The Human Interface

Dan Stovall dbstovall at gmail.com
Wed Mar 9 15:53:54 MST 2005


> Although I agree that it is neat and fun to use, it is much less
> efficient than other existing UI designs and processes. I can fly
> through files in the terminal, navigate a website with tabs, search
> thousands of documents on google, pop between applications with Mac OS'
> expose, or navigated pages in a PDF with the down arrow key much, much,
> much faster than I can zooming in and out of this virtual spread of
> documents.

 
I agree that it isn't as efficient.  But as far as ease of use goes, I
think that this type of interface would be much easier to use than the
current windows based interfaces, for some people.  Assuming it let
you organize things on the page they way you wanted and at the level
you wanted.  I just think about how my parents organize their desk,
everything is all over the place, nothing is in organized in files,
even though they have a nice filing cabinet right next to it.  The
drawers are the same mess of stuff that the desk is.  I think that
there are lots of people out there that would look at something like
that and be off and running as soon as they knew how to zoom and move.
 It abstracts a lot of things away from the user and simplifies the
interface for them.  They don't have to know anything about file
systems to find where "My Documents" are, or return to their home dir
to navigate to another area of their system.  All they need to know is
how to zoom and move a mouse.

There are a lot of things that are glossed over though.  Especially,
how applications are integrated into the user interface.  That seems
to me to be the biggest question mark I have.  But I think it has
potential as far as navigation goes for getting around a user
interface.


Dan



More information about the PLUG mailing list