To awk is human, to GUI divine ...?

GRASS GRASS user
1

Glenn C. Kroeger writes (in part):

If GRASS and OpenGIS are going to prosper they must accomodate the way
that new users use computers! .... More importantly, managers want
to use data this way, and they sure as hell aren't going to screw
around with awk..... If you want to know what people want, look at
what they spend money on.

and Nick Reddingius adds:

Is THAT ever right on!

.... But that means we have to address ease of use issues. The
attitude "let them use awk" is exactly what GRASS doesn't need.

That is the point all commercial vendors make, and Glenn is right.
GRASS may be the greatest system, but it will be a footnote in GIS-
land if it doesn't keep up in both technical features and ease of
use.

     I don't think that I agree with these guys. GRASS has always had the
philosophy of being for "installations with more talent than money". That,
after all, is the value of distributing source code - if it doesn't do what
you want, then you are free to fix it.

     And, as for students, I recall the old adage wherein one can give a
man a fish to take care of his hunger, or one can teach a man to fish, and
he will never go hungry again.

     Therefore, I would reverse the subject line, and persons who want
additional fields in site lists who have even a rudimentary familiarity
with awk can do as they will.

Nick Reddingius
----------- End Forwarded Message -----------
--------------------------------------------------------------
   ____ Oak Ridge National Laboratory
    / ) / / / / Environmental Sciences Division
   /--< o / / /--/ P.O. Box 2008, M.S. 6038
  /___/__<__/__/_ / / _ Oak Ridge, TN 37830-6038
William W. Hargrove (615) 574-1902
hnw@mtqgrass.esd.ornl.gov (615) 576-8646 (fax)
--------------------------------------------------------------

2

Hi Peoples,

Just to add my 2cents...

Bill wrote in responce to comments that GRASS should follow the lead of
commercial products...

     I don't think that I agree with these guys. GRASS has always had the
philosophy of being for "installations with more talent than money". That,
after all, is the value of distributing source code - if it doesn't do what
you want, then you are free to fix it.

Yes, but the point I think the others were making was that if there
are two ways to do something lets go the route best for the user, not
the programmer. Having said that...if I had to make a decision on where
to put GRASS programmer time at this point it would _not_ be on
"desk top" GUIs. It would 98% on analysis functionality. If I want a
neato-jiffy point click and gee look at the diolog box I will buy
a PC commercial product, eg MAPINFO. GRASS is not IMHO designed to
impress computerphobic managers, its for researchers and people who
know enough about what they want that they might want to tinker with
the code.

A tough balance between getting the job done and being kind to the
user...I know which way I went when there was a job to be done...[B

     And, as for students, I recall the old adage wherein one can give a
man a fish to take care of his hunger, or one can teach a man to fish, and
he will never go hungry again.

I am afraid I have to concur. Unless the student can "play" with a
routine at code level, it is tough or impossible to ever get that
intuitive feel for spatial analysis. On that vein, the easier you make
things for the student the less is learned --- that is if the object
is for them to understand the tool.

chris skelly