Live data from Hacker News

Are we stuck with the same Desktop UX forever? [video]

youtube.com

31–40 of 214 posts

Re: Are we stuck with the same Desktop UX forever? [video]

#31
post #22

The computer form factor hasn’t changed since the mainframe: look into a screen for where to give input, select visual icons via a pointer, type text via keyboard into a text entry box, hit an action button, recieve result, repeat it’s just all gotten miniaturized Humans have outright rejected all other possible computer form factors presented to them to date including: Purely NLP with no screen head worn augmented r…

> Purely NLP with no screen Cumbersome and slow with horrible failure recovery. Great if it works, huge pain in the ass if it doesn't. Useless for any visual task. > head worn augmented reality Completely useless if what you're doing doesn't involve "augmenting reality" (editing a text document), which probably describes most tasks that the average person is using a computer for. > contact lenses Effectively impossib…

And most computers were entirely shit in the 1950s

yet here we are today

You must’ve missed the point: people invested in desktop computers when they were shitty vacuum tubes that blow up.

That still hasn’t happened for any other user experience or interface.

> it's good and versatile enough for what most people need to do with a computer

Exactly correct! Like I said it’s a limitation of the human society, the capabilities and expectations of regular people are so low and diffuse that there is not enough collective intelligence to manage a complex interface that would measurably improve your abilities.

Said another way, it’s the same as if a baby could never “graduate” from Duplo blocks to Lego because lego blocks are too complicated

Re: Are we stuck with the same Desktop UX forever? [video]

#32

I've given dozens of talks, but this one seems to have struck a chord, as it's my most popular video in quite a while. It's got over 14k views in less than a day. I'm excited so many people are interested in desktop UX!

Thanks for that nice talk, it felt like a breeze of fresh air with basic & simple yet powerful but alas "forgotten" concepts of UX. Will look into your other talks.

[deleted]

Re: Are we stuck with the same Desktop UX forever? [video]

#33

I've given dozens of talks, but this one seems to have struck a chord, as it's my most popular video in quite a while. It's got over 14k views in less than a day. I'm excited so many people are interested in desktop UX!

I concur though per my earlier post I do feel "desktop stagnation" is inevitable and we're already there. You were channeling Don Norman https://jnd.org/ in the best of ways.

Re: Are we stuck with the same Desktop UX forever? [video]

#34
post #24

I enjoyed this talk, and I want to learn more about the concept of “learning loops” for interface design. Personally, I wish there were a champion of desktop usability like how Apple was in the 1980s and 1990s. I feel that Microsoft, Apple, and Google lost the plot in the 2010s due to two factors: (1) the rise of mobile and Web computing, and (2) the realization that software platforms are excellent platforms for mil…

It's because companies are no longer run by engineers. The MBAs and accountants are in charge and they could care less about making good products.

At Microsoft, Satya Nadella has an engineering background, but it seems like he didn't spend much time as an engineer before getting an MBA and playing the management advancement game.

Our industry isn't what it used to be and I'm not sure it ever could.

Re: Are we stuck with the same Desktop UX forever? [video]

#35

Why didn't Star Trek ever tackle the big issues, like them constantly updating the LCARS interface every few episodes to make it better, or having Geordi La Forge re-writing the warp core controllers in Rust?

Because, something that a lot of tech-obsessed Trek fans never seem to really come to terms with, is that Trek didn't fetishize technology. In the Trek universe, LCARS wasn't getting continuous UI updates because they would have advanced, culturally, to a point where they recognized that continuous UI updates are frustrating for users. They would have invested the time and research effort required to better understan…

[deleted]

Re: Are we stuck with the same Desktop UX forever? [video]

#36

The computer form factor hasn’t changed since the mainframe: look into a screen for where to give input, select visual icons via a pointer, type text via keyboard into a text entry box, hit an action button, recieve result, repeat it’s just all gotten miniaturized Humans have outright rejected all other possible computer form factors presented to them to date including: Purely NLP with no screen head worn augmented r…

I do not see laptop computers as the same form factor as mainframes. At. All.

Even more, I don't see phones as the same form factor as mainframes.

Re: Are we stuck with the same Desktop UX forever? [video]

#37

Why didn't Star Trek ever tackle the big issues, like them constantly updating the LCARS interface every few episodes to make it better, or having Geordi La Forge re-writing the warp core controllers in Rust?

Trek needs to visibly "sci-fi-up" extant tech in order to have the poetic narrative license to tell its present-day parables.

Things just need to "look futuristic". The don't actually need to have practical function outside whatever narrative constraints are imposed in order to provide pace and tension to the story.

I forget who said it first, but "Warp is really the speed of plot".

Re: Are we stuck with the same Desktop UX forever? [video]

#38

The computer form factor hasn’t changed since the mainframe: look into a screen for where to give input, select visual icons via a pointer, type text via keyboard into a text entry box, hit an action button, recieve result, repeat it’s just all gotten miniaturized Humans have outright rejected all other possible computer form factors presented to them to date including: Purely NLP with no screen head worn augmented r…

Since mainframes, you say. Well, sonny, when I first learned programming on a mainframe, we had punch cards and fan-fold printouts. Nothing beats that, eh?

Re: Are we stuck with the same Desktop UX forever? [video]

#39

Why didn't Star Trek ever tackle the big issues, like them constantly updating the LCARS interface every few episodes to make it better, or having Geordi La Forge re-writing the warp core controllers in Rust?

I have often thought that Star Trek is supposed to show a future in which computer technology and user interfaces have evolved to a steady state that don't need to change that much, and which is superior to our own in ways that we don't yet understand. And because it hasn't been invented yet, the show does not invent it either.

It is for the audience to imagine that those printed transparencies back-lit with light bulbs behind coloured gel are the most intuitive, easy to use, precise user interfaces that the actors pretend that they are.

Re: Are we stuck with the same Desktop UX forever? [video]

#40

Why didn't Star Trek ever tackle the big issues, like them constantly updating the LCARS interface every few episodes to make it better, or having Geordi La Forge re-writing the warp core controllers in Rust?

Because, something that a lot of tech-obsessed Trek fans never seem to really come to terms with, is that Trek didn't fetishize technology. In the Trek universe, LCARS wasn't getting continuous UI updates because they would have advanced, culturally, to a point where they recognized that continuous UI updates are frustrating for users. They would have invested the time and research effort required to better understan…

> In the Trek universe, LCARS wasn't getting continuous UI updates

In the Trek universe, LCARS was continuously generating UI updates for each user, because AI coding had reached the point that it no longer needs specific direction, and it responds autonomously to needs the system itself identifies.

Post reply on HN