Re: Email client programs
On Wed, 26 Dec 2001, Craig Dickson wrote:
> Brian Nelson wrote:
> > > ... but I don't think I could get our users to go over to a non-GUI
> > > program.
> > Why is that? Because they've bought into the marketing pitch that
> > pretty graphics == better software? That's bullshit. There's no good
> > reason any user couldn't become more proficient with a text-mode client.
> What I've found in trying to get GUI-dependent people to use mutt is
> that they resist having to memorize a bunch of keystroke commands (no
> matter how easy, and despite the fact that the most common ones are
> listed at the top of the screen!). They'd rather point and click; they
> know how to do that already, and they don't see why they should go to
> the (minimal) bother of learning a keyboard-based UI. This isn't an
> intelligence problem, either; some of these people are quite bright, but
> they don't see learning mutt as worth their bother when good GUI
> alternatives exist. And Sylpheed is actually pretty good; if I didn't
> need a text-based interface (for accessing my mail in an ssh session
> across the internet, on a slow enough connection that X forwarding is
> out of the question), I might use it myself. But since I need a
> text-mode MUA, I use mutt.
agreed. pretty graphics have nothing to do with better software. same
thing with text-based interfaces - neither is a clencher in the argument,
the underlying design is.
that being said, there are people that *gasp* don't want to learn anything
new in order to use a computer. some people don't delve nearly as far
into it as we do, and use a computer merely as a tool. same can be said
with me, and tax forms vs. an accountant.