*nix on "classic" systems

[John Foust]

At 04:16 AM 4/16/2007, Warren Wolfe wrote:
>On Thu, 2007-04-12 at 09:58 -0500, John Foust wrote:
>> See his 1991 book "Tog on Interface", where he claims in the 80s 
>
>    Sorry, John, that's simply not true.  Casual observation will show
>that; there's no need for a $50M study to determine it. 

The study of computer-human interaction is an old one; I'm not adept
in its studies and research.  Instead of relying on my gut as a standard
of reference, I quoted the one reference to a study that I knew offhand.
I suggest sigchi.org as a starting point if we want to examine 
the field to find other relevant studies.

A very casual search there found another study abstract:

  Graphical versus Character-Based Word Processors: An Analysis of User 
  Performance It's All about Choice 
  / d'Ydewalle, Gery / Leemans, Jurgen / Van Rensbergen, Johan Behaviour 
  and Information Technology 1995 v.14 n.4 p.208-214 
  Abstract: The study investigates how experienced computer users take 
  advantage of the availability of graphic user interfaces in a word 
  processing task. Performance time and actions were compared in three 
  groups of subjects working respectively with WordPerfect 5.1, WordPerfect 
  for Windows, or WordPerfect V2.00 for the Macintosh. The three groups 
  did not differ in efficiency: they performed the word processing task 
  at the same speed. Very few WordPerfect 5.1 users worked with the 
  pull-down menus; the great majority preferred using the function key 
  shortcuts. No significant difference in menu use was noted between 
  the two graphical user interface word processors (Windows and Macintosh). 
  Windows users did not apply shortcuts to move text, but used menus or 
  the button bar instead. There was no difference in the use of the mouse 
  between the Windows and Macintosh groups. While better task satisfaction 
  is often reported with the availability of graphical user interfaces, 
  our findings are in agreement with other studies suggesting that experienced 
  users don't perform more efficiently with such a computer environment. 

which might also point out that it's reasonable that we might expect
expert users to behave differently than newbies, and that there are other
dimensions we might want to consider such as "task satisfaction".

>While a simple logical case can be made for a human cause of
>the current warming trend, even a cursory examination of the data
>already collected indicates STRONG support for the idea that humans play
>no, or close to no, role in the current warming.  Scientists have
>discovered that panic induces increased funding, so, strangely enough,
>all of their recent releases are panic-inducing.  Those who don't "play
>along" lose their funding.

And now you're trolling and have wandering off topic.

- John