Re: The State Of The Art

[Adam Moyes <adam macfar demon co uk>]

Dr Geek wrote:
> 
> Gnome and KDE are rebuilding the GUI environment for Linux.  Why then are we
> following Windows/Mac/whatver in using the same old flat desktop metaphor?
> Yes, we have multiple desktops (so does Windows, so does the Mac), but how
> about this:
>
> (snip)
>

I agree whole heartedly with your sentiments, and I think that it would be
good to get around the 15 year old or so flat screen aproach. Thanks for
bringing it up.

But I have to say that I am keen to take it further. One of the nice things
about KDE is the view of the desktop being the network, the idea of an
application is hidden from internet/network/local navigation. Although simple
(multiprocess/thread kfm) it makes the desktop so much easier to use. I
would like to get away from the idea of monolithic apps (like netscape) that
manage a subset of your data requirements, I'm sure this is being addressed
with alternative browsers etc, and the mimetype configuration for GNOME.
But the problem is finding these links. A hirearchical approach is not always
appropriate (what should be a parent of what is not always immediately obvious),
and there is only limited space on the desktop (and its flat).

I havn't quite figured it out, but how about something less linear, a more
abstract representation of information _integrated_ into the desktop? So
rather than bits being placed _on_ your desktop, you could have something
context based on the mouse pointer, or maybee that _is_ your desktop/background
perhaps 3d oriented with left/right mouse button zoom/unzoom.

Maybee I'll only be satisfied with a virtual reality imersion interface, being
able to reach into and manipulate things, but why restrict ourselves to
2 hands/arms? Just wire directly into the brain and project the sense of
touching everywhere simultaneously ...

Ok, stop there. Anyone got any ideas on how to manage information links
more abstractly?

Adam.

-- 
Hofstadter's Law:
        It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take
Hofstadter's Law into account.