|
Friday, March 23, 2007 Divine Disorder on the DesktopContinued from page 2 By Wade Roush
Rao, for one, agrees. "There are some subtle things about aesthetics and movement that have real utility," he says. "For example, shading can make it easier to detect things, and physics can give you a stronger intuition about where the mouse is, or a faster recall about where you put something, so you can go and grab it before you can even name what you want." Despite these clever features, however, Rao warns that Agarawala's company could quickly find itself in the same position as Mirror Worlds. The fact that Bumptop is written in the common programming and graphics languages C++ and OpenGL is an advantage; it means that individual users will be able to download it to their Windows PCs, without waiting for Microsoft to adopt or clone the technology. And doubtless, many computing enthusiasts thirsty for fresh alternatives to the traditional desktop will do exactly that. But there's still a big leap from cult status to widespread consumer adoption. "Bumptop is very nice, and Anand is a guy I would immediately want to hire," says Rao. "But most of these ideas for reinventing the desktop have already been explored by one person or another, and the reason they failed was not that they didn't work well enough. It's a matter of how many levels of change would be required, and whether the need is deep enough." At Microsoft it takes years to bring to market even minor advances in desktop graphics such as the Windows Flip 3D feature in Vista, Rao points out. "Even if you got people inside Microsoft to agree on using something like Bumptop, it wouldn't go out the door anytime soon," he says. On top of that, the profusion of information and entertainment options on the Internet means that consumers have less and less reason to spend time monkeying with their PCs' desktop environment. "What really stopped progress on the next generation of GUIs was what happened on the Web," Rao opines. "People were willing to go back to much more impoverished interfaces in order to get a richness of services and connections to other people. All of those things are much more interesting than having a slightly better desktop user interface. I'm afraid there are just too many cool things to do on the Internet for [Bumptop] to pick up a lot of attention." For now, Agarawala is just concentrating on finishing Bumptop--and he says that even cooler things could come later. "I think there are some really awesome possibilities for things beyond the desktop," he says. "This theme of physics-based interaction opens up a lot of new ways to organize and interact with information." |
 |
|
||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||
Audio »
Share »
Digg this
Add to del.icio.us
Add to Reddit
Add to Facebook
Slashdot It!
Stumble It!
Add to Newsvine
Add to Connotea
Add to CiteUlike
Add to Furl
Googlize this
Add to Rojo
Add to MyWeb
Favorite
Print
E-mail
Comments
ricklev on 03/23/2007 at 9:30 AM
1
nicholas whitworth on 05/12/2007 at 11:20 PM
1
Humans developed in a rich visual 3D space, and this is the environment we function best in.
As highly adaptable creatures, the 2D desktop metaphor is easy [enough] to learn and use. Though it underuses our mental processes - such as memory formation which are highly geared into geographic, 3D, visual information-scapes. This makes using computers boring and irritating - it lacks the more basic enrichers of normal life - 3D and visual variety.
I find i organize folders into choices of 3-10 options. In this way i am constructing a geographic path. ('near the bottom'). This is by no means my only method of recalling the location of files, but one that is not directly catered for. I often find myself with no idea where a file is, and rely on my schema ('work / computer / tests'). Choosing the most likely option each time.
Conversely - i do not have this trouble in my house. Not because it's a library-style storage system - it's not even remotely. But because our minds are keyed into forming memories around objects and locations. Based in 3D and with unique appearances.
Objects with unique appearances [including sound] can convey a wealth of information about an object. Take an apple for example - age, type, development, quality, amount remaining, weight. Perhaps location and even implied nutritional information. [along with temperature, moisture, and a damage record - let alone sliced / boiled / baked / dried etc] [let alone again the information you gain through interaction]
Compare this to a 'pdf' icon.
A town is an intuitive spacial system of organization (and interaction with) a vast - amount of data.
Now i realize this is somewhat far-fetched, but the principal - that our mental mechanisms are needlessly underutilized is highly applicable even in slight measure. Take for examples windows with drop-shadow. A simple, and useful graphical aid to prominence.
It seems to me a 3D finder is an inevitable future ( because it's always been our past ) !
"It's a matter of how many levels of change would be required, and whether the need is deep enough."
Quite. There are a few individuals making cranky software which is severely limited by its lack of breadth. The large companies arn't interested because there is no demonstration of public need, and the public don't need it because they've not seen it's possible. It's a large jump which will cannot be completely solved in one go.
The desktop metaphor is becoming dysfunctional. (don't get me started on keybourd & mouse) and i see a few explorations of a 3D solution, which i welcome with open arms. I used a 3D 'plane' system program for a while and it really was a far better concept. Hundreds of files were on the 'first level' - instantly accessible, memorable and locatable. [3D-space VFS (mac)]
BumpTop i see as a little short sighted. The 'piles' idea is fine for a desktop - but for the harddrive... it's not enough. Adding 'rooms' might do it. Also it also leans on the 'fun' of a game, which is great, but i'd have greater scope first. As you know - i'm looking forward to it a lot.
The 'time' system of storage mentioned earlier i see as 'missing the mark'. Though i've never seen it and know nothing about it. I think it goes to show that people do rely on different mechanisms more. This is perhaps why 'lists' have prevailed - they are the lowest common denominator !
The internet is the most exciting arena at the moment but it's also painfully limiting. The virtual data-scape we swim in daily needs an improved navigation system and this will apply itself naturally and to it's maximum extent.