Live data from Hacker News

The Canon Cat

jagshouse.com

1–10 of 31 posts

Re: The Canon Cat

#2
This is an outline for a computer designed for the Person In The Street (or, to abbreviate: the PITS); one that will be truly pleasant to use, that will require the user to do nothing that will threaten his or her perverse delight in being able to say: "I don't know the first thing about computers"

Interesting perspective :D

Re: The Canon Cat

#3
From one perspective, Jobs and Raskin ended up going down two opposite paths.

Raskin emphasized that "modes" were a major cause of UI problems. Essentially you want a UI that the user can habituate to as strongly as possible, so that all one's attention can be focused on the actual task and all of the administrivia you need to do tell the computer your intention are handled subconsciously. Like touch typing at a higher level.

The issue with modes is that they break habituation. If performing a given UI gesture does one thing in one mode and another thing in another mode, you can't make that gesture a habit. For example: Cmd+Z is a conventional gesture that many applications interpret as undo. If the keyboard shortcut changed between applications (or worse Cmd+Z meant something else in another application/mode), it wouldn't be so habitual and you'd be less productive.

Raskin was very serious about no modes. The Cat for example didn't even have an on/off mode. It would go to sleep to save power, but if you started typing it would buffer all your key strokes and have them in your document by the time the thing woke up. That is, you didn't have to switch from off mode to on mode! And because you were always in a document (that is, there were no separate application modes), you knew that typing some words always did the same thing, so the scheme really worked.

On the other hand, Apple has really pushed, especially since iOS, on the "App" model. Applications are, of course, giant modes. And the strategy has been to push a separate App (mode) for every single use of the machine. So rather than learning a few powerful gestures and then combining them to do disparate tasks, users need to learn a separate, surface-level gesture complex (App) for each individual task they want to do on their machine.

Which is more efficient or appealing? On what time scale of use?

Did Apple end up this way because Apps are a more natural fit for a consumerist model? "Want to do this task with your machine? Don't bother figuring out how you can do it yourself. There's an App for that!" No Modes vs Buy More Modes?

Raskin's book, The Humane Interface, talks extensively about his UI design philosophy. In addition to explaining the above problems with modes, he discusses how to actually design a computer system with no modes (I believe an elaboration of what he did with the Cat). He also explains other really important UI principles and their ramifications, for example, "The user's data is sacred" (hence undo).

PS:

Raskin's definitions: A gesture is defined as an action that can be done automatically by the body as soon as the brain "gives the command". So Cmd+Z is a gesture, as is typing the word "brain". What constitutes a single gesture will be different depending on the user! A mode is defined as any situation not at the user's locus of attention that would cause a gesture to perform an action different from another mode. So "pseudomodes" where the user holds down a modifier key or holds the mouse button while performing a drag gesture get around this since they keep the user's locus of attention on the fact that they are performing the pseudomode.

I think both the above definitions are still a bit problematic but Raskin's definitions are better than any other that I've heard. I hope there are more people who study and discuss these deep UI design issues! What do you think about modes?

Re: The Canon Cat

#4
My uncle was one of the programmers on the Cat project, he still has a working production unit. The Cat is a handsome little machine. There's something elegant about its lack of silos: all of your (textual) data is in one space that you leap around with the aid of dedicated search forwards/backwards keys, reprogramming or extending the system itself is likewise a keystroke away. It obviously wasn't a commercial success, but the user was indisputably the boss of the thing.

Re: The Canon Cat

#5
post #3

From one perspective, Jobs and Raskin ended up going down two opposite paths. Raskin emphasized that "modes" were a major cause of UI problems. Essentially you want a UI that the user can habituate to as strongly as possible, so that all one's attention can be focused on the actual task and all of the administrivia you need to do tell the computer your intention are handled subconsciously. Like touch typing at a high…

Fascinating. To play the devil's advocate, would you agree that sometimes a new mode's optimization for the task can outweigh its cognitive overload? If you try to shoehorn too many disparate tasks into the same interface, usability can suffer.

Re: The Canon Cat

#6
post #3

From one perspective, Jobs and Raskin ended up going down two opposite paths. Raskin emphasized that "modes" were a major cause of UI problems. Essentially you want a UI that the user can habituate to as strongly as possible, so that all one's attention can be focused on the actual task and all of the administrivia you need to do tell the computer your intention are handled subconsciously. Like touch typing at a high…

Some of Raskin's idea is really like what Emacs does. Ian Bicking once wrote an article THE vs. Emacs. http://blog.ianbicking.org/the-vs-emacs.html

Re: The Canon Cat

#7
post #3

From one perspective, Jobs and Raskin ended up going down two opposite paths. Raskin emphasized that "modes" were a major cause of UI problems. Essentially you want a UI that the user can habituate to as strongly as possible, so that all one's attention can be focused on the actual task and all of the administrivia you need to do tell the computer your intention are handled subconsciously. Like touch typing at a high…

You are painting a picture with black and white where in reality there are shades of grey.

The dichotomy you are trying to conjure up does exist to an extent and it is interesting, but in reality no one even knows how to build a modeless mobile interface (that is as powerful as an interface that is allowed to use modes).

Deciding whether modes would be a good idea pretty much has to be done on a case-by-case basis, considering the involved tradeoffs. While avoiding modes is in general a good rule of thumb I have a hard time believing that it is realistic as a hard and fast rule.

(The characterisation of apps as giant modes doesn’t make much if any sense in the context of iOS.)

Re: The Canon Cat

#8

My uncle was one of the programmers on the Cat project, he still has a working production unit. The Cat is a handsome little machine. There's something elegant about its lack of silos: all of your (textual) data is in one space that you leap around with the aid of dedicated search forwards/backwards keys, reprogramming or extending the system itself is likewise a keystroke away. It obviously wasn't a commercial succe…

"but the user was indisputably the boss of the thing."

Thanks for posting: I read Raskin's The Humane Interface some time ago. I wondered then and now if the fact that the user was the boss was actually part of the problem with sales? Reasonably steep learning curve?

Re: The Canon Cat

#10
I've always been a fan of the way the Cat works. So much so that my main work tool is pretty much a copy of the Cat on modern hardware. It beats, and has been beating for a bunch of years now, any alternative that I try to give a go.

PS. Notational Velocity and NValt are pretty awesome too.

Post reply on HN