quote: No, it''s not important to provide users with a consistent interface. It''s important to provide users with whatever GUI they want.
Yes, and the GUI I want is a consistent one. Scratch that, the GUI I need is a consistent one. That means handing over my right to complete and utter configurability to a central body that decides user interface issues for me. Why that''s a problem I''ll never understand. I''m not an expert at interface design, very few programmers are experts at interface design. But some people out there are experts at interface design. They make decisions better than I or any typical programmer ever could. They should decide my interface for the same reason an architect should design my house or Engineer plan out my television. I recognize I can''t do everything, and am grateful that there are people out there that can do this for me, and do i t well (note, none of those people seem to work for Microsoft )
Open source operating systems are one of the very few things in life that just allow everyone to bring whatever to the pot, stir it all together, and force the user to muck through it. Very few organizations could get far on this model. Sure there''s planning and structure within a project, and distro/os developers do the best they can with what they got, but there''s little to no organization at the big picture level. Why do you think Redhat came out with Blue Curve, and Mandrake created Galaxy? They''re a tiny stab at the problem, but they''re a start.
Consistency leads to stronger work flow and greater productivity. Consistency means easily moving into new programs and reduces the need to relearn things.