5 ms·

The system seems cool but the UI's insistence on mouse usage is a non-starter for a lot of people. If you look at some of the white papers, Pike starts with as

The system seems cool but the UI's insistence on mouse usage is a non-starter for a lot of people. If you look at some of the white papers, Pike starts with assertions that the mouse must be a front and center input mechanism. I reject the premise. I'd argue pushing as much functionality to the keyboard and using natural language to interact is more productive in the long run.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
Koshkin 9y ago
MacOS was based on the same premise, it seems - at least originally: the keyboard was to be used only as a tool for typing characters into a text widget; navigation, selection, etc. all were to be done using the mouse. It was a popular idea at the time. In fact, Acme is a clone of the user interface of Oberon OS. The difference (from the Mac) was, while the mouse as designed by Apple had only one button, Oberon and Acme required three buttons and the user's ability to press some of them simultaneously (termed "chords"). While I find the Plan 9's (and Inferno's) window system elegant and useful, with the need to be able to use the mouse pervasively and in such an intricate way, these OS and editors seem to have jumped the shark.
- pjmlp 9y ago
  Using the mouse alongside keyboard shortcuts, feels like playing FPS. It is a personal thing, but I have always been more productive that way.
aaron-lebo 9y ago
I lean towards this, but I've never seen anything that suggests it is more than a (possibly wrong) intuition. If Starcraft players can do 200 actions per minute, what suggests the mouse is the limiting factor? I'd suspect we spend more time processing what we are going to do than we do actually doing it. I often find myself pausing to think about how to get the right layout I want in i3, but if I just could drag some windows around, it'd be done. The mouse is very intuitive, that's probably why Jobs got stuck on it. It's hard to get much more "natural language" than literally using text to control actions as Acme does.
- secure 9y ago
  Regarding your comment about getting the right layout in i3: https://github.com/i3/i3/pull/2653 https://github.com/i3/i3/pull/2653 might be relevant. It hasn’t seen an update in quite a while, though.
- taeric 9y ago
  It is hard to see how the mouse enhances textual interaction. Contrasted with GUI interaction like Starcraft, where it is kind of a clear win. Similarly, using a pen is a clear win for artists, which is why wacom and now surface are such successes in their fields.
- boomlinde 9y ago
  For me it's not so much a matter of time as it is about ergonomics. Typing with only one hand or constantly switching between the mouse and the keyboard is not good for your arms. Starcraft players on the other hand perform a task where one hand can always stay on the mouse while the other is on the keyboard.
- 0x445442 9y ago
  I'd suggest if you could map all your movement, navigation, pre-configured layouts to a command box with fuzzy matching available with Ctrl-Space or the like you would quickly become more proficient than with the mouse. Spacemacs and the Hydra package for Emacs are interesting as well but I actually prefer to just start typing commands until I get the match I want.
e12e 9y ago
I think the mouse is a dead end - but I think interactive Gui with pen and touch input are not. I recall there's been studies that show editing with the mouse is faster/more efficient than keyboard/modal-driven editing - and even as an avid Vi(m) user I can believe that. But I while the mouse is dangerous (due to rsi) and limiting (five fingers become 1 to 3ish buttons) - I don't think the keyboard is the best we can do either. I actually think the direction Ms is taking with surface and wheel is very interesting. And for a while, I've believed an acme inspired (multi)touch&pen interface is likely to be a good way to take user interaction a step further.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

Koshkin 9y ago

MacOS was based on the same premise, it seems - at least originally: the keyboard was to be used only as a tool for typing characters into a text widget; navigation, selection, etc. all were to be done using the mouse. It was a popular idea at the time. In fact, Acme is a clone of the user interface of Oberon OS. The difference (from the Mac) was, while the mouse as designed by Apple had only one button, Oberon and Acme required three buttons and the user's ability to press some of them simultaneously (termed "chords"). While I find the Plan 9's (and Inferno's) window system elegant and useful, with the need to be able to use the mouse pervasively and in such an intricate way, these OS and editors seem to have jumped the shark.

pjmlp 9y ago
Using the mouse alongside keyboard shortcuts, feels like playing FPS. It is a personal thing, but I have always been more productive that way.

aaron-lebo 9y ago

I lean towards this, but I've never seen anything that suggests it is more than a (possibly wrong) intuition. If Starcraft players can do 200 actions per minute, what suggests the mouse is the limiting factor? I'd suspect we spend more time processing what we are going to do than we do actually doing it. I often find myself pausing to think about how to get the right layout I want in i3, but if I just could drag some windows around, it'd be done. The mouse is very intuitive, that's probably why Jobs got stuck on it. It's hard to get much more "natural language" than literally using text to control actions as Acme does.

secure 9y ago
Regarding your comment about getting the right layout in i3: https://github.com/i3/i3/pull/2653 https://github.com/i3/i3/pull/2653 might be relevant. It hasn’t seen an update in quite a while, though.
taeric 9y ago
It is hard to see how the mouse enhances textual interaction. Contrasted with GUI interaction like Starcraft, where it is kind of a clear win. Similarly, using a pen is a clear win for artists, which is why wacom and now surface are such successes in their fields.
boomlinde 9y ago
For me it's not so much a matter of time as it is about ergonomics. Typing with only one hand or constantly switching between the mouse and the keyboard is not good for your arms. Starcraft players on the other hand perform a task where one hand can always stay on the mouse while the other is on the keyboard.
0x445442 9y ago
I'd suggest if you could map all your movement, navigation, pre-configured layouts to a command box with fuzzy matching available with Ctrl-Space or the like you would quickly become more proficient than with the mouse. Spacemacs and the Hydra package for Emacs are interesting as well but I actually prefer to just start typing commands until I get the match I want.

e12e 9y ago

I think the mouse is a dead end - but I think interactive Gui with pen and touch input are not. I recall there's been studies that show editing with the mouse is faster/more efficient than keyboard/modal-driven editing - and even as an avid Vi(m) user I can believe that. But I while the mouse is dangerous (due to rsi) and limiting (five fingers become 1 to 3ish buttons) - I don't think the keyboard is the best we can do either. I actually think the direction Ms is taking with surface and wheel is very interesting. And for a while, I've believed an acme inspired (multi)touch&pen interface is likely to be a good way to take user interaction a step further.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]