On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, geiger wrote:
Yes, and I was against it because I am used to the ordering done in Pd. I think unless you make real user studies this is personal taste. (but then, who believes in user studies :)
You see, the ordering done in Pd was also chosen because it was someone's personal taste. I don't see what's so inferior about my personal taste.
See, thats exactly what I wanted to say. Nothing is inferior about your personal taste. If you think I wanted to imply that then tell me how, and I try to make a clearer statement the next time.
User studies... I'm a user, and I study myself, that's a user study.
About the "real" ones... it's easy to skew them; it doesn't have to be intentional; one just has to be skilled, confident AND naïve. I mean:
Pick users that never use pd, ask them to do tasks that never happen in real life, measure aspects that don't matter, but do so with everything in milliseconds and millimetres, proper sampling, compute standard deviation, compare to the bell curve, interpret hypotheses according to 95th centile, and WOW, you now have a perfectly realised study revolving around wrong assumptions.
(No statistics book will mention those wrong assumptions, because they are domain-specific.)
(ever measured a programmer's productivity by counting written lines of code? try measuring pd user productivity by counting how many objects there are in their patches. that's a technique used in industry.)
:) Yeah, but sad thing is I have seen that in other "non-industrial" domains too. And it gets even worse, some people think that lines of code is directly proportionial to quality.
Günter