GLASS containers

vs.

glass CONTAINERS

The former describes a container FOR glasses, which may or may not be MADE OF glass. The latter describes a container MADE of glass which may or may not be FOR glasses.

The difference between these two phrases in terms of audible stress is subtle, but I assure you it’s there.

Mamá me lavó la blanca My mom washed the white one
Mamáme la bola blanca Suck my ball white girl

Programming Language Questions & Review

Nice blog - I’ll subscribe later. However, I should note that in one of my default browsers - Konqueror, I don’t have Flash, because it is either that or full-Flash all the time. (And I hate them intrusive Flash ads). On Firefox, I normally use FlashBlock which makes surfing much more enjoyable, but I’m also using Konqi a lot.

In any case, if you just embed the Flash applet, then I don’t see anything and have to figure out there’s something beside the snothing. So please also include the link to the applet or the .flv on YouTube or where-ever. Otherwise, it’s bad usability.

Regards,

Shlomi Fish

Or have I been here before? If so, what language did I use? English every time? Well let’s get rid of the language question then. Have I ever made a deposit? Yes? Dozens of times, in fact? Well then, let’s switch from the “deep and narrow” style to the “wide and shallow” style preferred by power users. How often have I asked for a receipt? Never? Replace the “Do you want a receipt?” screen with some small toggle option on the initial (or final) screen. Always? Just print one without asking. How much cash do I ask for? Wildly varying amounts? Just ask me to key it in. Always one of three or four amounts ($20, $40, $100)? Then give me some quick buttons for that right up front, and put the keypad entry in the background.

And so forth. All you need to do is build a model of your user’s state of expertise, from newbie to pro, then use the information coming in about his behaviour to validate the model. You can build as complex a model as you have money for, and be as conservative or aggressive about trusting it as your customer service hotline complaints tell you works.

But the point is that what probably most bugs people about interacting with mechanical interfaces instead of fellow human beings is that they don’t learn, ever. That could be changed. (Bonus: it solves the problem of trying to come up with The One True Interface Design that works for everyone — why bother? Let the interface adapt to the user.)

The number of strangers who drop into SFO and want to take BART to downtown and who have no friends or family there to help them out with this stuff is pretty much a set of measure zero. Far too small to waste valuable engineering design talent on, when those $150,000 a year men could be put to use, say, making sure the damn trains run at all, and on time (which is hard enough for BART to pull off on a regular basis).

I’m not saying your criticism aren’t spot on. They surely are. But it sounds like it hasn’t quite occured to you yet that nearly everything you see around you has had the minimum possible amount of design talent spent on it, with the consequence that, if you have any design talent (or critical thinking skills) yourself, you’re bound to be disappointed in the quality of design of nearly everything. But this is efficient, this is how it should be. If as a society we wasted design talent where it wasn’t necessary, e.g. designing BART ticket machines, it wouldn’t be available for where it was, e.g. designing the bridges over which BART trains run.