Re: [Usability] Future of the menu top bar?]

[Matthew Paul Thomas <mpt myrealbox com>]

Microsoft's Web site used to contain a document discussing the design  
of Windows 95, including a paragraph or two on why they had placed the  
taskbar at the bottom instead of the top. I can't find it now, though I  
did find a paper on the design process that produced the taskbar.  
<http://www.microsoft.com/usability/UEPostings/The%20WindowsSUP®- 
SUP%2095%20User%20Interface%20A%20Case%20Study%20in%20Usability%20Engine 
ering.htm>

On May 12, 2006, at 6:08 AM, Shane M. Coughlan wrote:
> ...
> Semiotics would suggest that the placement of the menu at the top of  
> the screen is not fitting psychologically.  The 'top' is generally
> understood to be ideological in Western cultures, with the left area
> being given to known information, the right to new information, and  
> the bottom to data with less priority or the status of predictability  
> (much the same as the left).

Citations, please.

> ...
> - From the perspective of traditional semiotics it would make sense to
> have ideological data like application names and/or documentation  
> names at the top, but to have predictable active objects on the left  
> of the screen. The middle and right of the screen should contain new
> information like dynamic user data (desktop?).
> ...

I double dog dare you to define "ideological data" with reference to  
human-computer interfaces.

Cheers
--
Matthew Paul Thomas
http://mpt.net.nz/