Re: [Usability] spatial nautilus concerns, revisited

[David Feldman <mailing-lists interfacethis com>]

Thanks for reading the article. Of course, coming up with a real  
alternative is a bit harder than coming up with what I hope is  
constructive criticism...but compiling some ideas sounds like a fun  
project. For one thing I know there are some interesting projects (I  
remember one at Sun) examining new ways to do things. I'll post back  
here when I've got something, maybe in a few weeks, and perhaps it  
will be of use.

I like pie in the sky ideas - I think they're a good place to start.  
Sure, you ultimately have to reconcile with reality, but if you  
restrict yourself from the start you'll probably miss something.  
Right now I think a complete shift in file management might be a  
mistake for the mainstream Linux desktop, since it might hinder Linux  
adoption by Windows users. But by GNOME 4 or 5, that may change. Plus  
one isn't restricted to a single file manager.

That said, my points about the need for empirical testing hold even  
if we are to scrap everything and start over. At this point, we have  
some great tools for gathering data on what works and what doesn't.  
We can test spatial Nautilus and browser Nautilus side by side. And  
while we may not keep any of the features we test, the data will help  
us determine what works for people today. That's very valuable in  
guiding a redesign.

Thanks again,
--Dave

On May 5, 2005, at 5:19 PM, Steve Hall wrote:

> I think your best statement is:
>
>     However, one cannot design by testing: Someone needs to
>     take the results and synthesize a new design in response.
>
> Agreed, good design is not something collectively compiled. There
> needs to be a chef, an architect, a designer with a vision. If GNOME's
> current vision is spatial, it isn't going to be replaced with "not
> spatial", only something better.
>
> I believe the better way is to rethink the whole idea of a desktop. In
> my own sketches, I've been calling it GNOME 4 just to distance myself
> from any of the current conventions. Rectangular shapes, resolution,
> superficial distinctions in local/network/media--it all gets
> re-considered.
>
> Of course I'm not naive, this is pie in the sky. But implementation
> details, while important, don't get us to the next level. The ensuing
> raft of comments that usually accompany this topic generally fall into
> the "this isn't what I'm used to" category. Adjusting the spacial
> paradigm (and I agree that it is misfit and broken) doesn't find the
> new vision that gets us all beyond this debate. So we're left arguing
> over window positioning strategies.
>
> You've pointed us to a well written article, but I'd be more
> interested in seeing your vision on something truly new and better.
>
>
> --
> Steve Hall  [ digitect mindspring com ]