3D desktop
Locked
12
12
 
|
|
|
Hi Stef,
Am 05.01.2007 um 22:31 schrieb stéphane ducasse: > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0ODskdEPnQ > Could be cool to use Genie for that.... Cool indeed. What is "Genie" ? Greetings Hans |
|
|
Hans N Beck wrote:
> Hi Stef, > > > Am 05.01.2007 um 22:31 schrieb stéphane ducasse: > >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0ODskdEPnQ >> Could be cool to use Genie for that.... > > Cool indeed. What is "Genie" ? > > Greetings > > Hans > > the video is pretty cool. I think it is a good interface for dealing with subsections of documents, but it will become unwieldy with a huge amount of documents one accumulate over a few years. I saw terabyte disks announced yesterday, users should not be exposed to manually organize something like that. Some kind of automatic storage and indexing must be introduced. karl |
|
|
In reply to this post by Hans N Beck-2
Genie is a gesture recognition system developed by nathanael schaerli
for squeak. Stef On 6 janv. 07, at 13:06, Hans N Beck wrote: > Hi Stef, > > > Am 05.01.2007 um 22:31 schrieb stéphane ducasse: > >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0ODskdEPnQ >> Could be cool to use Genie for that.... > > Cool indeed. What is "Genie" ? > > Greetings > > Hans > > |
|
|
In reply to this post by stéphane ducasse-2
On 5-Jan-07, at 1:31 PM, stéphane ducasse wrote: > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0ODskdEPnQ Yuck. Absolutely ridiculous system. I don't want some simulation of a bad system (messy desktops may be common but they're certainly not good) I want a sensible system that actually helps my work processes. This is nothing more than game-washed kids trying to find a way to get grade points for playing Doom. tim -- tim Rowledge; [hidden email]; http://www.rowledge.org/tim Strange OpCodes: FR: Flip Record |
|
|
tim Rowledge wrote:
> This is nothing more than game-washed kids trying to find a way to get > grade points for playing Doom. you might be right ;-) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUVpSY4eBCc&mode=related&search= Michael |
|
|
In reply to this post by timrowledge
I think that what is interesting is that people have the tools to try
new ideas even if you think that they are idiot. I thought for a moment that squeak was this platform that would allow us to build great next generation ideas. So I hope that I clarified the purpose of my first email. On 6 janv. 07, at 21:16, tim Rowledge wrote: > > On 5-Jan-07, at 1:31 PM, stéphane ducasse wrote: > >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0ODskdEPnQ > Yuck. Absolutely ridiculous system. I don't want some simulation of > a bad system (messy desktops may be common but they're certainly > not good) I want a sensible system that actually helps my work > processes. > > This is nothing more than game-washed kids trying to find a way to > get grade points for playing Doom. > > tim > -- > tim Rowledge; [hidden email]; http://www.rowledge.org/tim > Strange OpCodes: FR: Flip Record > > > > |
|
|
In reply to this post by timrowledge
tim Rowledge wrote:
> > On 5-Jan-07, at 1:31 PM, stéphane ducasse wrote: > >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0ODskdEPnQ > > Yuck. Absolutely ridiculous system. I don't want some simulation of a > bad system (messy desktops may be common but they're certainly not > good) I want a sensible system that actually helps my work processes. > > This is nothing more than game-washed kids trying to find a way to > get grade points for playing Doom. > > tim Gee Tim, just this weekend I have seen several articles saying that messy is good. Seems there's a new book out by a rabbi saying that too-organized is wasteful and too-messy is wasteful, but some mess is just right! See: <http://www.amazon.com/Yearnings-Embracing-Sacred-Messiness-Life/dp/1401301924> Cheers, David |
|
|
In reply to this post by Michael Rueger-6
Michael Rueger skrev:
> tim Rowledge wrote: >> This is nothing more than game-washed kids trying to find a way to >> get grade points for playing Doom. > > you might be right ;-) > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUVpSY4eBCc&mode=related&search= > > Michael > > Karl |
|
|
In reply to this post by timrowledge
On 1/6/07, tim Rowledge <[hidden email]> wrote:
> This is nothing more than game-washed kids trying to find a way to > get grade points for playing Doom. > True in sorts. The best email system I've used so far is Gmail. Which is strange, it being browser-based. Every single shortcoming for the browser UI, however, is made up for by Google's excellent search system. Eye candy can't compete with good old functionality :). That's also why I am totally not interested in pimping Squeak's UI, for example. Still - some nice and potentially more widely applicable gestures though. |
|
|
Hi
Am 07.01.2007 um 12:20 schrieb Cees de Groot: > On 1/6/07, tim Rowledge <[hidden email]> wrote: >> This is nothing more than game-washed kids trying to find a way to >> get grade points for playing Doom. >> > True in sorts. The best email system I've used so far is Gmail. Which > is strange, it being browser-based. Every single shortcoming for the > browser UI, however, is made up for by Google's excellent search > system. Eye candy can't compete with good old functionality :). That's > also why I am totally not interested in pimping Squeak's UI, for > example. > > Still - some nice and potentially more widely applicable gestures > though. > And: the way how to use computers will change. There will be come an age where we don't use a mouse or a keyboard at all for standard tasks. So playing such "games" may be necessary to find promising new ways. Regards Hans |
|
|
In reply to this post by Cees De Groot
Cees de Groot puso en su mail :
> On 1/6/07, tim Rowledge <[hidden email]> wrote: >> This is nothing more than game-washed kids trying to find a way to >> get grade points for playing Doom. Euclides view of world last for many years and for many of us a "flat" world is enough. Edgar __________________________________________________ Preguntá. Respondé. Descubrí. Todo lo que querías saber, y lo que ni imaginabas, está en Yahoo! Respuestas (Beta). ¡Probalo ya! http://www.yahoo.com.ar/respuestas |
|
|
In reply to this post by stephane ducasse
On 7-Jan-07, at 12:16 AM, stephane ducasse wrote: > I think that what is interesting is that people have the tools to > try new ideas even if you think that they are idiot. Yes, that is good and interesting; the faster people ca try out ideas and discover which ones are bad, the better it is. As we used to say at Interval Research - Fail Early, Fail Often. Squeak is definitely one of the tools I would consider valuable for this. So is SketchUp, so is the Doom Programmers Kit (or whatever it may be known as). So is modelling clay.... And none of it stops me thinking that is a bad idea to photophysically emulate a bad way of working. Sure it's cool that you *can* do that that but that doesn't make it a good way of working. tim -- tim Rowledge; [hidden email]; http://www.rowledge.org/tim Oscar Wilde: “Only the shallow know themselves.” |
|
|
>> I think that what is interesting is that people have the tools to
>> try new ideas even if you think that they are idiot. > > Yes, that is good and interesting; the faster people ca try out > ideas and discover which ones are bad, the better it is. As we used > to say at Interval Research - Fail Early, Fail Often. > > Squeak is definitely one of the tools I would consider valuable for > this. So is SketchUp, so is the Doom Programmers Kit (or whatever > it may be known as). So is modelling clay.... > > And none of it stops me thinking that is a bad idea to > photophysically emulate a bad way of working. Sure it's cool that > you *can* do that that but that doesn't make it a good way of working. Indeed. I have no idea of 3D virtual space efficiency and I was more looking at the technical aspects. Stef |
|
|
In reply to this post by timrowledge
I wish someone would tell that to every organisation that attempts to chain it's employees to desks for 8 hours+ a day :-) Back to the video, it is some months old now and I think all the criticisms that could be made have been. Still, on a superficial level it is excellent eye candy and I for one don't understand the general aversion of the Squeak community to eye candy. Image sells and that's a fact... and I think Squeak/Smalltalk could have done with some eye-candy style interfaces and marketing. It could also be argued that EToys is eye candy? Regarding 3D, for a long time I believed that 3D was the future but eventually came to the conclusion that 2.5D is more suitable in most cases and this is an prime example. I agree it has flaws but I think it should be viewed as possibly appropriate for working at a particular level, eg, with a small subset of documents/data. Plus it presents an immediately familiar metaphor that almost anyone can relate to. I lost faith in full blown 3D metaphors because the examples I have seen overwhelm the user and/or abstract away any common meaning. A good metric for future interfaces is: do they even need explaining, let alone an operators manual (yuuuuk!). ...or should I just say: I like it! |
|
|
Why I think full 3D is inevitable... though fully integrated with 2D,
with text, and with databases. Most information management will begin to look like how a large building is built. Building Information Modeling http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Building_Information_Modeling ... to manage complexity and coordinate communication in real time for a multitude of information participants and interests. Cheers, Darius On 1/7/07, Derek O'Connell <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > tim Rowledge wrote: > > > > And none of it stops me thinking that is a bad idea to > > photophysically emulate a bad way of working. > > > > I wish someone would tell that to every organisation that attempts to chain > it's employees to desks for 8 hours+ a day :-) > > Back to the video, it is some months old now and I think all the criticisms > that could be made have been. Still, on a superficial level it is excellent > eye candy and I for one don't understand the general aversion of the Squeak > community to eye candy. Image sells and that's a fact... and I think > Squeak/Smalltalk could have done with some eye-candy style interfaces and > marketing. It could also be argued that EToys is eye candy? > > Regarding 3D, for a long time I believed that 3D was the future but > eventually came to the conclusion that 2.5D is more suitable in most cases > and this is an prime example. I agree it has flaws but I think it should be > viewed as possibly appropriate for working at a particular level, eg, with a > small subset of documents/data. Plus it presents an immediately familiar > metaphor that almost anyone can relate to. I lost faith in full blown 3D > metaphors because the examples I have seen overwhelm the user and/or > abstract away any common meaning. A good metric for future interfaces is: do > they even need explaining, let alone an operators manual (yuuuuk!). > > ...or should I just say: I like it! > -- > View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/3D-desktop-tf2930270.html#a8208533 > Sent from the Squeak - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > |
|
|
The problem with 3D desktops, or any 3D functionality whatsoever, is
that I own a motherboard which, by all appearances Linux should support, it even has a menu item in the configuration system specifically listing my chipset, but it doesn't. instead linux crashes instantly and completely whenever I try to do anything at all with anything even remotely related to 3D, even the simplest diagnostics will crash my computer. Therefore my position is that nobody should be permitted to use, develop, or even discuss any 3D application of any kind, under penalty of law, until my computer is restored to full operation. =| -- |/-\|/-\| |
|
|
In reply to this post by Darius Clarke
I stick with my prediction that Windows will never take off because DOS apps
are much faster. 40 lines of code just to bring up a window!! It's never going to happen! Ron Teitelbaum > -----Original Message----- > From: [hidden email] [mailto:squeak-dev- > [hidden email]] On Behalf Of Darius Clarke > Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 12:09 PM > To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list > Subject: Re: 3D desktop > > Why I think full 3D is inevitable... though fully integrated with 2D, > with text, and with > databases. > > Most information management will begin to look like how a large > building is built. > > Building Information Modeling > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Building_Information_Modeling > > ... to manage complexity and coordinate communication in real time for > a multitude of information participants and interests. > > Cheers, > Darius > > > On 1/7/07, Derek O'Connell <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > > > > tim Rowledge wrote: > > > > > > And none of it stops me thinking that is a bad idea to > > > photophysically emulate a bad way of working. > > > > > > > I wish someone would tell that to every organisation that attempts to > chain > > it's employees to desks for 8 hours+ a day :-) > > > > Back to the video, it is some months old now and I think all the > criticisms > > that could be made have been. Still, on a superficial level it is > excellent > > eye candy and I for one don't understand the general aversion of the > Squeak > > community to eye candy. Image sells and that's a fact... and I think > > Squeak/Smalltalk could have done with some eye-candy style interfaces > and > > marketing. It could also be argued that EToys is eye candy? > > > > Regarding 3D, for a long time I believed that 3D was the future but > > eventually came to the conclusion that 2.5D is more suitable in most > cases > > and this is an prime example. I agree it has flaws but I think it should > be > > viewed as possibly appropriate for working at a particular level, eg, > with a > > small subset of documents/data. Plus it presents an immediately familiar > > metaphor that almost anyone can relate to. I lost faith in full blown 3D > > metaphors because the examples I have seen overwhelm the user and/or > > abstract away any common meaning. A good metric for future interfaces > is: do > > they even need explaining, let alone an operators manual (yuuuuk!). > > > > ...or should I just say: I like it! > > -- > > View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/3D-desktop- > tf2930270.html#a8208533 > > Sent from the Squeak - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > > > > > |
|
|
Ron Teitelbaum wrote:
> I stick with my prediction that Windows will never take off because DOS apps > are much faster. 40 lines of code just to bring up a window!! It's never > going to happen! Damn streight! DOS Apps remain unsurpassed in so many areas that it makes me cry every time I think about it. =( -- |/-\|/-\| |
|
|
In reply to this post by timrowledge
On 1/7/07, tim Rowledge <[hidden email]> wrote:
Perhaps order, like most things is not always what it appears to be. Organizing requires overhead and maintenance. Not all neat desktops are efficient and some messy desktops are more effectively organized than others. For example, there are many visual encodings in my messy desktop that I can't figure out a "neat" way to do that doesn't require a lot of overhead. I get phone calls, snail mail, physical folders and objects from other people that don't fit neatly into an existing structure so they go into piles. Proximity indicates overall priority. Nearness to the top of the stack is a strong indicator of priority within the domain of that stack. A stack is sticky - i.e. I can move a stack and it retains local spatial tags along with a rough chronology and whatever color tags I may have used. I have a sense of when my mess is getting unmanageable and things need to have a neater, more structured arrangement. Piles that are really high, wide or static probably need attention. Piles convey status info to me while on the phone and when entering or leaving the room. They have their downsides especially for things that need to be shared but messy piles can be an effective management tool. Cheers, Laurence tim |
«
Return to Squeak - Dev
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |