What do you think when Usability comes to mind?

[Dekkon]

Recently, while sitting next to my grandma, she was teaching her friend how to use the computer. Sat across from her, laughing, because my grandma also barely knows how to use anything past email and pictures. I laughed when she said, "Click on this for internet", looks at me, I nodded ya when she points over IE, then I go, "I bet thats not gonna work", as the wireless card was not in there, and she goes "Ohh, gotta put the wireless in here, it makes it work".

Then I left, now think of all the usability problems that could come after that, selecting network, encryption, signals, and all these fancy terms and not a single popup dialog to walk them through it.


What do you consider good usability?
What draws the line between, too simple, and not enough features?
Consider the grandma, as I know it's always used, put it in front of her, and tell her to go to eMail, do you really think she would think evolution would be email?


You would think that it makes it more simple for user when they have Ubuntu cause it has everything(most) installed, but you think it would also overwhelm the user.

*Btw, that story was true.

[SunnyRabbiera]

Its a shame a lot of people are like this with computers, if it doesnt have a little blue E or a green button at the bottom left of the screen their brains fry.
In the case of Ubuntu its more then ready for these kind of users in my opinion, to me in many ways Ubuntu is far more easy to use then Windows because its layout and interface doesnt take a genius to figure out.
But are users like this ready for Ubuntu?

[abyssius]

In the case of Ubuntu its more then ready for these kind of users in my opinion, to me in many ways Ubuntu is far more easy to use then Windows because its layout and interface doesnt take a genius to figure out.
But are users like this ready for Ubuntu?

If you consider the required maintenance aspect of Windows (daily scans, definition updates, etc.), Windows cannot match Ubuntu in terms of usability. Unfortunately, some people equate simplicity with inferiority. Others, are afraid to try the unfamiliar. I tried for months to get my wife to give up on Windows, IE, etc. and she outright refused to do so, no matter how many times I pointed out the anti-virus measures need, the active-x dangers, etc. etc. I finally got her to switch by secretly installing Ubuntu and configuring her desktop to look and operate as much like her Windows desktop as I could (see attachment). When she first approached her computer, she noticed something was different, but couldn't quite pin it down. When she sat down, she knew I had done something radical - and immediately protested. After, some gentle coaxing and some firefox customization (she refused to use it in Windows), she finally settled down. In about twenty minutes she was comfortable - and now FINALLY her Windows days are over!

[Dekkon]

Its a shame a lot of people are like this with computers, if it doesnt have a little blue E or a green button at the bottom left of the screen their brains fry.
In the case of Ubuntu its more then ready for these kind of users in my opinion, to me in many ways Ubuntu is far more easy to use then Windows because its layout and interface doesnt take a genius to figure out.
But are users like this ready for Ubuntu?

Which is a good point, which is why I believe that the installer should be more user friendly, and possibly at the end, ask you if you have ever used Ubuntu before, what operating system you came from, and then explain the basics and how to access the internet, email, music, etc. and how it's different from your previous.

[hessiess]

What do you consider good usability?

Can be controled with the keybord only (its just way more effecent for most things),



What draws the line between, too simple, and not enough features?

Personally, if the interface waste tuns of screen space and is verry hard to navigate, there are too meny features. This does not apply to CLI programs, as the `interface' never gets any bigger ;).



Consider the grandma, as I know it's always used, put it in front of her, and tell her to go to eMail, do you really think she would think evolution would be email?

No, the word `evolution' does not eaven hint at being an E-Mail client.

[SunnyRabbiera]

Which is a good point, which is why I believe that the installer should be more user friendly, and possibly at the end, ask you if you have ever used Ubuntu before, what operating system you came from, and then explain the basics and how to access the internet, email, music, etc. and how it's different from your previous.

The Ubuntu installer in my mind is actually the simplest of all, far better then the Vista/XP installer.
As for a tutorial at the end, maybe it is a good idea but would take too much room on the live disk...
Would need a DVD install and not everyone has DVD capacity on their computers.

[Ascenti0n]

not too difficult to find what you want and do what you want to do. For me it is that SIMPLE.

[spcwingo]

When I think of usability only one word comes to mind KISS (keep it simple stupid). The simpler it is, the less there is to go wrong.

[billgoldberg]

No, the word `evolution' does not eaven hint at being an E-Mail client.

I'm not on Ubuntu atm, but I do believe that when you go to Applications -> Internet, it says Evolution Email Client.

[Dekkon]

I'm not on Ubuntu atm, but I do believe that when you go to Applications -> Internet, it says Evolution Email Client.

That is actually what I thought, either way, I think the name could be rethought but if it is like that is probably not that big of a usability issue.

[Mr. Picklesworth]

Actually, it's "Evolution Mail." About as complex as Windows Mail ;)

But you can type "emails" in Deskbar and it'll still bring up the same thing. (Truly the only application search tool, in any major operating system, which can find an application when you type something other than its exact name. We have the benefit that the applications being indexed have REALLY rich meta-data for searching, so you can find an app based on what it does instead of just what it's called).

The biggest usability issue for desktop computing happens to be the same for every major operating system. Applications do not blend together with regards to saving and opening files, with the outcome being that users have to access the file system manually as it is the only consistent medium to move stuff around.

[23meg]

What do you consider good usability?

The word "usability" needs a good amount of contextualizing in terms of project goals, intended audience and the various factors contributing to it before it can mean anything. When you say "usability" in a vacuum, it tends to mean different things in different cases to different people, and that does not yield good discussion.

Matthew Paul Thomas puts this well in "What do you mean by 'usability'? (http://mpt.net.nz/archive/2008/08/11/usability)"


What draws the line between, too simple, and not enough features?

Depends completely on the goals of the software and its target audience. Any opining without those given would be hot air.


Consider the grandma, as I know it's always used, put it in front of her, and tell her to go to eMail, do you really think she would think evolution would be email?

Given that she is literate, has the very basic cognition of mouse semantics, and has some idea what an "application" and "Internet" may mean, yes; even though she may be unfamiliar with the environment, there's a well advertised area labeled "Applications" waiting to be clicked on, upon clicking on which she'll see "Internet", upon hovering on which she'll see "Evolution Mail".