3 ms·

I wasn't really referring to how you physically interact with the system. More along the lines of: if you implement a 3D environment of your files, but you're s

by setr 9y ago

I wasn't really referring to how you physically interact with the system. More along the lines of: if you implement a 3D environment of your files, but you're still interacting with a directory/file model, then you've just constructed a less efficient interface. But if you can now move on to some kind of 3 dimensional, or n-dimensional model, maybe there's something to gain with the 3D interface. Theres little point representing 2D structures in a 3D environment. You have to change what you're representing as well to see any fundamental benefits.

mncharity 9y ago
Nod. Though just relaxing the severe real estate constraints of screens may be a big deal. It's much easier for tooling to provide speculative content when its "off to the side, just in case you care" rather than "in you face, covering what you were working on". So various existing "cute... but it's just not worth the cost of dealing with" ideas might become viable. Code analytics and documentation could be ever present, accessible at glance, just off to the side. That's one fun XR puzzle game. Given a domain where you deeply understand the constraints which determine some system shape, ponder what will change as XR alters the UI constraints. And what approaches already tried, might deserve another look.