Re: [Usability] The Desktop: useful or just a relic?

["Diego Moya (a.k.a. TuringTest)" <turingt gmail com>]

On 25/05/05, Bosshard Raphael (bosshrap) <bosshrap zhwin ch> wrote:
> Topaz thoughts..
> 
> Again a silly questions to the gods of usefull interfaces;
> 
>   Is the desktop useful (or is it just a relic from ancient times?)

It might have served well when documents where only text and image and
users had at most two or three applications open. But I believe that
this metaphor is aged and is being replaced by other interfaces (the
next Big Thing being system-wide metadata search).

> 
> Most people I know use the desktop  (the thing in the background where all these funny icons are) to store data. They create folders with names like "Music" and "Private" and "None of you business" and put stuff into them.
> 
Yes, this is what desktops were designed for.


> But whenever they want to access them, they use the file-picker, because the application they are using is concealing those nice folders. The desktop is the least accessible place on the screen.

That's the first main whole design error of desktop systems - their
primary function is not easy to do, so it is not done on a regular
basis.


> 
> Imagine drag and drop: minimize application, open folder, open folder, open application, move application to the left, move folder to the right, drag file into application, close folder, close folder. Silly.

I agree with your analysis. That kind of micro-management of basic
system tools is silly indeed, and getting worse with the increasing
amounts of data inside your own computer and in your reachable
network.


> 
> What about a different to store data? What about a "sidebar" (instinct anti-longhorn reaction expected) with all folders in the home directory? Plus, maybe, some "persistent search" folders (All images, all music-files by Jethro Tull, conversations with ALICE...).

Isn't this what the Mac OS X "Dock" is for? I see it as a workaround
to the "always covered desktop" problem, but there could be better
solutions.


> 
> I guess there are better ways then the one example above. Do you have any ideas?
> 

I'm a big fan of Zooming User Interfaces:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZUI

and Shneiderman's "dynamic queries"
http://www.cs.umd.edu/hcil/spotfire/

Both are versatile and expressive interfaces for quick access and
progressive disclosure of the user's data.

With both techniques you get first an overview of the whole system.
Then you refine the application state using direct manipulation with
visual feedback so the mental burden.

You don't have to "remember" where the data was stored or what
properties it had, you can choose from a sensible machine-made
selection of interesting properties and data sets. You can combine the
best of spatial interfaces and metadata search in a very visual, non
abstract metaphor.