3 ms·

I don't know if that's the right approach. If his target audience are people who don't know the difference between Web 2.0 and 1.0 (say, accountants in the acco

by jayliew 17y ago

I don't know if that's the right approach. If his target audience are people who don't know the difference between Web 2.0 and 1.0 (say, accountants in the accounting department of a big corporation), they would probably feel more at home with the desktop metaphors. Case in point, Google wants people to use Google Docs like their Office suite, except it's 100% web based. But to ease the transition they have this notion of "folders" in G Docs even know it could very well just be a bunch of tags like in Gmail. When non Web savvy people see "folders" they go "ah, I get it." imho.

TomasSedovic 17y ago
I didn't think of that. You're right -- knowing your users' background and knowledge is very important. However, there are things that I believe simply shouldn't be carried over from desktop to web. Even in desktop, modal dialogs reek of "I don't know or care how to do it better". Double clicks have a similar feel to me. And neither is much present on the web (1.0 and 2.0). Even GDocs don't rely on double clicking (though they try to mimic the Office behaviour in other ways). But sure, if the users never really used the web and are used to desktop tools, it would be easier for them if this program mimicked that.