Haven't read the story yet, but I've been thinking for awhile that UI seems somewhat stuck. 10.5 just as fab as I'm sure it'll be is still the same old thing just with more bells and whistles.

I wonder if Jeff Han's idea will go anywhere?

After watching the Alan Kay video, and the bit near the end on Spatial Dataland, it seems Jeff's ideas aren't new. I've found a video of their Spatial Data Management Systhem here


(Now I best go read the above, then come back here and change what I've typed) : )

"...the UI will be based on multiple gestures...."

This is drivel unless you know what the heck a "gesture" is.

I remember a few years a go something called "mouse gestures" came out for Mac OS X. While for some I'm sure it was an interesting product, the author was so inconsiderate as to believe that everyone would simply just "know" what a mouse gesture is, or would be able to figure it out because it was self-explanatory. We it wasn't and it isn't. She didn't even include a basic clear, concise and lucid explanation of what a "mouse gesture" is.

The same problem applies (to a lesser degree) to this article and, apparently, to many GUI gurus, who are so far ahead of the rest of us that they neglect to properly illucidate their technobabble. I'm not sure it's arrogance, but it's close.

It certainly doesn't inspire confidence in their ideas for fancy new ways to navigate a computer if they can't even adequately explain their basic concepts in a way that Jane or Joe Average can understand.

/end rant

With resources like Google and Wikipedia, there's less and less excuse for ignorance (not necessarily a bad thing in itself, unless you don't do anything about it). It took me less than thirty seconds to find this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mouse_gestures

So what's arrogant and inconsiderate about the article? what bits don't you understand that you can't find out with a very little research? do you want to be spoon-fed everything?

I admit to being one who hasn't fully appreciated Englebart et al. That said, in 1968, a decade before PCs, having a desktop UI that appears futuristic 35 years later would have been impossible to grasp. Kinda like neural interfaces to run 5-D (height, width, depth, time and alternative time) would be today. I mean, Time Machine in Mac OS X 10.5 is just a glimpse and of course, it really isn't 5-d in that you aren't allowed multiple time paths. Moreover, the interface is still an extruded 2-d rather than truly 3-d and the interface mechanisms are still keyboard and mouse (I prefer the trackball). Truly getting people who don't know the difference between RAM and ROM to embrace sophisticated methods of interaction with data and objects using gestures as sophisticated as those used to fully convey all nuance of non-verbal communication today (and verbal interaction only adds a layer of complexity) will take decades. Considering my mother-in-law still has a hard time grasping how email works (I don't think people fully appreciate how wide the Digital divide is today and how it is expanding at an almost geometric rate), I think 3-D or 4-D (let alone 5-D) interfaces are decades away from being mainstream. Kinda like when Windows was a 32 bit shell on a 16 bit framework (or how Mac OS X Tiger is a 64 bit cludge with 32 bit underpinnings). For some time, we will likely see glimpses, kludges and add-ons that mimic a true environment since the masses in general adapt relatively slowly compared to the development of these things.

Rather than hammer (well 'hammer' might be too strong a word here) at the OS vendors and giving credit to innovation pushers like those behind XGL (usable on Linux today), I am taking into account that embracing the truly society changing way of grasping innovations takes much more time than it takes to develop them these days. I can see a not too distant future where multiple input UI computers are state of the art, but still allow a retrograde interface to mouse and keyboard 2-d interface. And as much as I just LOVE how XGL looks, I think that for those that struggle with Windows it will take lots of time to migrate their thinking to this much different model. That said, I think young people and those with adaptive minds will find the new abstract MUCH EASIER to grasp (we'll hear an acceleration of "kids today are so much smarter than we were", when in reality, they just have a more natural humanistic interface and thus can move more quickly and adaptively to new metaphors. But smarter? no. Just try giving a grammar test which is simple rule memorization and constant and variable recognition so it isn't like it is unique to any language or even other metaphors. Rather, language is basic to the human experience. Anyway, that will quickly satisfy any hubris within any generation..LOL).

I find that I could easily embrace these maniform ideas rather quickly. However, for those with adaptive problems (my autistic son comes to mind) any future interfaces (even those 35 years old...lol) will have to have some way of dealing with different adaptability levels. Whether it is via AI wizarding (as in question asking, prompting with possible and likely answers, etc), UI simplification to reduce distraction, reduction of layering and dimensions or any number of other possibilities, we must acknowledge that even the best UI will have people unable to interact with it. Along those lines, imagine the difficulty an injured quadrapalegic would have navigating a multi input UI (as opposed to someone born with a neurological impairment which might allow for super efficiencies due to natural neurological adaptation.).

I look forward to these innovations becoming mainstream. What really makes me hopeful is that these innovations have the potential to not just increase computer use, but simply change in a better way how we interact with computers and each other.

Quote

rpaege wrote:
"...the UI will be based on multiple gestures...."

This is drivel unless you know what the heck a "gesture" is.

LOL. The same could be said of any statement in which the reader/listener did not understand the content. You could post this whole article in Japanese and then it would be useless to me since I can't read Japanese. So thanks, Mister Obvious. But hey, muchos props for using the word drivel.

Not sure what you're complaining about. I know what "gestures" means. Since I'm reading an article about user interfaces, I can select the proper meaning from my brain using the magical power of context. I'm not sure if "Jane or Joe Average" is going to be reading a story on the future and history of the user interface on a Mac News website. I think this is more a case of the author writing for his intended audience. That, by the way, is an important part of being a successful writer. Which is why he is a writer and you just post complaints that include the word drivel.

Very thoughtful and interesting article.

I tend to believe that we are moving towards a lot of improvement in the UI, but not at a very fast pace. One issue is cost - businesses and a lot of consumers are looking at the lowest price, which is the one factor that will slow down advances in UI accommodating hardware. Even a lot of people who could afford to buy this enhanced hardware will wait until they are ready to upgrade before spending the money, providing another factor in slowing down the development.

Another important factor is the difficulty in getting people to move to different approaches in computing. Look at the challenges Apple faces getting a PC user to move to Macs.

And then there is the fact that a lot of advances or new products are focused on a particular market. Garage Band is one example - fantastic for those that use it, but I don't. Enhanced UI, I believe, will be very much a market segment product in initial stages, with little bits & pieces moving into the mainstream over time.

Anyone remember the active UI he used is going thru the computer information in front of him?

When I first saw Exposй & read about the motion sensor UI work hacked up for the MacBooks that wass my first thought.

I wonder if anyone could work it up with EyeTV and Exposй and Universal Access keymappings....

I firmly believe William Gibson predicted the UI future with that convenient usable UI...

Just my 2Ñž
Thanks,
John Boyarsky
Fairbanks, AK

Greets!

I've been lucky enough to see this video with commentary by Doug - he has commented that many people thought it was all Hollywood trickery and one of the problems he had in the next few weeks was persuading people it was all real!

Doug's still around, still has ideas relevant and ahead of most of the rest of the computing world and is always glad to discuss his ideas with people. You can find out his current plans at the Bootstrap Institute:
http://www.bootstrap.org/ [bootstrap.org]

"So what's arrogant and inconsiderate about the article? what bits don't you understand that you can't find out with a very little research? do you want to be spoon-fed everything?"

Of course not. But I do expect the author of an article to explain themselves, especially in a public forum, without assuming that everyone can just do a "little research" in order to decipher their presumptuous language.

This isn't a technical article written for GUI cognizanti, it's for the rest of us. It's also a matter of good writing and consideration for your readers so that they don't have to go look up things you write because you assume they will or that they already know.

Academics, and good writers by extension, know that you don't make opaque statements without referencing something else to make your statements clear. While footnotes aren't called for in an opinion piece like this one, lucidity always is.

The author mostly did a good job. I just wish he had done a little better.

I still don't think it's presumptuous. Much IT jargon does require explanation, but I'm going to have to go out on a limb here and actually agree with Biff for once: it's all about context.

If I wave at you, or shake my fist at you, that's a gesture - in this case a movement of my hand. What is the analogue of that in a GUI context? it's a mouse movement, or a figure drawn on a tablet, or even with disabled people a movement of the head.

I'm the "rest of us" too, and I understood it.

Quote

LaurieF wrote:
I'm the "rest of us" too, and I understood it.

Oh are you? You call yourself a "geek" and have a sig that indicates that you might just live up to that.

I only say it's presumptuous because it presumes we will look it up or simply just understand it based on context. Most understand the basic meaning of a gesture, probably Biff more than most, but what if it's presented in the first or second paragraph of an article, then put in an unfamiliar context? It becomes out of context and hard to understand unless you are already familiar with the concepts. It's an automatic invitation to stop reading, either out of frustration or simply to go look up some terminology.

In anycase, it appears as though the article has now be reworked a little, and it's to great effect. I applaud the author and his efforts, and for an interesting and enlightening article.

Obligatory Microsoft reference. You'd really be surprised by the amount of research and development done between Microsoft Research and Microsoft Design.

Just to give an example, there was a presentation at last year's Professional Developers Conference in Los Angeles where the design team showed off all the concepts that they went through before they settled on the current Aero interface. From PDC 2003 to PDC 2005, they have gone through several ideas on how to improve the overall experience of the platform. As we all know, Longhorn was scrapped, but it's neat to look at what they came up with.

The presentation was called "The past 60 days in 50 seconds". I found the video of it on Putfile (direct link to WMV), and I found extracted images of the video on this site.

Quote

rpaege wrote:

Quote

LaurieF wrote:
I'm the "rest of us" too, and I understood it.

Oh are you? You call yourself a "geek" and have a sig that indicates that you might just live up to that.

There are geeks and geeks. I'm a data warehousing specialist and know nothing about GUI design.

Um. Engelbart is also <a href"http://codinginparadise.org/weblog/2006/09/douglas-engelbarts-hyperscope-released.html">getting a "web2" update</a> over at hyperscope.org

http://www.microsoft.com/surface/