Author: Bob Durrett
Date: 15:09:32 11/10/02
Go up one level in this thread
On November 10, 2002 at 18:02:47, Mike S. wrote: >On November 10, 2002 at 17:41:54, Bob Durrett wrote: > >>(...) >>To start with, I want something which requires the absolute minimum in user >>smarts. I want: Software which does it all for me without any special >>knowledge (other than chess) at all. > >You mean, like Windows? :o)) > >My experience is, the more stupid (or lazy) the software developers expect the >user to be, the more problems and the less usability and "controlability" of the >software will result. Like in Windows, where so much is either deeply hidden, of >defaults set to the most uncomfortable, etc. > >I mean, if the user doesn't even want to read a few sentences of the docs then >and when, push one or two buttons and play around with the controls a bit to try >things out, it's really difficult for the programmer to provide a powerful set >of functions at the same time. > >There's no one-button radio :o) > >Probably not the number of the functions is a problem, but how the are organised >in menues and dialouge boxes (and documented). With the correct options in the >correct place, right-click menus supported properly with the most often used >functions etc., it shouldn't be a problem. > >Actually I think, except for the really advanced options, the only chess device >easier to handle than Fritz is a wooden chessboard... :o) > >(Or Fritz is even easier, when you replay a game with many variants and >sub-variants...) > >Regards, >M.Scheidl Good points! : ) Believe it or not, there are people out there who like chess but don't want to be "software savvy." They are called "customers." : ) Bob D.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.