I believe Thomas Grill said this around Wed, 12 Feb 2003:
Well, to me that sounds a bit too much like "on a mission". Why does "the word" PD have to be spreaded to a larger audience?
It doesn't. But I think of it as good karma. "Here, I found something I like," I say, "maybe you will like it too."
Also/as a result... more users (to a certain point) means more feedback and refinement. Is Pd the same system now compared to what Miller might have come up with without community feedback, without users?
Isn't it rather the wish for a perfect system for one's own needs, be it this or that one?
But I would agree more with your earlier statement:
For me, the main reason to trust in PD is the fact that i'm silly enough to waste my time with developing basics (and neglecting art) and hoping that something really powerful can come out in the end if more people are thinking in the same way.
The tool is its own art... that's more interesting to me than a single instantiation using it (sometimes sadly so).
I'm also my conviction that a really good performance system can't be designed by a developer doing it for the "user" - it can only be done by someone who is using it on a daily basis.
I think it takes a very special user/developer/designer to simultaneously design and use a system to the point of maturity. Yes, it could be a very interesting, idiosyncratic system. But I think one way of thinking taken too far creates hidden constraints in a system. (Constraints in themselves aren't bad, but when one is blind to them, it can be a detriment.)
This has turned into an interesting thread. Cool.
adam
----- Original Message ----- From: "Marc Lavallée" odradek@videotron.ca To: "pd-list" pd-list@iem.kug.ac.at Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 9:01 PM Subject: Re: [PD] PD usability
Le mer 12/02/2003 à 14:12, Yves Degoyon a écrit :
why keeping that distinction over and over between users and programmers ???
Because that's what users wants, and because sometimes we must deal with them. I'd really like to simply ignore them, but that's not always possible. They don't want help, they want fancy products, that's how they've been raised. They see me as a programmer (which I'm not) because I can install, configure, use, integrate and modify many types of softwares on different machines. So they want me to sell them a candy software they can chew on until the next software realease, or they want me to help them use a candy software, which I don't want too. They are totally integrated in the market economy, I'm not. Culture clash.
i was born a user...
We all did, but you evolved as a programmer. 99.9% of the population won't. So either we keep PD only as a research or hobbyist tool, or we try to put some sugar on it to please all those "users" out there. At some point they'll hopefully agree why PD (or jMax) are better tools for reasons they don't want to understand now. We could even make commercial products based on PD, if its license allows it, because that's the only language most users really understand now. It's being done with many other free softwares, so why not PD? The MSP plugin for Max is PD, so that should be possible to sell a "better" PD. I don't care if they copy and use the commercial version (they would for sure), because the goal would be to made them switch to the free version. It would bring PD to a larger audience while keeping it free. The market is certainly not too small. It would give university students access to softwares they usually can't afford or are reluctent to even try. The advent of the OSX platform is giving us an opportunity we should consider. Maybe I simply don't understand what the market economy is all about...
-- Marc
PD-list mailing list PD-list@iem.kug.ac.at http://iem.kug.ac.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
PD-list mailing list PD-list@iem.kug.ac.at http://iem.kug.ac.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
--
Adam Lindsay +44(0)1524 594 537 atl@comp.lancs.ac.uk http://www.comp.lancs.ac.uk/computing/users/atl/ -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=