Re: Graphic converter query - transparency

Woody <usenet@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

> Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> 
> > Woody <usenet@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > 
> > > Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Woody <usenet@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > zoara <me18@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > > [snip]
> > > > 
> > > > > > Generally speaking, people click around and see what happens.
> > > > > > That's how people learn, generally speaking; trial and error.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Depressingly, a lot of them done do that either.
> > > > 
> > > > In the general case, it's impossible to tell what software does
from the
> > > > GUI.
> > > 
> > > I have never found that to be the case. I have always found it
> > > reasonably easy to work out what the software does from the UI.
> > > I know you have problems with doing it that way
> > 
> > Along with most people.
> 
> Not really I wouldn't think.

My experience is such that I know you're wrong and I'm right on this
point.

> > After all, you have to admit that a GUI does not actually inform you
> > what software actually does in the general case - that's why it's not
> > possible to work out how to use software properly from the GUI.
> 
> If you don't know what the software does in the general case, why on
> earth would you be using it?

<puzzled>

You're assuming that `looking at the GUI' is the only means available to
work out what software does - that is not always the case.

And who says I use software that I cannot figure out?  I don't!

I *cannot use* most software these days - simple as that.  Most software
is not accessible to me.  Did I suggest anything else?  No, I did not.

I'm very puzzled by your question here.

> In generaly people get software to do a task, not the other way around.
> 
> So beyond that I would say, yes, given a piece of software, a large
> number of people could work out how to get it to do what they want.

Most people cannot get it to work properly.  Almost everyone would find
that they could learn to use it in a shorter time and learn to use it
better if they had a manual.

> > I've made this point before, but you've always ignored it completely.
> 
> No, I have heard it and disagreed with it, as I am sure I have mentioned
> before..

You seem to have been ignoring it.

> > > > All the GUI does is indicate what the GUI indicates: it doesn't
tell you
> > > > what the software does.
> > > 
> > > Most GUIs if they are reasonably well put together give you more an
> > > indication of what the software does than the manual, unless you
have
> > > something with no user interface.
> > 
> > That is contrary to my experience in the early 1990s, when proper
> > software manuals still existed.
> > 
> > A GUI can only tell you how to use software if you already know what
the
> > software does /and/ you already know how to do the jobs that it
permits
> > to be done.
> > 
> > So GUIs are no use at all for those withou experience in a particular
> > field and with particular types of software.
> 
> No, they are less useful. They are not of no use.

Read what I wrote again and think a bit more carefully.  Then re-state
your point, if you still have one.

> > So there is a problem: one still has to learn how to use software, but
> > these days, the software suppliers no longer provide the purchaser
with
> > the means to learn how to use the software they supply.
> 
> > That's why you'll find so many expensive courses on how to use
Photoshop
> > and Quark Xpress and Adobe InDesign: it's because they come without
good
> > enough do***entation for the user to learn how to use them properly.
> 
> Photoshop comes with a ton of do***entation. OK it is on the disk so you
> need to print it, but it is a full indepth manual, plus a full DVD of
> training materials.

Okay, so that one's a bad example.  Bloody MS bloody Word, then.  We've
got a pukka and legit MS installer disc here.  Can I find do***entation
to teach me how to use the reeking pile of ****e?  Can I hell!

> And yes, I learned to use photoshop and Quark Express, to the point I
> could show other people how to use them without ever reading the manual.
> 
> Just because you cant do it, don't assume it can't be done.

Don't assume that I assume everyone's like me: that is a mistake on your
part.

I have seen that most people cannnot do it.

Of course I've not looked at most people, but I have looked at what I
consider a representative sample.

> > If you were right and most people could learn from the GUI, those
> > courses would not exist.
> 
> That is just a daft assumption, sorry.

How so?  You claim that people can learn from the GUI.  If so, they'd
not need the courses - surely?

If that reasoning is wrong, please show me how.

> Some people don't learn from
> books at all, and need a hands on course.

I'm not talking about books - I'm talking about the GUI.  You claim that
most people can learn what they need from the GUI.  I state that the
clear evidence is that your claim on this point is just a huge pile of
steaming bollocks.

> So there were no computer
> courses in the 90s when there were manuals for everything?
> Of course there were.

Manuals started to be dropped in the 1990s.

> > It's why the bookshops are filled with third party manuals pu****ting
to
> > teach you how to use software - because pretty much everyone has the
> > same problem as me when it comes to learning how to use software.
> 
> No, it is because most copies of photoshop in the world are pirate
> verions, and the people don't download the manuals.

Okay, so Photoshop (software I don't have myself - well, okay, maybe
there might have been a version of Photoshop 3.blah that I once had
access to in the mists of time) was a bad example.

> > If you were right and most people could learn from the GUI, those
> > manuals would not exist.
> 
> You think these people would sit and photocopy the manual as well as
> pirate the disks?

You said that the do***entation was on disc.

> > Since the courses and manuals do exist, it's obvious that you're wrong
> > about most people being able to learn from the GUI.
> 
> It is neither obvious or true.

How so?

Rowland.


-- 
Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
                                            Sorry - the spam got to me
http://www.mag-uk.org
                            http://www.bmf.co.uk
UK biker?   Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking