features do
not come without a price - that's where part of the hoggishness comes
from.
|
popcorn
|
|
response 104 of 110:
|
Dec 18 14:07 UTC 1994 |
Compared to WordPerfect 5.1, I found Word somewhat annoying. It's got
lots of neat features, but it doesn't have my favorite WordPerfect feature:
a command that reveals *all* the control codes that affect your document.
I always have a heck of a time getting my tab stops to do what I want them
to in Word. In WordPerfect you can look at the control codes and figure
out exactly what your tab stops are doing. Word does have some neat,
arcane, features.
But this is the "What Do We Want For Grex" item, not the word processor
wars item, so I'll drop this topic now.
|
nephi
|
|
response 105 of 110:
|
Dec 18 14:10 UTC 1994 |
You are right, Marcus. Maybe I should have said that I was able to
comfortably use WFW after 5 minutes.
You are right about the arcane details thing, too. I would have to say,
though, that WFW's arcane details are probably just as easy to learn
as are PicoSpan's. A person that *wanted* to learn how to do either
can rather easily.
|
nephi
|
|
response 106 of 110:
|
Dec 18 14:12 UTC 1994 |
(#104 slipped in)
|
bartlett
|
|
response 107 of 110:
|
Dec 18 21:06 UTC 1994 |
This discussion about the technical merits of Picospan is an important
one, but if it was intended to answer my charges of confocentrism in 89
etc, then it is decidedly off topic. Back a few responses, someone said
something key. Conferencing is very common, just not on the Internet.
For a while, Grex can ofer an uncommon service to the dedicated net user.
But I can find several bulletin boards locally, and zillions an LD call
away that have conferencing.
What I can't find is a system with our user base. Our user base is our
strength, and it would be our strength no matter what tools it chooses to
use. Conferencing is one obvious one. What about the Web? What about
other resources? A lot of us participate in one way or another, either
through Usenet, Email listservs etc, but the Grex presence as a whole is
rather scattered. The Grexgheist (if I may be permitted to mangle German)
lies squarely in conferencing, and I think it's a little out of date.
|
remmers
|
|
response 108 of 110:
|
Dec 18 22:48 UTC 1994 |
It's my opinion that our user base has evolved to what it is because of
Grex's focus on conferencing and related participatory activities.
You can divide the communications resources that an online system
offers into two categories:
(1) read only - data bases such as library card catalogs, reference
material such as government documents, etc. A person can access
these but cannot modify or contribute to them.
(2) read/write - conferencing, email, real-time chat. The user can
both access information and contribute new information which is
accessible to others.
I would hope that the central focus of Grex stays squarely on the items
in category (2). Of these, I think conferencing is our greatest
strength because it's publicly accessible and permanent. Email is
private, and real-time chat -- even the public variety (party) tends
to be throwaway.
Although it may be appropriate for Grex to provide some read-only
information to the public, I don't see us moving into that on a large
scale because there's other systems who can do it much better. But
there are very few places one can have better conversations than on
Grex.
|
andyv
|
|
response 109 of 110:
|
Dec 24 07:08 UTC 1994 |
Grex doesn't have the resourses to be everything to everybody. Number 2
read/write should be the focus. I can go lots of other places for reading
without participation.
|
sidhe
|
|
response 110 of 110:
|
Feb 7 18:47 UTC 1995 |
Indeed, let us remain available for input!
|