[QtExtended] some things
Dale Maggee
antisol at internode.on.net
Mon Mar 16 04:48:46 CET 2009
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Lorn Potter wrote:
> Typing numbers are not 'suggested'.
Fine, be fastidious if you must, You know what I meant.
How long did it take you to type your postal address? Now, how long does
it take on your PC?
Oh... you didn't test it? You didn't bother typing out the sample SMS in
my email? Hmmm, Interesting...
> I personally do not find the delay all that troublesome.
Well, that indicates to me that you're either not using it for everyday
use, or that you happen to be a lucky person who's typing dictionary
words, or, more likely, that as the developer all the words you use
commonly happen to be in the dictionary already (strange, that...)
> As I said, if you can easily switch to the qwerty keyboard.
bwahahaha, that's a funny joke. Have you ever tried actually switching
to the qwerty keyboard using just your finger? for me, it usually takes
at least 3-4 attempts just to bring up the list of input methods. Then
there's actually attempting to type on the qwerty keyboard, which we'll
get into later...
> This is not a very valid usecase. How many times are you going to type
> this into your phone in a real world situation?
You're incorrect - it's a completely valid, worst-case scenario which
serves very well to illustrate the inadequacy of the 'typing one letter
at a time' method which you are advocating. In real-world usage, I'll
concede that 'antidisestablishmentarianism' isn't used often, but long
words which aren't in the dictionary are not at all uncommon, especially
given long words combined with sms-speak spelling. How would you suggest
a biologist or chemist use this input method to talk about his work?
If you're trying to tell me that the biologist needs to put a
"biologist's dictionary" on his phone before he can use it, I'll laugh
my ass off, and I'll tell you exactly how utterly ludicrous that Idea
really is.
As a software developer, I'm *very* interested in worst-case scenarios,
as they work very well to find all these little inefficiencies - if I
can make my software usable in a worst case scenario, it's going to be
absolutely brilliant for average, everyday use. I test (and sometimes
write) all my software on low-powered machines for this reason
If you're not interested in actually making your software robust and
useful, maybe you should apply for a job at Microsoft.
> For a fact, though, this took me exactly as much time to tap it out,
> without having to use the press down method ~10 seconds.
Care to clarify on that? to me, this statement makes no sense.
If you're saying that you just typed in 'antidisestablishmentarianism'
and it was suggested and you were able to choose it because it had no
idea what you were typing and showed you what you typed, then you're
doing it wrong, and your test is invalid.
For it to be a valid test, you need to do the following:
1. *quickly* Type 'antidisestablishmentarianism', as if you're expecting
it to be in the dictionary. (Type quickly, and ignore precision,
assuming the dictionary will still suggest the correct word even if you
accidentally hit a couple of letters wrong).
(i.e: If I'm typing 'owned' in an SMS, I don't concern myself if I
actually accidentally type "pwned", because I know the dictionary will
pick up on my mistake and suggest "owned". For your test to be valid,
you need to type 'antidisestablishmentarianism' as if you're expecting
it to be in the dictionary - i.e quickly and without precision)
2. Since you typed quickly and without precision, you'll now have
something like "antidiseatablishmentaroanusm" (note that my spelling
wasn't precise, and I now have an incorrectly spelled word being
"suggested".
3. A this point, If I swipe my finger to the left (i.e: backspace) to
correct the spelling mistakes, the entire word is erased, and I have to
do the 'one letter at a time' bullshit.
4. Alternatively at step 3, I could have tapped on the incorrectly
spelled word to have it added to the sms I'm composing, and then edited
it by positioning the cursor, backspacing, fixing the mistakes, and
repositioning the cursor at the end of the text.
I can do that, that is, *if* the software happens to want to let me
position the cursor, rather than selecting everything between where I'm
trying to put the cursor and the end of the message. I haven't been able
to determine exactly what factors influence whether it will let me
position the cursor or select text to the end, but I think it has to do
with the ambient humidity and wind speed/direction.
Of course, This is all as much or more of a hassle than the 'one letter
at a time' method which you advocate.
Don't you dare even trying to tell me that my test is invalid, and that
I need to type with precision in step 1, because if you try to tell me
that, then I'll have one very simple and effective retort: What is the
point of having a dictionary lookup system like the one in QTe unless
it's to figure out what you were trying to type, and correct your
mistakes? If I still need to type with precision, then the dictionary
stuff is a completely useless feature which is eating up CPU cycles and
screen real-estate for absolutely no benefit, and it might as well be
removed.
Don't tell me "you can delete the dictionary file", because this doesn't
turn off the dictionary crap, and it only makes life harder - it still
suggests the names of contacts etc - the only difference is that now
instead of letter-by-letter typing maybe one in every 3 words, you're
letter-by-letter typing 97 out of every 100 words. Deleting the
dictionary file and typing with precision to make it suggest what you
typed is similarly useless, because if you make a spelling mistake,
'backspace' erases the entire word.
> Then it would not be suggestive/predictive, and you should use the
> qwerty keyboard.
bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
That's *really* funny!
> You can even use this with big fingers and hit in between letters and it
> will still work (suggestively) well.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH-HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
That's possibly the funniest thing I've ever read!
For the record, "Big" fingers aren't as thin as a stylus, and they don't
generally have fingernails which have been honed to a fine point by a
professional samurai sword polisher under an electron microscope.
I don't know what universe you've been doing your testing in, but in the
universe I live in, I can barely use the qwerty keyboard *with a
stylus*! Trying to use it with my fingers, well, that's just a really
really unfunny joke - the huge delays on the predictive keyboard are
easier and less frustrating. I'll give you $500 in cash if you can type
the phrase "this input method is godawful" on the qwerty keyboard using
only your fingers, while sitting on a moving train, without making any
mistakes, in less than 5 minutes... Or are you going to try to argue
that this isn't a valid use-case either?
> Don't make it something its not
> supposed to be.
Don't pretend your software isn't shit when it clearly and demonstrably is.
Telling users that they're imagining the problems they're having is not
a way to solve issues.
Ooooh, yay! I get to use one of my example words:
You just got pwned.
I'm betting you'll go all quiet now, because you know you just got pwned.
It was nice talking to you.
After that last email, I'm glad QTe's development is no longer in your
hands - hopefully the community will actually be interested in
usability, quality and robustness.
http://www.microsoft.com/australia/careers/default.mspx
- -DM
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFJvcr/FbVnQRV3OEYRAjk6AJ9zwQ4WYN1UyKMo2f3aNt7Qg37cgQCfQuXj
SsjBB5T59FKIOyM6WEgPF+0=
=A15q
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the community
mailing list