Has the Mac Hit Raskin's Ideal?

Discussion in 'MacBytes.com News Discussion' started by MacBytes, Sep 11, 2006.

  1. macrumors bot

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2003
    #1
  2. macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #2
    I hardly think so. Raskin was withering in his criticism of the OSX interface.
     
  3. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2003
    #3
    very true. for all OS X's failings however, the latter day raskin had lost it imo. actually strike that i think most everything raskin did pre/post apple was mediocre at best. it led me to believe that perhaps raskin talked up his own importance on the mac dev team.
     
  4. macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #4
    He's been accused of doing so before. With justification? I don't honestly know. My point was, Raskin was above all a computer interface theorist, and his ideas about GUIs centered around a radical kind of simplicity. All this talk about RAM, size of displays and cost of computers is pretty much completely besides the point, and kind of makes a joke of everything Jef Raskin was really about.
     
  5. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    #5
    One memo

    Considering that the article is going by one particular memo written by Raskin, it seems to have met his ideal as written in that memo. Most of the comments people make about user interfaces and Fitt's Law and all that seriously oversimplify things. I'm taking a UI class right now, and UI researchers don't give Fitt's Law anywhere near the reverence that the typical interface-nazi gives it.

    "Do one thing every day that scares you. —Eleanor Roosevelt"

    Read a quote by Eleanor Roosevelt today... that was pretty scary.
     
  6. macrumors 65816

    Flynnstone

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Location:
    Cold beer land
    #6
    Raskin had very good ideas. He is one of the reason OS X is better than Windows.
    Some of his ideas or projects were a bit out there, but in general he made valuable contributions to the computer world.
     
  7. macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #7
    And your point was?
     
  8. macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #8
    Um, Elenor Roosevelt was a hottie? :p

    I gotta agree with Flynnstone here. Raskin had some good ideas, and I definitely respected his opinion, but not everything he wanted to do would have been a good idea IMO. Plus I think people are kinda put off by how crotchety he got in the last few years. Not that I blame him for being a little bitter, but he could have been a little more, er, constructive in some of his criticisms. There were some pretty valid complaints in there somewhere though.
     
  9. macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #9
    I wasn't really debating that point. Whether we agree on whether Raskin's theories were completely sound or not, the article seemed to miss the central point of what his theories actually were.
     
  10. macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #10
    To be honest, I just kinda skimmed it. Didn't seem that interesting. I just wanted to share my opinion on Raskin himself. Not that I really had one, but there you go.
     
  11. macrumors 6502a

    thewhitehart

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2005
    Location:
    The town without George Bailey
    #11
    Check out the Archy Project, being developed by Jeff Raskin's son. The website for it is at "The Jeff Raskin Center for Humane Interfaces", a quck google will find it as I don't have the link.
     
  12. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    #12
    My point

    That the article was not attempting to address all of Raskin's theories, just one memo that he wrote around 1979 (according to the article).
     
  13. macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #13
    Which is why the article is so shallow. This is my point.
     

Share This Page