Christian.
Well said. I agree with all your points, though I feel I disagree in terms
of the G of the UI. [why do I feel I need an upper-GI after this
discussion???] ;)
I actually think the user experience includes what you so eloquently
stated.. But additionally is a visual pleasing experience.. I like my Newton
and Mac because of the interface at times... Of course, I am a design
theorist.. An addict to form and visual fodder...but I prefer a "slick",
well [visually] designed OS interface. I think OSX and Newton do it
wonderfully.
Add the functionality you described [maybe a toggle option for those of us
the like to see the GUI, and those of you that don't], and we are in biz!
Thanx for your observations.
I am really digging the conversation.
Oh, and I actually think the tailfin discussion is an important one.. But
then again.. The designer in me rises to the surface...
On 5/21/08 4:37 PM, "Lord Groundhog" <LordGroundhog@gmail.com> wrote:
> ~~~ On 2008/05/21 23:00, bcantley at bcantley@exchange.fullerton.edu wrote
> ~~~
>
>> I'm sure I'll be criticized about this.. But... "the actual UI can suck,
>> hell it could be purely textual..."
>>
>> Ugh. I could not disagree more. The UI IS the experience interface,
>> regardless of what it lets you do. Granted, the REST of what you say is
>> golden, but to ignore the UI is to ignore ONE of the GREAT things about OSX
>> and the Newton- REGULAR peeps will NOT care how efficient and smart the
>> system is, if the damn UI is buggy, boring, overly complex, or.. Heaven help
>> us.. Textual.
>>
>> I mean that with all due respect- I have not a clue as to the underpinnings
>> of my osx.. And I really don't care to... Im in the geek minority, but in
>> the consumer majority.
>>
>> Ok, let the ripping begin ;)
>>
>
> Bryan,
>
> Thanks for that. What I originally was describing is my dream computer OS,
> one that is totally data-centric. To me, that means that along with the new
> way for the OS to handle data there must be a new (G)UI with a new way of
> letting me at my data. The centrality of the data means (to me) that the
> OS/UI must be as near to transparent as possible. If the UI sucked (as
> Simon put it) it would become an obstacle between user and data. But if
> it's well-designed -- and remember I was talking about the OS allowing me to
> access all my data as a mind-map, by which I should have specified I meant a
> fully relational mind-map -- it will allow the near-transparent manipulation
> of my data on-screen, sometimes organizing all relevant data around this one
> datum, sometimes organizing it around a central theme, sometimes switching
> it to show this or that relationship between two or three or more data-sets,
> and much, much more. Given that for me the data is the important thing,
> I'd expect apps to be fully integrating and co-operating, going several
> steps beyond what we already enjoy on the Newt. At this point I don't see
> how that could use less than a GUI, since we're talking about manipulating a
> mind-map easily and invisibly. And eventually it would have to be "more"
> (and at this point I have no idea how it could be more than a GUI unless
> it's an interactive hologram or something).
>
> So, I defend a really good UI not because it's the user's experience
> although that's also important, but because it's the user's *access and
> control of the data* (and if that's what you meant, then I'm not
> disagreeing). My wish is to revolutionize the OS so as to shift (at last!)
> the computer's practical reality from being the box in which I employ this
> or that flashy app to being the box in which I do what I need and what I
> please with my data, while the OS, UI and apps are all demoted to the rôle
> of secondary and derived importance, existing solely for the purpose of
> serving my needs regarding my data. But there is really no point at all to
> this kind of revolution in the OS unless the UI is good enough to make data
> control a seamless and nearly effortless selection and employment of
> whichever tools will accomplish my intentions with my data.
>
> IMO, we already have computers whose OSes and UIs form series of obstacles
> between us and our data, and that's even before we get as far as working
> with them in those clumsy, ego-centric apps that demand our worship rather
> than invisibly serving our will. Some are worse than others; I use a Mac
> because it's marginally better, and I love my Newton because it's miles
> better. For sure, even the Newton could do a lot better, but my experience
> on the Newton is the closest I've come so far to what I want.
>
> My bottom line: I want a radical transformation of computing philosophy and
> the practical changes which that would trigger. My data is the ultimate
> raison d'etre for my computer. Until my computer, its OS, its (G)UI, and
> especially those £#¢&!*% applications get out of my sight and out of my way,
> and just let me control my data without all the hardware and software
> equivalent of "Look at me! Look what I can do!" my computer is failing to
> justify its existence.
>
> So, thanks for your disagreement with Simon. I'm not really ripping you,
> Bryan, just re-emphasizing why I went off on that topic. I can only speak
> personally, but if the next real revolution in computing doesn't finally
> give us a truly data-centric OS (storage system, retrieval system, GUI,
> app-implementation, and so on), I'm not interested -- to me it's no more
> than "should the Cadillac have big fins, little fins or no fins this year?"
> (yes, I really am old enough to remember when the Cadu designers went
> through that decision and got rid of the "Flash Gordon" fins).
>
> FWIW.
>
>
> Shalom.
> Christian
>
> ~~~ ~~~ ~~~
>
> ³Any sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from a Newton.²
> -- what Arthur C. Clarke meant
>
> http://youtube.com/watch?v=1ZzpdPJ7Zr4
> (With thanks to Chod Lang)
> http://tinyurl.com/29y2dl
> http://www.diyplanner.com/node/3942
>
> ~~~ ~~~ ~~~
> Fight Spam. Join EuroCAUCE: http://www.euro.cauce.org/
> Get MUGged and love it: http://www.oxmug.org/
> Join today: http://www.newtontalk.net/
>
>
>
>
>
> ====================================================================
> The NewtonTalk Mailing List - http://www.newtontalk.net/
> The Official Newton FAQ - http://www.splorp.com/newton/faq/
> The Newton Glossary - http://www.splorp.com/newton/glossary/
> WikiWikiNewt - http://tools.unna.org/wikiwikinewt/
> ====================================================================
>
>
--
bryan cantley
form:uLA dimension laboratory
spatial orchestrator + owner
+
Professor of Design Theory
CSUF
714.278.2075
bcantley@fullerton.edu
bryancantley@gmail.com
http://www.fotolog.net/formula
http://web.mac.com/form.u.la/iWeb/FIEDAD2007/00.html
====================================================================
The NewtonTalk Mailing List - http://www.newtontalk.net/
The Official Newton FAQ - http://www.splorp.com/newton/faq/
The Newton Glossary - http://www.splorp.com/newton/glossary/
WikiWikiNewt - http://tools.unna.org/wikiwikinewt/
====================================================================
Received on Wed May 21 22:33:59 2008
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu May 22 2008 - 05:30:01 EDT