<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<html><head><style type="text/css"><!--
blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { padding-top: 0 ; padding-bottom: 0 }
--></style><title>Re: [OS X TeX] New Macros, new Engines, new TeXShop
versio</title></head><body>
<div>I usually don't chime in on this kind of dialog because I am a
"naive user" and scarcely have anything to contribute.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>I would guess that many naive users are destined to stay naive
because it takes way too much time to get savvy. That is certainly
true for me. (For example, I love different typefaces. I have a
background in graphic arts. But the prospect of trying to simply
install a new font in TexShop scares the hell out of me. I resign
myself to just stick to the default.)</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>In my opinion, the more user-friendly TexShop can be made, the
better it will be for everybody.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>After all, isn't the point of a software program to make it
unnecessary for users to duplicate work that could have been done at
the design stage? I.e., to anticipate user's needs and arrange it so
they are met in one stroke instead of hundreds or thousands of
strokes?</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Thanks for all efforts in this direction.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Richard Benish</div>
<div><br></div>
<div><br></div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>2010/2/21 David Messerschmitt <<a
href="mailto:messer@eecs.berkeley.edu">messer@eecs.berkeley.edu</a
>></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><br>
<blockquote>Good point, but there is absolutely nothing inconsistent
between (a) accommodating naive and power users differently and (b)
allowing users to move from the naive to the power category. All you
are saying is that naive users should not matter, because they dont
stay that way. Such a perspective is commonplace in open source
software, but I am arguing that naive users are important. For one
thing, accommodating them will attract more new users to TexShop,
whether or not they later turn into power users. I would argue that
this is good, if we wish to maximize the impact of
TexShop.</blockquote>
<blockquote><br></blockquote>
<blockquote>-dave<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><br></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>And doesn't OS X provide a mechanism for
this? Default macros, engines, etc. could go into /Library/Application
Support/TeXShop/ and could easily be upgraded automatically; the
current directory in ~/Library/TeXShop would be the user's
responsibility, should they see the need. This is the way it is
handled for AppleScripts, PreferencePanes, Screen Savers -- all sorts
of things really.</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><br></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>Or am I missing the point?</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><br></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>-- Gerrit.</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><br>
----------- Please Consult the Following Before Posting
-----------<br>
TeX FAQ: http://www.tex.ac.uk/faq<br>
List Reminders and Etiquette: http://email.esm.psu.edu/mac-tex/<br>
List Archive: http://tug.org/pipermail/macostex-archives/<br>
TeX on Mac OS X Website: http://mactex-wiki.tug.org/<br>
List Info:
http://email.esm.psu.edu/mailman/listinfo/macosx-tex</blockquote>
<div><br></div>
</body>
</html>