Re: Killer -Reply

Subject: Re: Killer -Reply
From: Kris Olberg <kjolberg -at- IX -dot- NETCOM -dot- COM>
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 1996 11:45:48 -0800

At 12:09 PM 11/13/96 +0000, you wrote:
>> Saying that users "expect" the word "abort" is a dangerous
>> assumption. How do you know this?

>Because it *is* so commonly used (otherwise, we wouldn't be arguing
>about it, would we?) Remember "abort, retry, fail?" (hmm... now I
>see... the whole thing is a fiendish plot by Bill Gates...)

Your logic is flawed. One cannot deduce that users expect to see certain terminology simply because it's used a few times in DOS messages (or anywhere else for that matter).

>> To most audiences, what's the difference between saying
>> "aborts" and "stops"?

>To me, "abort" means that everything about the process will be
>discarded -- it will be as if I never even attempted to start that
>process. "Stop" means stop the process where it is right now, but
>anything that has already been done is still done. But that's just
>me. I'd like to see some studies done so we'll all know what to

My question was really rhetorical. Your post (and other similar ones) define "abort" and "stop" from your (or the poster's) perspective, not the audience's.

In the end, though, Tracy, you're right about a study. Only research would definitively tell us whether we're making a mistake by using "abort" instead of "stop." One would think that a study of this type has already been done, but I have seen nothing of its kind. Maybe someone else has. Anyone?

kjolberg -at- ix -dot- netcom -dot- com (preferred)
kjolberg -at- aol -dot- com
kjolberg -at- msn -dot- com
kolberg -at- actamed -dot- com
102031 -dot- 3556 -at- compuserve -dot- com
s -dot- othoudt -at- worldnet -dot- att -dot- net

Previous by Author: Re: Killer -Reply
Next by Author: Re: Re[2]: Killer -Reply
Previous by Thread: Re[2]: Killer -Reply
Next by Thread: Re: Killer -Reply

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads