3 ms·
"I don't think people really want to know.." But why not go ahead and actually find out? That's my point, and that's what makes this field potentially SO MUCH
by jrm4 5y ago
"I don't think people really want to know.."
But why not go ahead and actually find out? That's my point, and that's what makes this field potentially SO MUCH DIFFERENT. It's true, in the past you couldn't do this for toasters. You had to do a ton of homework and pick a design and hope people liked it.
But this is software! Just bake in a little "hey, you might break this but here's how to fiddle around with it" and let people work-slash-play.
- karmakaze 5y agoThis sounds good in theory, but then we could end up with something like the various Linux desktops. It's hard to find a complete and coherent one that doesn't also have annoying bits too. Usually if such a thing exists it's from implementation of a single vision rather than a collection of hobby experiments.
- jrm4 5y agoOne, there's no good reason that you can't have both. None at all. Lots of times in Steve Job's history where he arbitrarily (or at least, not for reasons of his expertise in UI) shut down greater user configurability -- not for the sake of design, but for the sake of market control. But also, two, I think "various Linux desktops" would be far preferable to what we have now. Again, I appreciate Steve Jobs' accelerating things in many ways, but also, he made interfaces perhaps too simple, to the point of frequently being just dumb.