5 ms·

How Star Trek artists imagined the iPad... 23 years ago

68 points by bluesmoon 16y ago

rbanffy 16y ago
Great. Now all we need is warp drive and we can call it a day.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- api 16y ago
  This actually opens a profound issue: why has progress in areas like computers and biotech been so breakneck fast but has utterly stalled in areas like energy, propulsion, aviation, etc.? I think I know the answer: those fields are capital intensive, so their "generation time" is very slow. But that might not be the only answer.
  - brettnak 16y ago
    It seems to me that progress in computers is much more incremental. Meaning, step N+1 is pretty well visible from step N. When dealing with energy and propulsion, this does not seem to be the case. I realize this is pretty hand-wavy, but it's how I get myself to sleep.
  - jerf 16y ago
    Computers and biotech are the exceptions. Progress continues in those other fields at a normal pace.
  - grinich 16y ago
    It hasn't stalled, it's just classified.
  - sliverstorm 16y ago
    For every person who chooses to dive into computing and biotech, that's one more person who cannot work on energy, propulsion and aviation. I know I for one would probably do one of those if I wasn't in computing.
    - api 16y ago
      Maybe it's that the job market in computers especially is so much more dynamic with better opportunity for advancement, so it attracts a greater share of the best and the brightest. It might also be accessibility. Anyone can play with a computer. A jet engine, not so much.
RiderOfGiraffes 16y ago
So you can fly the Enterprise from a PADD, and you can change the interface, or what it's connected to, and interface with the rest of the ship, and yet ... ... when handing over several reports, they handed over several PADDs
- mechanical_fish 16y ago
  You could write a little essay on the subject of props and what they are for. It would be a meditation on questions like why is it so much more dramatically effective to have two characters fight for possession of a gun than it is to have them shoot magic lightning at each other from their fingertips? Or you could write an essay on all the things that neophiles forget when they declare war on paper. The good news is that Malcolm Gladwell wrote that already: http://www.gladwell.com/2002/2002_03_25_a_paper.htm http://www.gladwell.com/2002/2002_03_25_a_paper.htm ...in the form of a review of an MIT press book on the subject. Or we could just make a list of why one would use several PADDs if PADDs were free. You can juxtapose two reports on a desk and rapidly glance from one to another. (Paging Edward Tufte, who goes on and on about this.) You can walk into a room with five people and hand one report to the first four and the remaining three reports to the last one. When you do hand over a stack of reports, they can be in priority order. And you can add commentary to the reports via the way you hand over each one: A careful two-handed presentation (note the proper technique for exchanging Japanese business cards), a jumbled stack, a light toss, a disgusted look as you gingerly pinch the report between thumb and forefinger, or even a mock attempt to shield the bad-news report behind your body as you hand over the good news first. See? Props are not just for actors; everyone is an actor and we all use props.
  - RiderOfGiraffes 16y ago
    Or instead of handing over PADDs at all you can simply tell the intended recipient that the report is ready and they can tap the screen and read it on their own customised display. They can call up multiple reports side by side, etc, etc. Yes, I understand and appreciate your points, and I, personally, use more paper and physical means of thinking and reasoning than many of my colleagues. That doesn't mean that the original ST people got it entirely right (as some people seem to claim). Handing over PADDs only gets part of the story right, and part of the story wrong. I look forward to the 24th century to see how these things really do get used. (And thanks for the reference to the Gladwell article - I'll read that later - it may get into my "Great Articles" library.)
DanielBMarkham 16y ago
Damn Chris -- I blogged this just yesterday. I understand that good authors borrow and great authors steal, but geesh. At least give it a few days. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1587909 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1587909
- gduffy 16y ago
  Do you think you're the only one to notice the similarity, or are you saying he took something from your article?
jws 16y ago
I have on several occasions attempted to make a user interface that looked and felt like the okudagrams[1] in ST:TNG or DS9. My conclusion is that they are a stunningly bad use of space and a terrible way to direct user attention. If only they didn't look so cool I would stop trying. I think now that I sometimes need to display an iPhone's worth of information on an iPad the day of the okudagram has come. [1]okudagram – Okudagram is a nickname for the interactive (and usually reorganizable) displays found on control panels in 23rd and 24th century starships, and beyond. The nickname is a reference to Michael Okuda, a tech advisor for the show, who created definitive signage styles for a new design of control panel, without any physical controls, that was used in the later Star Trek Movies and TNG era productions.
jsulak 16y ago
We'd be remiss in not mentioning this: http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/lcars-internet-media-reader/id366238562?mt=8 http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/lcars-internet-media-reader/i...
mjgoins 16y ago
Hopefully this invalidates some patents.

68 points by bluesmoon 16y ago

rbanffy 16y ago

Great. Now all we need is warp drive and we can call it a day.

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
api 16y ago
This actually opens a profound issue: why has progress in areas like computers and biotech been so breakneck fast but has utterly stalled in areas like energy, propulsion, aviation, etc.? I think I know the answer: those fields are capital intensive, so their "generation time" is very slow. But that might not be the only answer.
- brettnak 16y ago
  It seems to me that progress in computers is much more incremental. Meaning, step N+1 is pretty well visible from step N. When dealing with energy and propulsion, this does not seem to be the case. I realize this is pretty hand-wavy, but it's how I get myself to sleep.
- jerf 16y ago
  Computers and biotech are the exceptions. Progress continues in those other fields at a normal pace.
- grinich 16y ago
  It hasn't stalled, it's just classified.
- sliverstorm 16y ago
  For every person who chooses to dive into computing and biotech, that's one more person who cannot work on energy, propulsion and aviation. I know I for one would probably do one of those if I wasn't in computing.
  - api 16y ago
    Maybe it's that the job market in computers especially is so much more dynamic with better opportunity for advancement, so it attracts a greater share of the best and the brightest. It might also be accessibility. Anyone can play with a computer. A jet engine, not so much.

RiderOfGiraffes 16y ago

So you can fly the Enterprise from a PADD, and you can change the interface, or what it's connected to, and interface with the rest of the ship, and yet ... ... when handing over several reports, they handed over several PADDs

mechanical_fish 16y ago
You could write a little essay on the subject of props and what they are for. It would be a meditation on questions like why is it so much more dramatically effective to have two characters fight for possession of a gun than it is to have them shoot magic lightning at each other from their fingertips? Or you could write an essay on all the things that neophiles forget when they declare war on paper. The good news is that Malcolm Gladwell wrote that already: http://www.gladwell.com/2002/2002_03_25_a_paper.htm http://www.gladwell.com/2002/2002_03_25_a_paper.htm ...in the form of a review of an MIT press book on the subject. Or we could just make a list of why one would use several PADDs if PADDs were free. You can juxtapose two reports on a desk and rapidly glance from one to another. (Paging Edward Tufte, who goes on and on about this.) You can walk into a room with five people and hand one report to the first four and the remaining three reports to the last one. When you do hand over a stack of reports, they can be in priority order. And you can add commentary to the reports via the way you hand over each one: A careful two-handed presentation (note the proper technique for exchanging Japanese business cards), a jumbled stack, a light toss, a disgusted look as you gingerly pinch the report between thumb and forefinger, or even a mock attempt to shield the bad-news report behind your body as you hand over the good news first. See? Props are not just for actors; everyone is an actor and we all use props.
- RiderOfGiraffes 16y ago
  Or instead of handing over PADDs at all you can simply tell the intended recipient that the report is ready and they can tap the screen and read it on their own customised display. They can call up multiple reports side by side, etc, etc. Yes, I understand and appreciate your points, and I, personally, use more paper and physical means of thinking and reasoning than many of my colleagues. That doesn't mean that the original ST people got it entirely right (as some people seem to claim). Handing over PADDs only gets part of the story right, and part of the story wrong. I look forward to the 24th century to see how these things really do get used. (And thanks for the reference to the Gladwell article - I'll read that later - it may get into my "Great Articles" library.)

DanielBMarkham 16y ago

Damn Chris -- I blogged this just yesterday. I understand that good authors borrow and great authors steal, but geesh. At least give it a few days. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1587909 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1587909

gduffy 16y ago
Do you think you're the only one to notice the similarity, or are you saying he took something from your article?

jws 16y ago

I have on several occasions attempted to make a user interface that looked and felt like the okudagrams[1] in ST:TNG or DS9. My conclusion is that they are a stunningly bad use of space and a terrible way to direct user attention. If only they didn't look so cool I would stop trying. I think now that I sometimes need to display an iPhone's worth of information on an iPad the day of the okudagram has come. [1]okudagram – Okudagram is a nickname for the interactive (and usually reorganizable) displays found on control panels in 23rd and 24th century starships, and beyond. The nickname is a reference to Michael Okuda, a tech advisor for the show, who created definitive signage styles for a new design of control panel, without any physical controls, that was used in the later Star Trek Movies and TNG era productions.

jsulak 16y ago

We'd be remiss in not mentioning this: http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/lcars-internet-media-reader/id366238562?mt=8 http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/lcars-internet-media-reader/i...

mjgoins 16y ago

Hopefully this invalidates some patents.