There’s a difference between software that’s designed to be easy for people that haven’t seen it before and software that’s meant to be used by someone that’s been trained to use it.
Yes and no. I did build several in-house enterprise applications and for this I know about this problem. And yes you’re right, a lot of the complicated contexts are more complex than searching on Google.
But! Enterprise software architects have a tendency to make every feature as visible, and also making the apps as feature rich as possible. This comes with high costs.
I always try to establish a strive with exactly what google delivers.
Cage the user in his first decision, Filter or action and then show him or her the application with all the features feasible in the chosen context. It is amazing how complexity reduced most of these applications are when you just ask this first question.
I think it’s more a case of needing to be idiot proof and provide the correct answer every time. Some people using it may have been trained but they also may be absolutely useless at using technology. Google may be simple but it doesn’t give you exactly what you’re looking for and all the relevant information on the first attempt.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !programmerhumor@lemmy.ml
Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)
Rules:
Posts must be relevant to programming, programmers, or computer science.
No NSFW content.
Jokes must be in good taste. No hate speech, bigotry, etc.
There’s a difference between software that’s designed to be easy for people that haven’t seen it before and software that’s meant to be used by someone that’s been trained to use it.
Please remind Microsoft of this as they continue to “improve and modernize” windows.
Can’t even use keyboard shortcuts to save a damn picture in paintbrush.
What the heck is paintbrush?
It’s called Paint now. Back in the old days it was called Paintbrush. It’s an anachronism.
FWIW MS has Paint 3D now and will probably have Paint 365 and Paint Series X before we know it.
Paint is still in the OS and hasn’t changed. Paint 3D is different
It was always called Paint. Paintbrush is the Mac equivalent
Hmm so back in Windows 3.1, Wikipedia said paintbrush was a Mac app from the early 90s.
MS renamed it for Windows 95, likely because of that and they were getting a lot of blowback for the interface in looking a lot like Mac anyway.
MS Paint
Yes and no. I did build several in-house enterprise applications and for this I know about this problem. And yes you’re right, a lot of the complicated contexts are more complex than searching on Google.
But! Enterprise software architects have a tendency to make every feature as visible, and also making the apps as feature rich as possible. This comes with high costs.
I always try to establish a strive with exactly what google delivers.
Cage the user in his first decision, Filter or action and then show him or her the application with all the features feasible in the chosen context. It is amazing how complexity reduced most of these applications are when you just ask this first question.
I think it’s more a case of needing to be idiot proof and provide the correct answer every time. Some people using it may have been trained but they also may be absolutely useless at using technology. Google may be simple but it doesn’t give you exactly what you’re looking for and all the relevant information on the first attempt.