The Sketchbook of Susan Kare

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Posted by timothy on Thursday November 24, 2011 @10:01AM from the ideas-in-action dept.

theodp writes "The Mac wasn't the first computer to present the user with a virtual desktop of files and folders instead of a command line and a blinking cursor, but it was the sketchbook of Susan Kare that gave computing a human face to the masses. After graduating from NYU with a Ph.D. in fine arts, Kare was working on a commission from an Arkansas museum to sculpt a razorback hog out of steel when she got a call from high-school friend Andy Hertzfeld offering her a job to work on the Mac. The rest, as they say, is UI history. Armed with a $2.50 sketchbook, Kare crafted the casual prototypes of a new, radically user-friendly face of computing. BTW, just in time for holiday gift-giving, Kare has self-published her first book, Susan Kare Icons. So, could computing could use a few more artists, and a few less MBAs?"

173 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

A few less MBAs.... by mevets · 2011-11-24 10:10 · Score: 4, Insightful

Is there any field that couldn't use less MBAs? It is a sort of community service to get the poor critters off the street, but they sure make a mess of things. Maybe we can find them a nice island somewhere.
1. Re:A few less MBAs.... by yuhong · 2011-11-24 10:12 · Score: 2
  
  I know. How about retraining them, if possible?
2. Re:A few less MBAs.... by peragrin · 2011-11-24 10:20 · Score: 0
  
  Like lawyers and advertisers MBA's and especially EMBA's can never learn anything new or be retrained.
  They should be put out to pasture by the time they are 40 to minimize damage they cause. Preferably on an island. Maybe near Sarah plains bridge to neverland
  
  --
  i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
3. Re:A few less MBAs.... by ObsessiveMathsFreak · 2011-11-24 10:37 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  It's less about having less MBA, and simply having less people telling actual creators and innovators what to do, and what not to do.
  Our society is going nowhere if our developments and actions are being decided by people who don't understand what the things they're making decisions about.
  
  --
  May the Maths Be with you!
4. Re:A few less MBAs.... by mykepredko · 2011-11-24 10:50 · Score: 0
  
  I know, let's tell them that the Earth is about to be destroyed and put them on a SpaceShip.
  We could call it the "Ark 2".
  
  --
  Mimetics Inc. Twitter
5. Re:A few less MBAs.... by mykepredko · 2011-11-24 10:51 · Score: 1
  
  Argghhh... Mucked up the reference.
  Thanx Graham for getting it right.
  
  --
  Mimetics Inc. Twitter
6. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-24 10:55 · Score: 1
  
  Did you mean an island of MBA's across a small body of water from an island of Lawyers, and every full moon, one or the other jumps into war canoes and paddles across the body of water to the other island and wages a fierce battlle against the other side with major losses on both sides as a result? If thats what you meant, then how do we set such a thing up, and get tens of thousands to volunteer every year?
7. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-24 10:56 · Score: 1
  
  I think you mean fewer MBAs
8. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-24 11:11 · Score: 0
  
  MBA's are lesser, and we could do with a few fewer. I've worked with too many artists as well to want any more around me. Twenty-two years in the entertainment industry will do that to a person.
9. Re:A few less MBAs.... by yuhong · 2011-11-24 11:28 · Score: 1
  
  Indeed, I think this is the root cause of all the buzzwords.
10. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Keen+Anthony · 2011-11-24 11:37 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  I realize you're just taking the piss, but as an MBA who has always understood technology, I've done fairly well. It's always fun to make fun of the MBAs when you're on the tech side, but the fact is, engineers don't know how to run companies. They don't know how to develop markets. They don't know how to sell products. Sure, they can make truly epic prototypes that look really awesome sitting in a private room. I've seen a lot of cool tech wizardry that went nowhere. Every successful example of computer technology has depended on a mix of both. But we can always do with fewer lawyers, totally.
11. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-24 11:54 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Half a decade before the Macintosh, a Harvard MBA named Dan Bricklin invented the first spreadsheet application, VisiCalc. It's not about having people with or without degrees, it's about having creative and innovative people, whatever their background.
12. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-24 12:12 · Score: 0
  
  This made me laugh, because right before i read it i thought to myself 'is there any field that couldnt use more artists?'
13. Re:A few less MBAs.... by damn_registrars · 2011-11-24 12:33 · Score: 1
  
  they sure make a mess of things. Maybe we can find them a nice island somewhere.
  Unfortunately an MBA took over this island we call "America". Indeed, he did make a mess of things. I'm not inclined to give an island, or anything that exists in the physical world, to an MBA. How about we pair each MBA up with one of our surplus lawyers (we have tons of 'em where I live and I suspect that is the case in other places, too) and encourage them to sue each other? That should keep them busy for a while...
  
  --
  Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
14. Re:A few less MBAs.... by yuhong · 2011-11-24 12:36 · Score: 1
  
  Yea, it is legacy MBAs that was taught the horrible stuff that is the problem.
15. Re:A few less MBAs.... by BasilBrush · 2011-11-24 12:44 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Sergy Brin, Larry Page, Mark Zuckerberg... Not an MBA amongst them. Where are these MBAs that know how to run companies?
16. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-24 12:59 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  "The percentage of top 100 CEOs who earned an M.B.A. decreased from 37% in 2003 to 36% in 2004, to 35% this year [2005]. The percentage of all S&P 500 CEOs who have an M.B.A. has increased from 37% to 39% over the past two years."
  content.spencerstuart.com/sswebsite/pdf/lib/2005_CEO_Study_JS.pdf
  There are a lot of MBAs who successfully run large corporations, but I realize that its fun to hate on them here.
17. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Keen+Anthony · 2011-11-24 13:11 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Seriously? The point isn't that people who hold Masters in Business Administration know best per se, it is that successful technology businesses are not the result of good engineering, but the result of a mix of engineering, good business management, and marketing expertise. This is traditionally the area of the MBA, but this doesn't imply that a computer scientist can never ever under any circumstances understand things like SWOT. It means that understanding how to make a business successful is separate from knowing how to make cool technology. You have identified four companies out of an entire industry populated by many successful tech companies operated by businessmen. And incidentally, Steve Jobs is not an engineer or a computer scientist. Nor are Bill Gates or Mark Zuckerberg. None of these guys fits the profile of the typical software engineer. And Sergy Brin and Larry Page worked with Eric Schmidt who possessed executive experience, realizing the need for someone who understood how to run a business.
18. Re:A few less MBAs.... by BasilBrush · 2011-11-24 13:14 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  You're missing what is in common with the names I mentioned. What percentage of people who CREATED successful companies are MBAs. How close to 0%?
  Sure once the founders retire or die, the companies find new people to run them. At that stage MBAs seem like the right qualification. But those MBAs are invariably far less successful than the founders.
19. Re:A few less MBAs.... by BasilBrush · 2011-11-24 13:28 · Score: 1
  
  I didn't say anything about software engineers. Saying that MBAs are bad isn't the same as saying software engineers are good.
  I wouldn't have included Steve Jobs on the list if I'd been making a point about software engineers.
  Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg obviously are software engineers though, unless you're discounting them for dropping out to create companies rather than finish their studies. Which would be pretty silly because dropping out of college to create a company is an even bigger pointer to success than not being an MBA.
  Thanks for bringing up Eric Schmidt. He too is a software engineer, not an MBA.
20. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Keen+Anthony · 2011-11-24 14:16 · Score: 1
  
  I was just using SEs as an example. Obviously, the industry has more engineers than just SEs. Again, you listed a handful of people who don't represent the bulk of the industry, and most of those you listed cannot be claimed by engineers as one of theirs if business admins can't equally claim them as one of their own just because of that education. Eric Schmidt is far more than than just a software engineer. Most software engineers, maybe not even many, have his executive experience. My point about proper executive leadership still stands. I'm not going to bring up a list of every Silicon Valley company that isn't Apple, Microsoft, or Google just to find MBAs who do a good job of running their companies.
21. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Zero__Kelvin · 2011-11-24 14:29 · Score: 0
  
  "Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg obviously are software engineers though, unless you're discounting them for "
  I'm discounting Gates because it is a well known fact that he can't write software worth shit. Zuckerburg writes web apps so he likely has no ability to write real software either. In both cases their "success" lies not in their great business management expertise, but rather in their ability to be scumbags willing to sell out the good of the common user, leveraging those user's ignorance and naivete for their own personal profit.
  
  --
  Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
22. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Missing.Matter · 2011-11-24 14:30 · Score: 2
  
  dropping out of college to create a company is an even bigger pointer to success than not being an MBA.
  That's only because you're looking at already successful companies and then looking at how they got started. What about all the kids who dropped out of college to start a company that failed?
23. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Spaseboy · 2011-11-24 14:30 · Score: 1
  
  I think that you will find in the technology world MBAs and the type typically destroy companies. Look at HP, Yahoo!, AOL...how'd them MBAs work out for 'em?
  
  --
  "I don't want more choice, I just want nicer things!"
  -Jennifer Saunders as Edina Monsoon
24. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Keen+Anthony · 2011-11-24 14:48 · Score: 1
  
  Sure, that's a fair point. As one person already, noted legacy MBAs can be problem. What it takes is business leadership by individuals who can see both sides of the coin. I'll mention Eric Schmidt again, but he might not be a good example if we consider the arguments that Google has become so focused on business performance that it's killing projects prematurely for failure to give an instant high ROI rather than nurturing those projects. Eric Schmidt is an engineer, formally, but he hasn't worked as an engineer in a while. He's been functioning an executive (an MBA so to speak) for years. I have direct experience with AOL. They can be difficult to work with because of, as you point out, all the MBAs at the company. There's a lot of middle management BS you have to put up with when dealing with AOL. For HP, I'm more familiar with Carly Fiorina's tenure. Some say she did great, but fought constantly with other corporate suits. Others say she was horrible. I just remember watching the quality of my HP consumer products nosedive between the early 90s and the 2005. Consider Zhentang Wang, CEO of Acer as a positive example of MBA leadership. He is a EE and an MBA.
25. Re:A few less MBAs.... by mirix · 2011-11-24 15:34 · Score: 1
  
  I know. How about retraining them, if possible?
  You mean like... re-education camps? Hmmm...
  
  --
  Sent from my PDP-11
26. Re:A few less MBAs.... by BasilBrush · 2011-11-24 15:40 · Score: 1
  
  I'm not going to bring up a list of every Silicon Valley company that isn't Apple, Microsoft, or Google just to find MBAs who do a good job of running their companies.
  The fact that you'd have to scan a list to find some MBAs and I just listed the founders of the top tech companies says it all.
27. Re:A few less MBAs.... by BasilBrush · 2011-11-24 15:49 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  I'm no fan of Bill Gates, but he did write the original Microsoft BASIC back in the mid 1970s, and fit it in 4K, the first person do do such a thing. Now, lots of people could do it, but then, with the tools and knowledge of the day it was quite a feat. He's certainly a software engineer, and a notable one at that.
  I like to make fun of web app developers too. But in reality it is real software engineering, often with a greater variety of skills needed than classic programming. Not for the simplest web sites, but certainly for something like a social app.
  I agree they are scumbags, but they are successful company founding software engineer scumbags.
28. Re:A few less MBAs.... by paiute · 2011-11-24 15:55 · Score: 1
  
  Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Sergy Brin, Larry Page, Mark Zuckerberg
  One of these things is not like the others.
  
  --
  If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
29. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-24 16:22 · Score: 0
  
  one day you'll be finished with some great software and want to sell it. inside of two months you'll realize you don't know the first thing about that, and will want to team up. placing a small ad, you'll get a hundred resumes. not taking any chances, your first criterion will be whether the applicant has an MBA -- only 3 of your applicants do. out of the three, you pick the one that seems most intelligent and reasonable, sharp, has a proven track record. and the rest is history. soon, you're retired.
  unless of course those three were on your hypothetical island. good luck sorting out the rest.
30. Re:A few less MBAs.... by syousef · 2011-11-24 16:38 · Score: 1
  
  Indeed, I think this is the root cause of all the buzzwords.
  We need a new term for that. I think we should call it "buzzwordification". It sounds much cooler than "buzzwordiation".
  
  --
  These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
31. Re:A few less MBAs.... by inpher · 2011-11-24 18:20 · Score: 1
  
  Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Sergy Brin, Larry Page, Mark Zuckerberg
  
  One of these things is not like the others.
  
  One of them is dead as slashdotters are well aware.
32. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Rubinstien · 2011-11-24 18:30 · Score: 1
  
  You forgot Ken Olson (DEC), Scott McNealy (Sun), John Warnock (Adobe), Alan Ashton (WordPerfect), Philippe Kahn (Borland) ...I could go on. And, arguably, all of those companies were a lot better off when they were lead by their original CEOs than they are now ...those that even still exist.
33. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Keen+Anthony · 2011-11-24 19:05 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Fine, off the top of my head: Paul Otellini, Meg Whitman, Kevin Rollins, John Scully, Sam Palmisano, Lee Kun-hee, Zhentang Wang, Carly Fiorina, Greg Brown. Granted, some of these names comes with caveats. You either loved Fiorina's HP or you hated according to the insiders I knew. Greg Brown's degree was in economics. John Scully's Apple isn't everyone's favorite. And eventually people turned on Kevin Rollins. Obviously, the tech industry has a smaller number of MBA chiefs than do other industries, but some people would argue that while they are not Google or Facebook; Intel, Dell, and Samsung are somewhat successful companies.
34. Re:A few less MBAs.... by RyuuzakiTetsuya · 2011-11-24 20:22 · Score: 0
  
  You do need project managers. People who understand the stuff they're trying to sell to the general public.
  MBAs don't teach you that. They don't teach you taste or creativity. They teach you how to waste people's time and ruin perfectly good output from talented people and potentially destroy hearts, minds and souls in the process.
  
  --
  Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
35. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Chrisq · 2011-11-24 21:28 · Score: 1
  
  Is there any field that couldn't use less MBAs? It is a sort of community service to get the poor critters off the street, but they sure make a mess of things. Maybe we can find them a nice island somewhere.
  This is no joke. There is a team in our company that has five managers and five web developers, all MBAs. That's almost as many as the team that runs and maintains our web applications. We thought this was overkill - such a large team occasionally adding a link or a page to a static site. Recently we found that they are actually outsourcing this work, and all ten of them just "manage" it!
36. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-24 23:25 · Score: 0
  
  How about a few less anythings? I'm an MBA and I understand tech, could an MBA also be artistic? Jeez, your an idiot.
37. Re:A few less MBAs.... by BasilBrush · 2011-11-25 01:01 · Score: 1
  
  You seem to be making my points for me. Scully and Fiorina wrecked the companies they were hired to run. Don't know enough about the others you mention.
38. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Zero__Kelvin · 2011-11-25 01:07 · Score: 1
  
  "I'm no fan of Bill Gates, but he did write the original Microsoft BASIC back in the mid 1970s"
  You are thinking of Paul Allen. Yes, Gates was tangentially involved, but even Gates himself credits Allen as the brains behind the work, and it was Allen who had the background and skills.
  
  "But in reality it is real software engineering, often with a greater variety of skills needed than classic programming."
  In some cases this may be true, but we are talking about Facebook in its infancy. Web front end development does not require a subset of skills anywhere near what is required to be a Linux kernel developer, for example. I have experience in everything from embedded systems device driver development to website development and I promise you that Zuckerberg is not a software engineer.
  
  --
  Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
39. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Phoghat · 2011-11-25 01:23 · Score: 1
  
  I realize you're just taking the piss, but as an MBA who has always understood technology, I've done fairly well.
  Well, that's the point innit? If more MBAs actually understood technology they'd all do "fairly well", as would we all.
  
  --
  Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
40. Re:A few less MBAs.... by rsilvergun · 2011-11-25 01:55 · Score: 1
  
  HP seems to be doing a lot worse since the MBAs took over. Google, OTOH, is doing great and being run by engineers. Also, the point of the article is not that MBAs don't maximize profits, it's that MBAs are gutting America's business infrastructure; and will leave a wasteland in their wake.
  
  A good example of the worst excesses is the pulp fiction industry. Ever wonder what happened to it? Basically, there was just one company that was distributing all the the books, and that company had accumulated a ton of undervalued real-estate over the years. Somebody noticed that, bought the company, and liquidated it. The publishers lost their distributed, and couldn't survive long enough to find another one (this was the 1970s, and setting up a distributor wasn't as easy as today). So we lose out on generations of good sci-fi and it becomes harder for kids to start reading.
  
  --
  Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
41. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Raenex · 2011-11-25 05:30 · Score: 2
  
  You are thinking of Paul Allen. Yes, Gates was tangentially involved, but even Gates himself credits Allen as the brains behind the work, and it was Allen who had the background and skills.
  Your version of the story isn't supported by evidence. You might try reading Paul Allen's version:
  "I'd occasionally catch Bill grabbing naps at his terminal during our late-nighters. He'd be in the middle of a line of code when he'd gradually tilt forward until his nose touched the keyboard. After dozing for an hour or two, he'd open his eyes, squint at the screen, blink twice, and resume precisely where he'd left off--a prodigious feat of concentration. [..] And it was a true collaboration. I'd estimate that 45 percent of the code was Bill's, 30 percent Monte's, and 25 percent mine, excluding my development tools."
42. Re:A few less MBAs.... by yuhong · 2011-11-25 07:01 · Score: 1
  
  Well, I think it happened after Larry Page became CEO. And on AOL:
  http://www.quora.com/Did-AOL-make-it-hard-to-cancel-in-order-to-keep-customers
43. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Zero__Kelvin · 2011-11-25 09:43 · Score: 1
  
  I didn't say Allen is more trustworthy and reliable than Gates, just much more skilled ;-)
  
  --
  Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
44. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Raenex · 2011-11-25 10:24 · Score: 1
  
  I think at this point you should just admit you have no evidence on your side. Provide a cite if you do.
45. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Zero__Kelvin · 2011-11-25 14:08 · Score: 1
  
  Or at this point I could laugh at your feeble attempt to win by saying that if I don't want to spend the next several days trying to find the footage for the interview where I specifically heard Gates make the statement then you automagically are correct.
  I specifically recall it, because it was one of the few times I actually had to give Gates his props for being truthful for a change. I promise you I don't care if you believe it or not. The fact that Allen made a contradictory statement means nothing. In fact his statement is ludicrous. Dozing off for an hour or two is a great act of concentration? Seriously?
  
  --
  Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
46. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Raenex · 2011-11-25 14:42 · Score: 1
  
  What's pathetic is your lack of citations but strong claims. Also, what's really pathetic is saying that Allen's statement "means nothing." The man was there, in the thick of it. The same man that you claim deserves all the credit. You think that he completely misremembers working on the project together?
  Your personal anecdote of a video you are recalling from memory means nothing. I can provide an actual citation to video where Gates says he recalls every line from the BASIC implementation.
  You have no evidence and no credibility.
47. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Keen+Anthony · 2011-11-25 15:39 · Score: 1
  
  Do you even remember your point? You asked me where the MBAs were that were successfully running companies. I said they existed. You challenged me. I named some. Scully didn't wreck Apple. Check your history. Under Scully, Apple II continued to sell. Even the Apple III, a failure overall, actually did fairly well in sales. And Apple introduced several successful products. Amelio and Spindler, maybe, but not Scully. I already stipulated that Fiorina can be said to have ruined HP. If you really look at HP though, that was a company that was eating its own. Some would say Fiorina was a victim of it. The other I named are the CEOs of Intel, Samsung, IBM, and Acer amongst others. I apologize, I should of have listed their companies. None of these guys, save for maybe Meg Whitman are household names.
48. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Rutulian · 2011-11-25 18:53 · Score: 1
  
  After reading this thread, I can only conclude a few things:
  1) A large sample of Slashdotters claim to (but obviously don't) know anything about MBAs, what they do, or what they study. There even seems to be some confusion about the degree program itself. MBA (that is Masters in Business Administration) != anything vaguely business related (finance, economics, investment/stock mangement).
  2) There seems to be a certain naiveté being expressed that a person holding a degree should be expressly proficient (thereby validating the existence of the degree). Every Slashdotter here knows (or should know), though, that isn't the case. There are plenty of horrible programmers (ahem "software engineers") that hold degrees from reputable institutions. But we don't disparage the whole field and its practitioners due to a few (or large number) of bad apples now, do we?
  3) A point being made repeatably, albeit confusedly, is that running a successful business requires some luck, some opportunity, and a large number of skills (likely contributed by a large number of people). Those skilled people become good at what they do from a mixture of study (formal or otherwise) and experience (successful or otherwise). So a person who holds an MBA is not necessarily going to be a good businessman. Getting an MBA may provide him with some tools that will contribute to his success, but it doesn't guarantee it and it doesn't mean that you must have it to be successful.
  The short of it is, there are good businessman and bad. Some of them have MBAs and some don't. Having an MBA does not mean you will be either, but many good businessman will find it useful to have an MBA as part of their formal training.
  (footnote) There is also the issue that it seems to be assumed that an executive should necessarily have the interests of the company as his priority and not simply his personal gain. The MBA is often blamed for evidence of the latter, but there is no clear obvious link between MBA and greedy, soulless bastard (despite what many Slashdotters want to believe). You can really only blame our culture for that. And the degeneration of the stock market from a means to enable the growth of healthy companies into a mere gambling enterprise.
49. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Zero__Kelvin · 2011-11-26 11:02 · Score: 1
  
  "What's pathetic is your lack of citations but strong claims."
  You mean like Allen and Gates' claims, right? After all, where is Allen's "evidence"? Gates saying he remembers every line is not proof that he does in fact remember each line (in fact he obviously doesn't), and Allen's claim of percentages is unfounded in any proof by your standards. You don't just believe what you hear, you are selective in your belief. So who is pathetic, again?
  
  --
  Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
50. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Raenex · 2011-11-26 11:48 · Score: 1
  
  You, you are incredibly pathetic. You are trying to equate the documented statements of the principals involved with some random Slashdotter's undocumented claim of a video he saw, where one of the principals said something different.
  In other words, we're both starting with statements from the principals, but my claims are documented and in agreement with each other, and yours are in your head.
  I know your poor ego can't admit you were wrong.
51. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Zero__Kelvin · 2011-11-26 12:15 · Score: 1
  
  You want to insist that a statement not backed by citations is meaningless when it suits you, but that no such citation of proof is required when that suits you. I have no doubt you will not own up to your ridiculous flip-flopping.
  
  --
  Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
52. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Raenex · 2011-11-26 15:33 · Score: 1
  
  I don't know what you are talking about. In a court of law these would be primary witnesses that have a consistent story and no reason to lie, and there is no evidence that they did.
  You are a random Slashdotter that can't corroborate anything you say. For all I know you're either misremembering or making it up to fit your preconceived prejudice of Bill Gates.
  It hurts to even think about being wrong, doesn't it?
53. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Zero__Kelvin · 2011-11-27 02:00 · Score: 1
  
  "I don't know what you are talking about."
  You can add that to a long list with yourself at the top.
  This has nothing to do with a court of law, but since you went there they do not have consistent statements. As I already told you, Gates himself credited Allen as the brains of the operation in an interview at one time. The fact that he later contradicted himself, making a ludicrous claim that nobody in their right mind would ever believe merely goes to further impeach his credibility. For example, since we all agree that Allen did some significant percentage of the work, why does Gates remember every line?
  
  --
  Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
54. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Raenex · 2011-11-27 03:31 · Score: 1
  
  This has nothing to do with a court of law
  I used it as an example of how people decide what is most likely true. I could also have talked about Wikipedia, which goes by citations from reliable sources.
  
  As I already told you, Gates himself credited Allen as the brains of the operation in an interview at one time.
  Yes, YOU told me this, yet you have not cited any evidence in support of it beyond your own personal memory. Get this through your thick head: You are just a random Slashdotter. Your personal memory counts for nothing unless you can back it up. Any Slashdotter can make claims about an interview they saw.
  
  The fact that he later contradicted himself, making a ludicrous claim that nobody in their right mind would ever believe merely goes to further impeach his credibility.
  It's an unusual, but not ludicrous claim. Some people are capable of remembering surprising stuff. And the thing is, he didn't contradict himself by any credible evidence. Your unsubstantiated memory of an interview is not credible.
  
  For example, since we all agree that Allen did some significant percentage of the work, why does Gates remember every line?
  Considering that there were only three programmers and the program was small enough that it had to fit in 4k while still leaving room for programs, it's quite likely that they all worked on and reviewed each others code. Even if he was exaggerating and couldn't sit down and write it from scratch, you could probably produce a listing and he could talk about it with familiarity.
  From the Allen reference: "Working so closely together, the three of us developed a strong camaraderie. [..] We staged nightly competitions to squeeze a sub-routine [..] into the fewest instructions, taking notepads to separate corners of the room and scrawling away. Then someone would say, 'I can do it in nine.' And someone else would call out, 'Well, I can do it in five!'"
  The fact is that there is cited evidence from two of the primary principals involved that they worked on this project together, and all you've got is a personal memory from a contradictory interview that you cannot substantiate.
55. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Zero__Kelvin · 2011-11-27 04:14 · Score: 1
  
  "Your personal memory counts for nothing unless you can back it up."
  Get this through your thick head. My personal memory counts for exactly the same amount as Gates' and Allen's. You are such a moron, I'm not even going to bother reading the rest of your post. Later luser ...
  
  --
  Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
56. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Raenex · 2011-11-27 06:21 · Score: 1
  
  My personal memory counts for exactly the same amount as Gates' and Allen's.
  Perhaps to you. To anybody else, no. You should also be more skeptical of your memories, because they are notoriously faulty. You're probably just misremembering the details of whatever interview you saw, assuming you aren't making it up to begin with.
57. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Zero__Kelvin · 2011-11-27 09:51 · Score: 1
  
  PLONK
  
  --
  Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
58. Re:A few less MBAs.... by Raenex · 2011-11-27 13:08 · Score: 1
  
  Ah, yes, the fingers in ears, "la la la, I can't hear you," defense.
59. Re:A few less MBAs.... by nobodie · 2011-11-27 14:44 · Score: 1
  
  you been modded to the top so i just have to be a ditto head
  
  --
  Subversion of spatial scale luxury decoration ideas.
60. Re:A few less MBAs.... by nobodie · 2011-11-27 14:46 · Score: 1
  
  MBAs know how to run companies... into the dirt anyway. I have no respect for them, they live in the same mucky world as lawyers
  
  --
  Subversion of spatial scale luxury decoration ideas.
Icons by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-24 10:12 · Score: 0

She was the first person to design icons ever?
1. Re:Icons by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-24 10:19 · Score: 1
  
  Those Egyptians are in for a massive legal bill.... I wasn't even accidental - clearly they traveled through time to steal her ideas! Surely this shows intent?
2. Re:Icons by Yvan256 · 2011-11-24 10:32 · Score: 1
  
  Time travel? Don't be ridiculous. It was aliens.
3. Re:Icons by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-24 10:43 · Score: 1
  
  She was the first person to design icons ever?
  I think the point is "see women can do stuff too ... sometimes ... no we're not insecure about this, that's why we mention it and make a big deal out of it every single chance we get!"
4. Re:Icons by PopeRatzo · 2011-11-24 17:34 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  She was the first person to design icons ever?
  With the death of Steve Jobs, I believe we are going to see more early Mac artifacts like this one begin to emerge, forming the framework for what will be the fastest growing religion of the coming decade. File this one under, "Mac Nativity". Sketchbooks of ur-icons. Alchemical workbooks for the transmutation of blinking amber cursors into personal computers. Into the Macintosh.
  Do you remember the articles that came out every day after his death for more than two weeks? "The Last Words of Steve Jobs". "The Death of Steve Jobs" by his sister. "What Steve Jobs said about (cultural item here)". "The Early Days of Steve Jobs", "Steve Jobs the Lost Years", "Steve Jobs on the Road to Damascus" and "Steve Jobs rides into Jerusalem on the Back of an Ass". His great sacrifice of his own health so the Company can bring forth the iPhone 4S. His vision, his time in the wilderness and his rise and ultimate ascension. It's as predictable as the Perseids: this is the first 21st century faith. He even knocked the trial of the killer of that other mythical figure, Michael Jackson, out of the headlines for a solid month. Television programming was interrupted to make the solemn announcement. No mere text crawl could be sufficient.
  I'm setting the over/under on the first miracle performed in Steve Jobs' name at October, 2012.
  I am not joking.
  
  --
  You are welcome on my lawn.
5. Re:Icons by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-25 00:55 · Score: 0
  
  Burn in Windows DllHell Heathen UnBeliever !!!
6. Re:Icons by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-25 06:16 · Score: 0
  
  You do make a point, although a convoluted one. It is too bad you, and the vast majority who are just like you, personally, will never make, do or ever say or write anything important. If this were not the case, we wouldn't need individuals like Steve Jobs or Susan Kare, et al. But we already have enough uncreative, uninteresting individuals, so the ones that aren't sometimes get notoriety and praise. Deal with it, you troll of envy.
7. Re:Icons by PopeRatzo · 2011-11-25 10:22 · Score: 1
  
  Deal with it, you troll of envy.
  I'm not saying anything at all about the contributions of Steve Jobs or Susan Kare, but rather, about those that have turned them into figures of nearly supernatural significance.
  
  --
  You are welcome on my lawn.
Oh come on by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-24 10:15 · Score: 0

So basically you're just shilling for the book?
B Ark by GrahamCox · 2011-11-24 10:18 · Score: 0

Or just send them off with the telephone sanitisers.
Aha by Compuser · 2011-11-24 10:24 · Score: 2, Interesting

So now I know who made the Mac so insufferably ugly. For me it was a retch at first sight. I think I may be the only one in the world but I have consistently hated every single artistic and stylistic choice Apple ever made with their GUI (their hardware designs sometimes look OK, e.g. iPhone 4)
1. Re:Aha by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-24 10:50 · Score: 1, Informative
  
  So now I know who made the Mac so insufferably ugly. For me it was a retch at first sight. I think I may be the only one in the world but I have consistently hated every single artistic and stylistic choice Apple ever made with their GUI (their hardware designs sometimes look OK, e.g. iPhone 4)
  That comes from being a heterosexual. You're clearly not their target demographic.
2. Re:Aha by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-24 11:03 · Score: 0
  
  Parent and grandparent express nerd rage. Proof they need to get laid.
3. Re:Aha by BasilBrush · 2011-11-24 12:46 · Score: 1
  
  What's your idea of good computer design? Let me guess... a teletype emulation?
4. Re:Aha by tverbeek · 2011-11-24 13:44 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, you are the only one in the world who has hated every choice Apple has made with their GUI. :)
  I've disliked a lot of their choices over the decades, and I've got a BFA in design that supposedly means my criticisms have some validity. But Apple has gotten right far more than they've gotten wrong. For example, the rounded rectangle, which was the shape of the screen image in Finder 1.0, and available to programmers as a standard shape in its graphics routines (along with line, circle, and square), and which remains the standard shape of every window in OS X, every app icon in iOS, and nearly every Apple device... was a perfect cornerstone of design: tidy and clean without feeling mechanical.
  
  --
  http://alternatives.rzero.com/
5. Re:Aha by Compuser · 2011-11-24 14:13 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  I do not know why I got marked as flamebait. I clearly stated it was my personal opinion and I meant every word without intent of inciting a flamewar. Mods are on crack.
  That said, to me the ideal design of GUI so far has been Windows 95, with toolbar autohide. Horrible OS but imho best GUI ever. Clean, simple, rectangular without the horrible rounded corners. Grey background, forgettable fonts, and equally neutral pointer shapes.
  I have always hated icons and preferred text instead but I have yet to see a GUI with labels instead of pictures by default. Other than that - Windows 95 got most things right.
6. Re:Aha by BasilBrush · 2011-11-24 15:24 · Score: 1
  OK, I see what you mean. But even there, some icons are irreplaceable:
  1) Close, Minimise and Maximise at the corner of every app window. How much more ugly and less usable they would be if they were words instead of icons?
  2) What about arrows on the scroll bar ends? You can do scroll bars without them now, but back in 1995, many people were new to computers and needed the clue as to what that strip at the right of the window did.
  3) In a file manager list, how are you going to distinguish between a directory and a file? In DOS, they were distinguished with a column with either
  
  or blank. In what way is the icon of a folder worse than
  ?
  4) What about a Win 95 choice field? What how would you indicate it opens up to give a selection without the down arrow icon?
7. Re:Aha by BasilBrush · 2011-11-24 16:29 · Score: 1
  
  Ah, screwed formatting by using angle brackets. Can't be bothered redoing it.
So not everybody who did well dropped out... by fantomas · 2011-11-24 10:24 · Score: 4, Insightful

So not everybody who did well dropped out: a PhD in art history as well as a maker (her PhD thesis title "A study of the use of caricature in selected sculptures of Honore Daumier and Claes Oldenburg").
Nice to know it's possible to balance the two, it will make some of my PhD student friends very happy indeed :-)
wrong by khipu · 2011-11-24 10:24 · Score: 2, Informative

Shortly thereafter, Xerox doomed its chances to own the icon-driven future by pouring its resources into the Xerox Star, a product aimed strictly at the corporate market. Each Star purchase required an initial $75,000 installation and a network of external file servers, plus another $16,000 for each additional workstation (twice the price of a new car at the time). A digital revolution for the masses, it wasn’t.
No, Xerox didn't "doom the future", they just started with an expensive first product and then were driving the cost down. Apple saw this and started cloning it. Their first attempt also cost about $10000 per workstation. Then Apple cut a lot of corners and drove the price down further to about $2500 (about $5000 in today's dollars). Corner cutting involved getting rid of pretty much all the software infrastructure of the Xerox devices, stripping them down to a mere shell, a shell that looked nice but was hell to program.
1. Re:wrong by AHuxley · 2011-11-24 11:42 · Score: 1
  
  Re "cloning" - Xerox got to buy pre-IPO stock for Apples engineer visits.
  
  --
  Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
2. Re:wrong by BasilBrush · 2011-11-24 12:50 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  getting rid of pretty much all the software infrastructure of the Xerox devices, stripping them down to a mere shell
  Yeah, right. "Stripping". By adding things like pull down menus and drag and drop. Things that didn't exist on the Xerox system. Things that didn't exist at all till Apple invented them.
3. Re:wrong by Bing+Tsher+E · 2011-11-24 14:01 · Score: 2
  
  Bullshit. Pulldown menus existed in many software products. What Apple 'invented' was a crippled little box with a collection of applets in it and no third party software for a year or so. The Mac 128 was a joke machine.
4. Re:wrong by BasilBrush · 2011-11-24 15:06 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Bullshit. Pulldown menus existed in many software products.
  Name a single one that preceded the Lisa. You can't because Apple did indeed invent the pull down menu.
  Wikipedia even mentions it. Though they erroneously call them drop-down menus (which was a Microsoft variant) rather than pull down menus as Apple called them.
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_graphical_user_interface
  I recognise your user name as someone who is very often wrong. I suggest you should do a little research before posting in future.
5. Re:wrong by khipu · 2011-11-24 15:52 · Score: 1
  
  Lots of systems, including Xerox had things that were functionally identical to pull-down menus and graphically very similar. Furthermore, the idea of putting a menu bar at the top of the screen existed in several non-Apple software products. So, what you call "pull down menus" was a minor graphical variation on existing practice at the time.
  It also ended up not catching on. Most systems ended up with menu buttons at the top of windows, not the screen. Even NeXT went back to copying Smalltalk's menu system for a while. On current Macs, the menu bar at the top is a usability problem and an anachronism.
6. Re:wrong by GrahamCox · 2011-11-24 16:12 · Score: 1
  
  looked nice but was hell to program
  
  Actually, it wasn't hell to program. By the standards of the day, it was really not bad. Its built-in toolbox managed many chores for you - want a window, one line and you got one. Compared to today it looks quite low level, but at that time it was very high level. The first app I wrote for Mac (other than "hello world") was a full multi-windowed, menu and event driven affair that responded in real time to emergency radio transmissions. There was no way I could have done it if I had nothing but assembler and no toolbox. My main gripe at the time was the small screen and lack of colour, but that was fixed within a year.
  
  The limited memory, lack of multi-tasking and all the rest of it that people think were a major headache were simply not a problem AT THE TIME. It was only later that people wanted and needed more.
7. Re:wrong by GrahamCox · 2011-11-24 16:16 · Score: 1
  
  I should also mention that programming in pascal, something that also perhaps seems strange from todays point of view, was also a remarkably pleasant experience, coming from a background in bASIC and embedded assemblers of various flavours. Borland Turbo Pascal for the Mac was, in 1985-6, a very nice and fast environment.
8. Re:wrong by khipu · 2011-11-24 16:24 · Score: 0
  
  Actually, it wasn't hell to program. By the standards of the day, it was really not bad.
  When the Mac came out, Smalltalk-80 had been out for several years. Xerox Star had InterPress and object embedding. AmigaOS was right around the corner. LISP had CLIM. On Linux and UNIX workstations, you could get X10. On other platforms, there were high level languages, dynamic object systems, GUI designers, graphical debuggers, and IDEs.
  Yes, even by the standards of the day, MacOS was a piece of shit.
9. Re:wrong by BasilBrush · 2011-11-24 16:25 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Again, neither Xerox nor anyone else had pull-down menus nor anything like it. Xerox used buttons for commands. Either physical buttons on the custom keyboard, or screen buttons rather like a text button version of a modern day toolbar. Nothing like pull-down menus.
  
  So, what you call "pull down menus" was a minor graphical variation on existing practice at the time.
  There's nothing minor about it. The two dimensional menus within a menu concept was novel, new and is a central ingredient of most GUI OSs to this day.
  Whether or not it's attached to the screen or the app window *IS* a minor variation, yet that's something you bring up in the hope of changing this from a discussion of fact, to one of preference.
10. Re:wrong by khipu · 2011-11-24 16:44 · Score: 0
  
  Again, neither Xerox nor anyone else had pull-down menus nor anything like it.
  
  Many systems had a global hierarchical menu, some put them at the top, some used vertically stacked buttons, some used a menu button. Apple's choice was a minor variation of these systems,
  
  Whether or not it's attached to the screen or the app window *IS* a minor variation, yet that's something you bring up in the hope of changing this from a discussion of fact, to one of preference.
  Yeah, you're just the typical Apple fanboy trying to rewrite history.
11. Re:wrong by GrahamCox · 2011-11-24 16:51 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  No. You cannot compare it with anything that "was just around the corner" - it didn't exist yet. I don't recall AmigaOS being much ahead of the Mac (not "Mac OS", it wasn't called an OS for another 10 years), though it did have some nice features and eventually, some nice tools. Apart from Smalltalk, on which you might have a point, none of those other things would have been usable on a 68000 processor. It's questionable whether any sort of OOP runtime could have run on it. You could argue that the CPU was too small for the job, but the software was well tailored to the architecture they chose, for better or worse. The point is, it was a very productive way to program for a while. I'm not saying it was anywhere near perfect, but calling it a piece of shit is to judge it by the standards of today, not 1984.
12. Re:wrong by BasilBrush · 2011-11-24 18:18 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Many systems had a global hierarchical menu, some put them at the top, some used vertically stacked buttons, some used a menu button. Apple's choice was a minor variation of these systems,
  I've asked for a specific example. The only one you've given is Xerox, and you're wrong on that. Give it up.
  
  Yeah, you're just the typical Apple fanboy trying to rewrite history.
  On the contrary. I've given the history. I've linked to Wikipedia to prove it. You're the one who's denying history, without a scrap of anything to back you up. And the reason you're doing it is you hate Apple. Grow up.
13. Re:wrong by nightfell · 2011-11-24 20:05 · Score: 1
  
  I see facts are irrelevant to a troll.
14. Re:wrong by RyuuzakiTetsuya · 2011-11-24 20:42 · Score: 1
  
  They could've produced an easy to use personal computer but they didn't. They were too busy chasing their own bread and butter to try to change the world.
  Xerox had a decade to put out a Mac style product for the masses. They never did. They doomed themselves to being a printer and copier company since then.
  
  --
  Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
15. Re:wrong by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-24 22:27 · Score: 1
  
  I've linked to Wikipedia to prove it.
  Am I the only one that finds this funny?
16. Re:wrong by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-24 22:35 · Score: 0
  
  When the Mac came out, Smalltalk-80 had been out for several years. Xerox Star had InterPress and object embedding. AmigaOS was right around the corner. LISP had CLIM. On Linux and UNIX workstations, you could get X10.
  
  Linux did not exist when the Mac came out.
17. Re:wrong by uglyduckling · 2011-11-25 00:52 · Score: 1
  
  Look at the Wikipedia link, and at the many other GUI histories available on the web. The first image with a pull-down menu is captioned "Macintosh Desktop (1984)". All of the earlier images (and text referencing them) that show something that looks like a menu is in fact a modal button (either clickable or a reference to a function key) that changed the mode of the screen. Apple invented pull-down menus that allowed preferences to be set and choices made in a modeless manner, i.e. the application window below remained unchanged. Apple have ripped-off plenty of design features, as has every company involved in GUI design, but they did indeed invent the pull-down menu and they should get credit for it.
18. Re:wrong by khipu · 2011-11-25 06:25 · Score: 1
  
  Apart from Smalltalk, on which you might have a point, none of those other things would have been usable on a 68000 processor. It's questionable whether any sort of OOP runtime could have run on it.
  That's my point: Apple chose low-end components and messy software architecture in order to beat everybody to market. All the compromises Apple made in the software were just to get a 6-12 month lead and grab market share. It was a good business strategy but bad engineering.
  
  You could argue that the CPU was too small for the job, ... The point is, it was a very productive way to program for a while. I'm not saying it was anywhere near perfect, but calling it a piece of shit is to judge it by the standards of today, not 1984.
  No, it was bad even by the standards of 1984. A 68k was powerful enough to run UNIX, OS-9, AmigaOS, Smalltalk, Lisp, C, and Objective-C (all of which existed at the time). From an engineering point of view, Apple should have put a bit more memory on the machine and done a better job at the OS. But their objective wasn't to engineer a good system, their objective was to make something that looked good and could be released quickly, and that turned out to be the right business decision in the short term, but almost killed them in the long term.
19. Re:wrong by khipu · 2011-11-25 06:38 · Score: 1
  
  All of the earlier images (and text referencing them) that show something that looks like a menu is in fact a modal button (either clickable or a reference to a function key)
  Even Smalltalk-80 had a "Keep this Menu Up" feature. If you selected it, you got a persistent menu that you could select from. The Star had buttons in the menu bar that would pop up dialogs that were menu-like (but could be more complicated). UCSD Pascal had a menu with submenus at the top. There were also tons of text-based menu systems that did similar things.
  
  but they did indeed invent the pull-down menu and they should get credit for it.
  I didn't say that they didn't "invent the pull-down menu", I'm saying that the pull-down menu is merely a variation on interfaces that already existed. It was a small step in a long evolution.
20. Re:wrong by mgabrysPDX · 2011-11-26 09:50 · Score: 1
  
  Xerox Star was the actual goal and it came out 2 years before the Lisa and 3 before the Mac - it was never a masses product, and I'm not even sure Xerox was thinking masses outside of enterprise (which while huge isn't consumer-grade masses) for the entire of the PARC project(s) that led to the Alto / Star. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xerox_Star As far as doomed - their whole PARC enterprise is funded from the base-level patents they made, and XEROX made a 20x ROI on their Apple investment that lead to the PARC demo that launched the Lisa and Mac. I don't think Xerox failed in the slightest, and I'm not even getting into Novell, Adobe, and a number of other companies that came out of it all. They only failed if you think that the Mac was their goal - I don't think it ever was. It was the Star and assorted office systems that evolved from it, as well as the fundamental tech that lead to it and a myriad of other companies and industries (printing, storage, networking, operating systems, systems integration, OOP and on and on). If you succeeded at one of these, you'd be called a good businessman. They invented and through many non-standard channels, propagated themselves into every device on the planet. Some 'fail'. If you're going to fail - you're not going to cause companies to change direction and lead to the creation of other fortune 500s - you're going to fail in obscurity. --- BTw awesome sig - made my folks (both former CS drivers chuckle).
21. Re:wrong by mgabrysPDX · 2011-11-26 09:55 · Score: 1
  
  btw what is wrong with the text form? all my paragraph breaks never show up. How many do you need? 12? Dozens of forums and only this place removes them?
that bitch! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-24 10:36 · Score: 1

so she's the reason computers don't make any sense and just have these stupid and non-depictive pictures everywhere?
Plato was the inspiration by dak664 · 2011-11-24 10:39 · Score: 5, Informative

The Plato IV protoypes used a plasma panel with touch screen in the late '60s, and had downloadable characters you could point to to activate different functions. Not a far reach to make those program and folder icons.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PLATO_(computer_system)
1. Re:Plato was the inspiration by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-28 12:23 · Score: 0
  
  The Magnavox PLATO Plasma Panel terminal was a production unit - hundreds of the brown-and-tan units were made. They were first delivered to the PLATO lab (CERL) during Christmas break 1971. Control Data Corp. made more in a black-and-beige color scheme. Many have dear memories of the 512x512 orange-on-black screen.
Ugh, theodp non-sequitur by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-24 10:45 · Score: 0

I actually agree with the sentiment, but really? Did this article need that?
Do you realize who this is? by Animats · 2011-11-24 10:58 · Score: 4, Informative

Susan Kare is very well known in the visual design world. She is the world's leading icon designer. Not only did she do the icons for the Mac, she did some of the icons for Windows. And Autodesk products. And PayPal. And Facebook.
(If the Linux crowd had someone that good, Linux on the desktop would probably be a success by now.)
1. Re:Do you realize who this is? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-24 11:11 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  She did the icons for Nautilus too.
2. Re:Do you realize who this is? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-24 11:58 · Score: 0
  
  Yes, this is mentioned in TFA.
3. Re:Do you realize who this is? by Nerdfest · 2011-11-24 12:10 · Score: 1
  
  Have you seen the Faenza icon set?
4. Re:Do you realize who this is? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-24 12:12 · Score: 0
  
  (If the Linux crowd had someone that good, Linux on the desktop would probably be a success by now.)
  Even if she decided to contribute, would project managers be willing to listen to her? Given that the usability of Linux on the desktop is actually devolving (cf. KDE 4 and Gnome 3), I don't think this would be the case.
5. Re:Do you realize who this is? by martin-boundary · 2011-11-24 12:14 · Score: 1
  
  I've never understood the appeal of icons. I go out of my way to get rid of them on my desktop. I mean, what's the point? As soon as you open a window, they're hidden behind it. If you keep them in a toolbar or a dock instead and you make 'em they stay on top of application windows, now they interfere with the operation of those apps instead. Moreover, the pictures are too small to contain readable text, and if you want to know what an icon does, you have to hover until the tooltip appears. And that's usually cryptic too.
  I can see how icons are an art major's wet dream, but for real work I don't see any point in having them.
6. Re:Do you realize who this is? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-24 12:16 · Score: 0
  
  If the Linux crowd had someone that good, Linux on the desktop would probably be a success by now.
  The Linux desktop's main problem isn't a lack of good icons and themes. That's the least of it's problems.
7. Re:Do you realize who this is? by brantondaveperson · 2011-11-24 12:49 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  You know your mouse pointer? You know, the one that changes to indicate what actions are available depending on what you're pointing at? They're icons too. Icons also take up significantly less space in a toolbar than text, and are much faster for the human eye to recognise. The world of icons is not restricted to what litters your desktop.
  Also real work does not always == coding. Icons indicating which tool you have selected in photoshop (for instance) are most definitely used for 'real work'.
8. Re:Do you realize who this is? by BasilBrush · 2011-11-24 12:55 · Score: 1
  
  Your complaints only apply to badly designed icons. ...other than your complaint about icons on the desktop. I'd agree that they are a waste of time.
9. Re:Do you realize who this is? by martin-boundary · 2011-11-24 14:26 · Score: 2
  
  You know your mouse pointer? You know, the one that changes to indicate what actions are available depending on what you're pointing at? They're icons too. Icons also take up significantly less space in a toolbar than text, and are much faster for the human eye to recognise. The world of icons is not restricted to what litters your desktop.
  
  It's interesting you should mention that. Are icons really faster than text to recognize? I doubt it. Humans are trained to read text from the time we start school, and we're really good at it for most of us.
  In fact, I have no problem claiming we're better at it than recognizing icons. Here's an experiment for you to test this: Go to a Chinese takeaway (maybe not your regular one), and look at the menu. Read the words in English and on a blank piece of paper write down the dishes you remember. Now read the chinese characters, and on a blank piece of paper write down the ideograms you remember, and also the dishes they're associated with. I bet you do much better with the english text than with the chinese icons.
  So what's the point of this experiment? Obviously we're more used to text than icons in the western world, so why insist on using icons in computing instead of text? We should play up to our strengths, not go out of our way to makes things more difficult.
  
  Also real work does not always == coding. Icons indicating which tool you have selected in photoshop (for instance) are most definitely used for 'real work'.
  
  And as far as a palette or a ribbon of icons for choosing actions in an app like photoshop or word is concerned, let's review the facts where speed really matters: gaming. Do you see a lot of gamers who like to click on large palettes of dozens of icons during their games, or do they generally prefer pressing buttons on the keyboard to change functions when they need it? Gamers care about speed a lot more than photoshop users do, so if your point had merit, why do games continue to emphasize keyboard interfaces?
  I think icons sell computers, because they're novel and they look good in showrooms and adverts, and I suspect that's their main function in IT. It's an important function to be sure, since money's involved, but it's just marketing. Except for a few specialized applications, icons don't seem to *functionally* improve on text IMHO.
10. Re:Do you realize who this is? by chilvence · 2011-11-24 15:17 · Score: 1
  
  So what's the point of this experiment?
  To prove that you cant read chinese?
  I've been studying chinese glyphs in my spare time - even at a low level of experience, trust me, once their meaning is set in your head, they practically jump off the page. They are an example of a very abstract way of 'iconising' words though, not at all straightforward to learn. If chinese glyphs went back to being true to life, rather than extremely stylised and idiosyncratic, then we would see some intresting spread of chinese...
11. Re:Do you realize who this is? by martin-boundary · 2011-11-24 15:30 · Score: 0
  
  No, the point is that the vast majority of computer users have more difficulty with icons than text, just as the vast majority of Chinese take-away customers in America have more difficulty with Chinese symbols than with English text equivalents.
  You're like the guy who trains himself to recognize hundreds of icons at top speed, and then claims if he can do that, then icons must be superior to text for everybody.
12. Re:Do you realize who this is? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-24 16:41 · Score: 0
  
  No, the point is that the vast majority of computer users have more difficulty with icons than text,
  That's funny. I thought the point that you were making was that poorly designed icons weren't very effective.
13. Re:Do you realize who this is? by martin-boundary · 2011-11-24 17:28 · Score: 1
  
  This is a subthread about the claim that icons are faster to process than text. It's not my main argument.
14. Re:Do you realize who this is? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-24 19:02 · Score: 0
  
  Susan Kare is very well known in the visual design world. She is the world's leading icon designer. Not only did she do the icons for the Mac, she did some of the icons for Windows. And Autodesk products. And PayPal. And Facebook.
  (If the Linux crowd had someone that good, Linux on the desktop would probably be a success by now.)
  It isn't Linux's fault that the Desktop lost out to phones and tablets. *Nix is winning now.
15. Re:Do you realize who this is? by brantondaveperson · 2011-11-24 21:10 · Score: 1
  
  Do you see a lot of gamers who like to click on large palettes of dozens of icons during their games, or do they generally prefer pressing buttons on the keyboard to change functions when they need it?
  That's keyboard vs. Mouse. I bet they'd be even happier with a specially designed keyboard with icons to represent the actions those keys invoke.
16. Re:Do you realize who this is? by coolmadsi · 2011-11-25 02:15 · Score: 1
  
  It's interesting you should mention that. Are icons really faster than text to recognize? I doubt it. Humans are trained to read text from the time we start school, and we're really good at it for most of us.
  Most icons are going to take up less space on the screen compared to text, so you can fit more on. I suspect that, even if text is faster to read, the size benefit would probabaly win over it.
  I guess there is also the idea that the same icon can be used across multiple languages, so long as the meaning is the same, without having to translate lots of buttons.
  Although nowadays you do have this weird situation whereby an icon of an abstract concept is still used as an icon, but no longer used in the physical world. For example, a "save" button often uses an image of a floppy disk as the icon - there will be children (if not now, then soon) who understand that this image means to save a file, but would have never seen a floppy disk before.
Do not forget Xerox by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-24 11:23 · Score: 0

Let us not forget the early pioneers at Xerox: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_graphical_user_interface
Icons are a waste of time by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-24 11:31 · Score: 1

What purpose do they serve? Anybody using a computer here, who can't READ?
Icons clutter up your desktop and makes things MORE difficult to find. Unless you can't read, in which case, you probably can't use the program that the application refers to.
What's wrong with an alphabetical list of your programs? Too easy? Look at the ludicrous picture of icons in the article - spread all over the entire screen for something like 20 programs (I didn't count exactly), for what? Do you know what all your icons represent, without the text there to help you? The only place icons are useful is in the taskbar (but this could easily be replaced by a popup list of the program names...) and in toolbars (ditto, replaced with command names).
1. Re:Icons are a waste of time by Guy+Harris · 2011-11-24 11:37 · Score: 0
  
  Do you know what all your icons represent, without the text there to help you?
  Or, to put it another way, if your icon is incomprehensible without a tooltip or title, You're Doing It Wrong.
  Now, maybe once you've learned that, for example, the small image of the man with his head up his ass represents "send message to upper management", it's easier to find the picture on the toolbar than to find the text on the toolbar if that's the function you're looking for. If that's the case, it'd be a small irony, as it'd be "text for the newbies, icons for the power users...".
2. Re:Icons are a waste of time by angel'o'sphere · 2011-11-24 12:01 · Score: 1
  
  Icons are faster than text if they are designed well.
  Furthermore you do not need to translate them into other languages "when they have established themselves".
  However, this is pretty hard. Look at traffic signes. There are only a few basic shapes and those are again accustomed by text. (Triangle, sitting on a corner, triangle sitting on an edge, octagon, square sitting on a corner, smaller rectangles with text for ranges or durations)
  However if icons are more or less randomly created by programmers they most of the time make no sense at all. E.g. why does the "printer icon" on a windows toolbar behave different than the "File - Print ..." menu item? Who does still know what a disk is (as the disk symbol in save)? I usually use keyboard short cuts and/or menues only. If you can disable the toolbar I do so. The only toolbar I occasionally use us the Eclispe Run/Debug/Run External Tool ...
  Unfortunately user interfaces become badder and worse from year to year. Just as if Susan Kare and Razkin et al. never existed.
  Sure, iOs and Android is "nicer" but how long did you need to figure that the "sliders" on iOs to switch stuff on or off are no sliders but fancy looking radio buttons (or check boxes even). In other words: you can not slide them from off to on and vice versa, you have to click/touch them. Even worth: by looking at one you can not judge if it is in the on or off state. At least I mix them up all the time. Thinking an option is off (because it shows the neat little "o" to the left, and the slider is moved to the right) but in fact it is on (the little "o" is ment to indicate to move the slider to the left to switch it off. But that slider is no slider, ARRRRRRG!!!!)
  
  --
  Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
3. Re:Icons are a waste of time by tlhIngan · 2011-11-24 12:18 · Score: 2
  
  Sure, iOs and Android is "nicer" but how long did you need to figure that the "sliders" on iOs to switch stuff on or off are no sliders but fancy looking radio buttons (or check boxes even). In other words: you can not slide them from off to on and vice versa, you have to click/touch them. Even worth: by looking at one you can not judge if it is in the on or off state. At least I mix them up all the time. Thinking an option is off (because it shows the neat little "o" to the left, and the slider is moved to the right) but in fact it is on (the little "o" is ment to indicate to move the slider to the left to switch it off. But that slider is no slider, ARRRRRRG!!!!)
  I don't know about you, but iOS has always put "On" and "Off" in the little toggles. They're done that way for two reasons. First, it's a larger surface to tap on (checkboxes can be painfully small). Second, its state is readable at a glance.
  I believe iOS also puts the "off" in a dimmed-grey while "on" is white-on-blue, making it more obvious what it means ("current state" rather than "this will be its new state when you tap me").
  So there's two clues, and it only took me a few seconds to figure it out. iOS 5 improved its readability even more by making the flipping part smaller so there's more space for "On" and "Off".
  I'm guessing you're complaining about Android, since the iOS toggle buttons can be tapped OR swiped since the beginning. In which case I can't really help you on that. (iOS has always said "On and Off" and never "o").
4. Re:Icons are a waste of time by BasilBrush · 2011-11-24 13:04 · Score: 1
  
  What are you talking about? iOS switches nether look nor behave how you're describing. Below you can see no end of examples of iOS switches. And if you actually use one you'd find that you can indeed slide them.
  http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=uiswitch&hl=en&safe=off&client=safari&rls=en&prmd=imvns&source=lnms&tbm=isch&ei=pujOTsrBHIWf8gP9uezsCQ&sa=X&oi=mode_link&ct=mode&cd=2&ved=0CA8Q_AUoAQ&biw=1199&bih=668#hl=en&safe=off&client=safari&rls=en&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=uiswitch&oq=uiswitch&aq=f&aqi=g1g-m1g-S6g-sS1g-S1&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=38918l39617l2l40348l8l3l0l0l0l1l242l486l1.1.1l3l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=d8d6bd19e1503ed0&biw=1199&bih=668
5. Re:Icons are a waste of time by tverbeek · 2011-11-24 13:25 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  You simply don't know what the hell you're talking about. The normal human brain is very good a visual recognition of objects, and can find a familiar, distinctive icon for a program such as iTunes more quickly than it can find the word "iTunes". We recognize a red, hexagonal sign more quickly than we would recognize a white rectangle with black letters that read "stop". I'm sorry if the peculiarities of your brain development don't handle this properly, but don't begrudge the rest of us a UI that takes advantage of this.
  
  --
  http://alternatives.rzero.com/
6. Re:Icons are a waste of time by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-24 13:34 · Score: 0
  
  I work in a multi-lingual office. English is the official language, but all the people that work for me speak French as their primary language. About the _only_ way I can navigate around in their Win7 desktops is by looking at the icons.
7. Re:Icons are a waste of time by angel'o'sphere · 2011-11-24 13:43 · Score: 1
  
  Well, on my GFs IPhone you can not slide the "switches".
  Linking a page with over hundred iPhone images is no help either ;D
  
  --
  Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
8. Re:Icons are a waste of time by angel'o'sphere · 2011-11-24 13:51 · Score: 1
  
  Sorry, my GFs iPhones toggles can not be swiped, they only can be touched. No idea why. As they clearly look as to be ment to be swiped I was pretty confused.
  Also unlike the english version (someone linked some photos) the german version only shows an "I" and on "O".
  So after trying to switch off some configurations and feeling pretty stupid not to be able to do so, I can affirm you the usage is not "intuitive" or "stringent" or in anyway sensible.
  (You know, the "other" colour you only can see when you successfully switch to it ;D)
  
  --
  Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
9. Re:Icons are a waste of time by BasilBrush · 2011-11-24 15:36 · Score: 1
  
  Linking a page with over hundred iPhone images is no help either ;D
  It serves very well to show that the switch you described is not and has never existed on iOS.
  
  Well, on my GFs IPhone you can not slide the "switches".
  Given that real iPhone switches neither look nor work how you're describing, Clearly it's not an iPhone. Do you even have a GF?
10. Re:Icons are a waste of time by aaarrrgggh · 2011-11-24 17:32 · Score: 1
  
  Other languages use 1/0 for on/off in ios. Can't confirm slide vs tap behavior though, but my sister-in-law's phone did seem a little different In operation than an English iPhone.
11. Re:Icons are a waste of time by tlhIngan · 2011-11-24 18:18 · Score: 1
  
  Well, on my GFs IPhone you can not slide the "switches".
  You sure it's an iPhone? I hear the Samsung Galaxy Android phones with TouchWiz look a LOT like an iPhone. I wouldn't be surprised if they copied that bit of the UI as well. (Gripe #1 - Google spent a LOT of time ensuring nothing in Android looked even remotely like the iPhone, and Samsung goes and throws it all away with their TouchWiz crap. It's not even a good imitation.)
  Or is it one specific app? There's also a few web pages for iPhone that attempt to replicate the UI and do things like that. Then again, I suppose maybe it's a crappy theme applied to a jailbroken phone?
12. Re:Icons are a waste of time by MichaelSmith · 2011-11-24 22:07 · Score: 1
  
  A good icon works for readers of any language. You know that flag which identifies localized versions of a page? Thats an icon.
  
  --
  http://michaelsmith.id.au
13. Re:Icons are a waste of time by MichaelSmith · 2011-11-24 22:13 · Score: 1
  
  I hope they haven't afflicted AZERTY keyboards on you.
  
  --
  http://michaelsmith.id.au
14. Re:Icons are a waste of time by root_42 · 2011-11-24 22:18 · Score: 1
  
  iOS 5 changed the on/off text to I and O, like on power buttons and the like. The I representing a 1, or the on state, and the O representing a 0 or the off state.
  
  --
  [--- PGP key and more on http://www.root42.de ---]
15. Re:Icons are a waste of time by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-24 22:33 · Score: 0
  
  Have you any evidence that people can find an icon more quickly than they can look down through an alphabetical list, to find the program they know the name of?
  Can you show me the studies?
  Icons are completely arbitrary, i.e. they are made up by somebody, to represent a program. How do you create an icon that obviously represents 'iTunes' to everybody who sees it, WITHOUT telling them what it is?
  In other words, you are incorrect.
16. Re:Icons are a waste of time by bytesex · 2011-11-24 23:10 · Score: 1
  
  ls /bin /usr/bin /usr/local/bin /usr/X11R6/bin | wc -l
  Oh my god. It's full of programs !
  
  --
  Religion is what happens when nature strikes and groupthink goes wrong.
17. Re:Icons are a waste of time by blackchiney · 2011-11-25 01:39 · Score: 1
  
  >> I hope they haven't afflicted AZERTY keyboards on you.
  I remember the difficulty I had in sending an email from an AZERTY keyboard because no one told me about alt-right. Since english keyboards come with 2 shifts, 2 controls, and 2 alt keys we were never told some can do other things.
18. Re:Icons are a waste of time by ilsaloving · 2011-11-25 03:58 · Score: 1
  
  Actually, you are the one who is incorrect. Icons are used all over the world for countless things. How do you know to stop when driving? The big red octagon. How do you find an elevator? Look for a square with arrows going up and down. Is something dangerous? Look for one of a standardized set of images.
  You want studies? Look them up yourself, because you are the one who is making claims that go against reality.
19. Re:Icons are a waste of time by angel'o'sphere · 2011-11-25 09:39 · Score: 1
  
  Linking a page with over hundred iPhone images is no help either ;D
  It serves very well to show that the switch you described is not and has never existed on iOS.
  HÃ?
  Every second image on the page you linked exactly shows the switch I describe.
  What did you smoke last night?
  
  --
  Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
20. Re:Icons are a waste of time by angel'o'sphere · 2011-11-25 09:52 · Score: 1
  
  No its brand new iPhone I bought 6 weeks ago for my GF ...
  Do you really think I post on /. and can not distinguish an iPhone from a web page?
  
  --
  Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
21. Re:Icons are a waste of time by dodobh · 2011-11-25 10:23 · Score: 1
  
  Actually, I wouldn't know about a big red octagon as a signal to stop.
  My familiar stop signal is a human figure standing straight. Or a red circle, sometimes.
  
  --
  I can throw myself at the ground, and miss.
22. Re:Icons are a waste of time by Richy_T · 2011-11-25 15:15 · Score: 1
  
  Gotta love the ones that use the US flag for "English"
23. Re:Icons are a waste of time by MichaelSmith · 2011-11-25 15:31 · Score: 1
  
  Close enough is good enough (Aussie here). None of them are going to use my flag.
  
  --
  http://michaelsmith.id.au
History has the answers by Man+Eating+Duck · 2011-11-24 13:09 · Score: 2

So, could computing could use a few more artists, and a few less MBAs?
This is easy:
If you want to give people a system that works for every Joe Sixpack and is shiny and easy to use, but costs more: Hire lots of artists and designers, use a proven bulletproof backend, and keep a few brilliant devs on hand. Easy interoperability between your company's devices is king.
If you want to earn lots of money: Hire as many MBAs as you can get your hands on, put at least one of them in charge of each of your dev teams, and have an already established majority market share. Features before security and bugfixing is king.
If you want to provide the best system available, but the user might have to work for it: Who needs designers and artists? Upload the source code of your OS to an ftp server and let crowdsourcing do the rest. RTFM is... not "king", who gives a shit anyway, but RTFM is the only way to reach 1337-ness.

--
Are you a grammar Nazi? I'm trying to improve my English; please correct my errors! :)
Re:Computing could use... by tverbeek · 2011-11-24 13:14 · Score: 0

And the world could use fewer assholes. You're welcome to leave now.

--
http://alternatives.rzero.com/
causality. by mevets · 2011-11-24 13:19 · Score: 2

I don't think having an MBA causes incompetence, but like moths to a flame, the talentless are so drawn.
bait... by mevets · 2011-11-24 13:29 · Score: 1

Present a dumb-ass obvious ponzi scheme as a business venture that requires them to move to an island. Your only problem is finding a big enough island. You might get away with a photo of one, then they will all drown.
successful companies created by MBAs by mevets · 2011-11-24 13:37 · Score: 1

Have you looked at a Wall Street directory? I know they are all disgraces that would perform a ritualized suicide if they had an iota of decency. They don't, and they won't.
They are the product of the modern MBA, and until people get the balls to haul them off to jail (or the middle of the ocean), you will remain at the mercy of their childish schemes.
1. Re:successful companies created by MBAs by yuhong · 2011-11-25 06:59 · Score: 1
  
  Note by legacy I mean when they got the MBA.
More BFAs (forget the MBAs) by tverbeek · 2011-11-24 13:55 · Score: 3, Interesting

As someone with a BS in Computer Science and a BFA in Digital Media and Illustration, I'd certainly like to have more of the latter working in computing. Visual trainwrecks like the Windows XP Fisher-Price theme, usability disasters like Microsoft's game of "Where's The Button (and Menu)?" in every software upgrade in the last decade, and the less said about the uncanny valley that gaming has gotten lost in the better... sometimes make me want to quit tech and become an oil painter.

--
http://alternatives.rzero.com/
1. Re:More BFAs (forget the MBAs) by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-24 14:31 · Score: 0
  
  Maybe you should be an oil painter. With all those letters after your name on your resume why didn't you design the Windows XP theme? Where you too busy complaining on Slashdot? I find Microsoft's buttons and menus incredibly easy to find and rather intuitive as do millions of other users who are not Linux fanatics and Mac fanboys. You should go back to school and get your money back.
2. Re:More BFAs (forget the MBAs) by tverbeek · 2011-11-25 01:25 · Score: 1
  
  I don't use those as letters after my name; go take pot shots at someone who actually does. I'm talking about the fact that Microsoft hides and renames things then hides them somewhere else from one version to another, something that even a lot of Microsoft fanboys admit is annoying. Anyway, you should consider going back to school as well... and graduating.
  
  --
  http://alternatives.rzero.com/
3. Re:More BFAs (forget the MBAs) by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-25 06:00 · Score: 0
  
  STFU and get back to work on developing the perfect parabolas for the sexbots we need.
Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-24 15:30 · Score: 0

Bullshit MBAs don't know how to run a fucking company.
Look at all the fucking MBAs on Wall Street, and what the fuckers did to the economy.
If your actually competent with the MBA, perhaps you're actually competent in spite of the MBA.
Susan Kare Demonstrating the Mac by Bluecobra · 2011-11-24 19:29 · Score: 3, Informative

For all you computer history geeks out there, here is a clip from Computer Chronicles of Susan Kare demonstrating the Mac back in 1984:
http://www.archive.org/details/Computer1984_3?start=772
This article is typical of the way things work by Chrisq · 2011-11-24 21:32 · Score: 1

Who gets credit for "bringing us from the command line to the desktop"? Not the programmers who implemented it - but someone who drew the icons.
"We'd like you to help us design a desktop...." by Tomsk70 · 2011-11-24 22:15 · Score: 1

"...but if anyone asks, you've never heard of Xerox"
Mod this up by Kartu · 2011-11-24 23:00 · Score: 1

Where are mod points, when you need them...
Yes, Mac wasn't by Kartu · 2011-11-24 23:02 · Score: 1

"The Mac wasn't the first computer to present the user with a virtual desktop of files and folders instead of a command line and a blinking cursor"...
Indeed. It was Xerox.
1. Re:Yes, Mac wasn't by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-25 04:34 · Score: 0
  
  True, but it was the first one that did so by default (without adding any software) and that mere mortals could own.
2. Re:Yes, Mac wasn't by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-25 10:04 · Score: 0
  
  No it was. There was no desktop on the Alto. It had windows and icons but they didn't represent the file system. Apple created the desktop metaphor. And just for reference xerox did not invent the mouse either SRI did.
Stories from Folkore.org by WillAdams · 2011-11-25 00:54 · Score: 1

Surprising there wasn't a link there in the story since Susan Kare was featured in them. A few stories from there:
http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&story=MacPaint_Gallery.txt
http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&story=Steve,_Icon.txt
http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&story=Desk_Ornaments.txt
http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&story=World_Class_Cities.txt
http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&story=Swedish_Campground.txt
http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&story=Stolen_From_Apple.txt
http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&story=Pirate_Flag.txt
William

--
Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
Windows 95 UI == Poor Copy of NeXTStep UI by Robert+Gadling · 2011-11-25 02:38 · Score: 1

The visual design of the Windows 95 UI was a poor copy of the visual design of NeXTStep. Of Course NeXTStep had a decent OS underneath as well. So maybe you would have liked NeXTStep even better ;-)
Ya, but... by painandgreed · 2011-11-25 06:20 · Score: 1

Am I the only one that finds this funny?
This is the internet, and there are something to rules that govern such arguments. Everybody has an opinion and they're equal. Anecdotal story trumps opinion. Authoritative opinion trumps anecdotal data. Website trumps authoritative opinion. Authoritative website trumps a normal website. Real world citation beats an authoritative website and it ends there since nobody is going to spend time enough to actually look stuff in meat space.
One might questions whether Wikipedia is an Authoritative website or not, but it probably is as it is theoretically checked by various people who probably know their fields and any discrepancy can be seen in change record and discussion of the page. Since the other guys can't come up with a real world citation, then BasilBrush pretty much has proven the case (as far as internet arguments go).
I'm going to be very shallow here... by wcrowe · 2011-11-25 07:02 · Score: 1

Susan Kare is a seriously good looking woman.

--
Proverbs 21:19
Re:Computing could use... by YouDieAtTheEnd · 2011-11-27 00:33 · Score: 1

Speaking the truth always gets you labeled an asshole since you're not willing to stand behind clueless jerks sniffing each others farts all day long and shoving validation down each others throats.