[PD] PD usability

[Marc Lavallée]

Le mer 12/02/2003 à 15:36, Thomas Grill a écrit :
> Well, to me that sounds a bit too much like "on a mission". 

If I'm alone thinking this mission is worth it, I won't do it.

> Why does "the word" PD have to be spreaded to a larger audience?

It doesn't have to: I was the first against the idea of advertising PD
on Freshmeat, because of all those lazy users. But if we wait a couple
of years it'll be late to convince new Max users that PD is good enough.
We won't feel too sorry because we'll be happy using PD. But still,
those "users" are everywhere now, like borgs, and I feel even more alone
than when I first discovered the beta version of Max, 13 years ago. A
big chunk of my computer culture is like a Max patch, but now I use PD.
So I hope those interested to build a viable community of PD users (not
only hackers) will understand my concerns.

One idea would be to distribute PD with as much stuff as possible,
making sure all files (externals, help patches, documentation, etc) are
packaged in a consistant way. It really is difficult for beginners to
use and enjoy PD in the first place, and that should not be the case.

Yves Degoyon wrote:

> the real thing that annoys me is that PD __HAS__ to compared
> with MAX, but MAX has really unhandy features.

Imagine the opposite: Max users "forced" to compare Max to PD... :-)

> sending symbols with gui objects ( sliders, radios, ... ) 
> is something much more elegant and powerful
> than making segmented patch chords !!!

I agree. Totally !!! 

> PD doesn't have to imitate MAX in any way,
> people coming from MAX have to adapt
> ( and to learn how to compile )

We also need to adapt to Max users. Then maybe some of them will learn
how to compile, but I don't care; PD was not designed as a compiling
exercice...

Adam Lindsay wrote:

> The tool is its own art... 

Most artists would not agree, because they refuse to deeply understand
their tools; this is part of our occidental culture, and we must accept
it. We can decide that they are full of <>, but the enonomical reality
is that technical people are serving artists because we are enjoying
their art (well, sometimes). In Bali, "art" means "life", but I'm not
balinese...

Ok, Time out.

--
Marc