How would you rank order this series: Truth, Goodness, Beauty, Simplicity? How would your customer rank them?
Yesterday morning when I finally got Nicolas Rougier's beautiful UI for the emacs text-editor to work, I felt happier! (Check it out here https://github.com/rougier/nano-emacs )
It’s been easier for me to read and learn the emacs docs. And, to write Clojure code.
I’ve read a variety of articles by longtime emacs users who get defensive when the common GUIs—plain vanilla or Doom or Prelude or…— are criticized. Those people don’t understand two things:
1) They grew up with the UI and are used to it. Maybe it even feels like home to them. That’s not necessarily true for novices. It isn’t true for me.
2) Some people need beautiful and simple UIs. I’m one of them.
I find all the text editors I’ve used emacs, IntelliJ, VSCode and Atom aesthetically repulsive and visually confusing.
Years ago I read about the Neo-Platonic Transcendentals the True (verum), the Good (bonum), the Beautiful (pulchrum) and the One (unum). They are all logically connected but different people prioritize them differently.
I suspect that many Computer Scientists, Electrical Engineers and other lifelong developers/programmers would not put Beauty first. This assumption is partly based on the design of their programming tools. And, their writing about the tools—they talk about power and speed and efficiency when they discuss their editors.
For me Beauty comes first. Quickly followed by the One, the Simple. Of course, I care about Truth and Goodness. But they are harsh without Beauty.
Hans urs von Balthasar, a Swiss philosopher/theologian, said that when the Reformers (and the Catholic iconoclasts) drove Beauty out of the cathedrals and churches of Europe that Truth and Goodness became alienating to most people. To paraphrase him, It's like a nagging school teacher shaking a finger at students and shaming them into belief and doing their duty.
The role of Beauty is to draw us into the presence of the True and the Good.
The One, the Unum, the Simple is also important to me. Complex editors “scream” at my eyes and confuse my mind. Nano is simple, restful, peaceful to me.
This may be too philosophical so let me finish by saying:
I'm thankful to Nicolas for creating a beautiful UI for emacs. Its existence has drawn me deeper into the emacs community. I woke up early this morning eager to write Clojure code in it, to learn about Org-mode, and explore other features of emacs.
His Nano-emacs is a gift to me.
The True, The Good, The Beautiful and The One: different people rank them differently. And, the same person may rank them differently depending on what they need at the moment. As you develop products and services, how do you ensure that all four values are present? Do you know which one is most important to your beach head customers, your raving fans, and those you most want to reach? Getting the order right for them can make a huge difference in their joy and your pocketbook!
Yesterday morning when I finally got Nicolas Rougier's beautiful UI for the emacs text-editor to work, I felt happier! (Check it out here https://github.com/rougier/nano-emacs )
It’s been easier for me to read and learn the emacs docs. And, to write Clojure code.
I’ve read a variety of articles by longtime emacs users who get defensive when the common GUIs—plain vanilla or Doom or Prelude or…— are criticized. Those people don’t understand two things:
1) They grew up with the UI and are used to it. Maybe it even feels like home to them. That’s not necessarily true for novices. It isn’t true for me.
2) Some people need beautiful and simple UIs. I’m one of them.
I find all the text editors I’ve used emacs, IntelliJ, VSCode and Atom aesthetically repulsive and visually confusing.
Years ago I read about the Neo-Platonic Transcendentals the True (verum), the Good (bonum), the Beautiful (pulchrum) and the One (unum). They are all logically connected but different people prioritize them differently.
I suspect that many Computer Scientists, Electrical Engineers and other lifelong developers/programmers would not put Beauty first. This assumption is partly based on the design of their programming tools. And, their writing about the tools—they talk about power and speed and efficiency when they discuss their editors.
For me Beauty comes first. Quickly followed by the One, the Simple. Of course, I care about Truth and Goodness. But they are harsh without Beauty.
Hans urs von Balthasar, a Swiss philosopher/theologian, said that when the Reformers (and the Catholic iconoclasts) drove Beauty out of the cathedrals and churches of Europe that Truth and Goodness became alienating to most people. To paraphrase him, It's like a nagging school teacher shaking a finger at students and shaming them into belief and doing their duty.
The role of Beauty is to draw us into the presence of the True and the Good.
The One, the Unum, the Simple is also important to me. Complex editors “scream” at my eyes and confuse my mind. Nano is simple, restful, peaceful to me.
This may be too philosophical so let me finish by saying:
I'm thankful to Nicolas for creating a beautiful UI for emacs. Its existence has drawn me deeper into the emacs community. I woke up early this morning eager to write Clojure code in it, to learn about Org-mode, and explore other features of emacs.
His Nano-emacs is a gift to me.
The True, The Good, The Beautiful and The One: different people rank them differently. And, the same person may rank them differently depending on what they need at the moment. As you develop products and services, how do you ensure that all four values are present? Do you know which one is most important to your beach head customers, your raving fans, and those you most want to reach? Getting the order right for them can make a huge difference in their joy and your pocketbook!