[polyphonicist]

Actual quote from the article for context:

> Modeless: Computer scientists when writing code typically worked in different modes; you might have an insert mode, a delete mode, or a replace mode. You would first select the mode, then select the point on the screen at which the action was to occur, then perform the action. Tesler, in user experiments, proved that modes were confusing for nonscientific users and championed the “modeless” interface.

For non-technical users, sure modeless editing may be better. But for computer scientists, modeful editing may be better. The article mentions modeless editing to be better for no scientific users only, not necessarily for everyone.

[TuringTest]

> But for computer scientists, modeful editing may be better. The article mentions modeless editing to be better for no scientific users only, not necessarily for everyone.

That's why they kept on investigating, and concluded that modes are bad for anyone; as long as they are human, using modes increase their rates of error. Jef Raskin went so far as to invent quasimodes, to get the benefits of modal interfaces without the burden on short-term memory. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mode_(user_interface)#Quasimod...)

[lonelappde]

Calling people inhuman is obnoxious; please don't do that.

Quasimodes (chording) are physically difficult and distracting.

[e12e]

Just a note, that for a person used to working in say, vim - having to take a hand off the keyboard in order to use the mouse (or touch the screen) essentially feels like changing to selection mode. Putting hand back on keyboard is like going back to insert mode.

The key difference is of course that "learning" to use the mouse, or the touch screen - feels much more natural than some arcane key combination.

So, if you already know the combinations for switching modes (both the arcane key combo, and the "process" of moving one hand from the keyboard to the mouse, and back again) - you are comparing different things - typically "efficiency".

While I'm a vim user, and unlikely to ever go back to using a mouse, due to RSS injuries - I still thing something like ACME[1] is likely more efficient than vim. On the other hand, the act of editing is plenty efficient in vim for me.

[1] Russ Cox "An introduction to the ACME editor": https://youtu.be/dP1xVpMPn8M

http://acme.cat-v.org/

[cmroanirgo]

Lol. I didn't realise I wasn't technical - but then again my background's only in electronics thru 3d game dev & modelling (90's) thru finance thru embedded. I should probably quit.

Also from the article:

> “I really didn’t believe in it,” he said. “I thought cursor keys were much better. We literally took people off the streets who had never seen a computer. In three or four minutes they were happily editing away using cursor keys. At that point I was going to show them the mouse and prove that they could select text faster than with the cursor keys. Then I was going to show that they didn’t like it.

“It backfired.

Just because he thought a way was the way, Mr Tesler was willing to correct himself of his presuppositions based on real world testing.