[prev] [thread] [next] [lurker] [Date index for 2006/12/11]
>> Dear audio software (including, but not limited to, mixers, >> synthesizers/samplers, and effects): >> Who told you you were supposed to look like audio HARDWARE? >> Please, stop. It's really bad interface design. > > Not to diminish this obviously hateful situation, but what is the > alternative? Make them learn an entirely new interface metaphor > that's useless outside of the software? Should someone that knows > how to operate these devices not be able to sit in front of > software that does the same thing and be able to use it? Clearly a > DJ or somesuch shouldn't have to learn to program the operating > system's audio APIs, and you don't like the idea of it looking too > similar to the hardware they are used to, so where in between do we > place their learning curve? In the audio hardware, we have an > established metaphor and list of things to do in order to > accomplish a given task. Why should that list be different for the > hardware or the software? I would like to respectfully disagree here. You are assuming that one who uses Software also uses the Hardware. I for one, could care less that there is a switch on a turn table that does X, because I am not a DJ and I am not going to touch a turn table. However, what if I just want to use the software? Why should it be expected that I know the expected functionality of the hardware to use the software? > > Or is it just that their hardware is hateful from the start? I think that it is the hardware is fine for those who want to use the hardware. It's the soft ware that is pretty annoying. Sometimes you just want something straight forward and not have to work about freaking knobs and such. > >> Love, >> An aspiring musician who's tired of his music programs being full >> of fucking knobs and cables and LEDsThere's stuff above here
Generated at 22:02 on 27 Dec 2006 by mariachi 0.52