Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

When “choice” becomes a burden

Filed under
OSS

A recent LWN article on the openSUSE desktop debate has an excellent quote from user Naheem Zaffar: “Choice is only good if you are informed enough to exercise it.”

Those of you who may have read Barry Schwartz’ “The Paradox of Choice” may already be familiar with the idea of choice paralysis though information overload. One of the reasons I’ve stayed out of the conversation is that I feel that openSUSE should not offer a choice at all. Not supporting “freedom of choice” is a very controversial position to take in a free software community, but many fail to realise how much “choice” can hurt a user.

The current design places a burden on the user. Two options of seemingly equal importance are presented and the user is asked to make a choice. This choice requires the user to be knowledgeable enough about each option to make a decision. Normally, defaults help guide the user in making a decision. Having one selected by default is helpful, but this “hint” is offset by the purposeful neutral presence of an alternative. The list is in alphabetical order and not order of importance and both options have the same visual treatment. How can the user know that the selected option is the best option for them and not simply the first item on the list? This isn’t very user friendly.

rest here




More in Tux Machines

Android Leftovers

Leftovers: OSS

Ubuntu 16.04 Review: What’s New for Desktop Users

Ubuntu is a tricky distribution. As much as I love it on my home server, my desktop is a different ballgame. In my experience, releases between LTS versions have many new technologies that may or may not survive in the next LTS. There were many technologies or features that Canonical thought were ambitious -- HUD, experimenting with menus, online dash search, Ubuntu Software Center, etc. -- but they were abandoned. So, if I were to use Ubuntu on my desktop, I would still choose LTS. Read more

Workflow and efficiency geek talks Drush and Drupal

I started using Drupal because I needed an open source content management system (CMS) to use in several community projects. One of the projects I was involved with was just getting started and had narrowed its CMS selection down to either Drupal or Joomla. At the time I was using a different framework, but I had considered Drupal in the past and knew that I liked it a lot better than Joomla. I convinced them to go with the new Drupal 6 release and converted all of my other projects for consistency. I started working with Drush because I wanted a unified mechanism to work with local and remote sites. My first major contribution to Drush was site aliases and sql-sync in Drush 3. Read more