3 ms·

I was surprised when the audience cheered when the eraser tool was demonstrated. I wonder what felt novel about selectively removing content in 1984.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
pavlov 5y ago
It’s the strength of the metaphor. People were used to computers where a green cursor blinks on the screen, and in a separate printed manual you find the necessary incantations for how to make it do something: “To enter replace mode, press the Q key and type the line number to be modified.” On the Mac, these actions and objects and modes were on-screen physical metaphors that you could simply “reach out and grab” (with the indirection layer of the mouse, of course). Draw with a pencil, and if you don’t like the result, take it out with the eraser. No manual to read, no keys to remember. Even files used this strong visual metaphor: each floppy disk was represented as basically a 2D space containing the files exactly where you left them. Drag your files into a circle formation if you want, and they’ll be in the same arrangement when you put in the floppy next week. To delete something, you’d drag it into the trash can (a feature on which Apple held such strong IP that it didn’t appear in Windows until 1995).
- judge2020 5y ago
  Great explanation, but I think the commenter was alluding to the book Nineteen Eighty-Four by George Orwell and the overarching theme of an entity selectively censoring speech.
  - pavlov 5y ago
    Ah. Well, computers seen as tools of centralized oppression was a pretty old theme by then. If anything, personal computers were understood as tools of liberation because for the first time you could have it all just to yourself: your data and software tools on your own hardware. (The famous “1984” Apple ad by Ridley Scott builds on these fears and hopes.)
  - DonHopkins 5y ago
    Not just the book 1984, but also the year the Mac was released, and the ad: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtvjbmoDx-I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtvjbmoDx-I
masswerk 5y ago
Mind that direct manipulation of bitmap images and the mouse were new to consumers. (That is, there had been the Xerox Star and the PERQ, but these were no systems for the mere mortal.) Lisa did have a mouse, but no square pixels and came with a drawing program, which was essentially about placing layered shapes. So, what was revealed by the use of the eraser was that this was actually manipulating a composition on a digital canvas, on a per pixel basis, under manual control. (Just like the fat pixels / pencil demo and the option+feature drag demo at the very end, which enjoyed a similar reaction.) I guess, that this became more obvious by eating the image away, rather than by adding strokes or shapes, is because the latter could have been accomplished by other means, as well, like in a drawing program. The eraser, however, gave it away, unambiguously.
- martyvis 5y ago
  I was a participant at a mathematics summer school at the local atomic research centre in Sydney in 1980. The focus was on mathematical modelling and using computers to realise those models. (The theme was looking at predicting fuel demand especially oil). It was great fun learning to program FORTRAN on a mainframe, BASIC on a minicomputer and see other computers including an analog computer in actual use. One really striking display was them showing a light-pen input with a vector graphic display. I distinctly recall how out-of-the-future it seemed when the demonstrator used the rubber banding effect of drawing shapes by stretching their dimensions, and then selecting tools from a palette on the edge with the pen and manipulating the diagram he was building. It certainly seemed mind-blowing to this 17 year old at the time.
lostgame 5y ago
…really? You realize that virtually every system ran off a command line interface - and the idea of virtually drawing so simply was very novel to start - to erase so simply actually implied a change of art entirely over to the digital era. I can’t understand what wasn’t significant about it.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

pavlov 5y ago

It’s the strength of the metaphor. People were used to computers where a green cursor blinks on the screen, and in a separate printed manual you find the necessary incantations for how to make it do something: “To enter replace mode, press the Q key and type the line number to be modified.” On the Mac, these actions and objects and modes were on-screen physical metaphors that you could simply “reach out and grab” (with the indirection layer of the mouse, of course). Draw with a pencil, and if you don’t like the result, take it out with the eraser. No manual to read, no keys to remember. Even files used this strong visual metaphor: each floppy disk was represented as basically a 2D space containing the files exactly where you left them. Drag your files into a circle formation if you want, and they’ll be in the same arrangement when you put in the floppy next week. To delete something, you’d drag it into the trash can (a feature on which Apple held such strong IP that it didn’t appear in Windows until 1995).

judge2020 5y ago
Great explanation, but I think the commenter was alluding to the book Nineteen Eighty-Four by George Orwell and the overarching theme of an entity selectively censoring speech.
- pavlov 5y ago
  Ah. Well, computers seen as tools of centralized oppression was a pretty old theme by then. If anything, personal computers were understood as tools of liberation because for the first time you could have it all just to yourself: your data and software tools on your own hardware. (The famous “1984” Apple ad by Ridley Scott builds on these fears and hopes.)
- DonHopkins 5y ago
  Not just the book 1984, but also the year the Mac was released, and the ad: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtvjbmoDx-I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtvjbmoDx-I

masswerk 5y ago

Mind that direct manipulation of bitmap images and the mouse were new to consumers. (That is, there had been the Xerox Star and the PERQ, but these were no systems for the mere mortal.) Lisa did have a mouse, but no square pixels and came with a drawing program, which was essentially about placing layered shapes. So, what was revealed by the use of the eraser was that this was actually manipulating a composition on a digital canvas, on a per pixel basis, under manual control. (Just like the fat pixels / pencil demo and the option+feature drag demo at the very end, which enjoyed a similar reaction.) I guess, that this became more obvious by eating the image away, rather than by adding strokes or shapes, is because the latter could have been accomplished by other means, as well, like in a drawing program. The eraser, however, gave it away, unambiguously.

martyvis 5y ago
I was a participant at a mathematics summer school at the local atomic research centre in Sydney in 1980. The focus was on mathematical modelling and using computers to realise those models. (The theme was looking at predicting fuel demand especially oil). It was great fun learning to program FORTRAN on a mainframe, BASIC on a minicomputer and see other computers including an analog computer in actual use. One really striking display was them showing a light-pen input with a vector graphic display. I distinctly recall how out-of-the-future it seemed when the demonstrator used the rubber banding effect of drawing shapes by stretching their dimensions, and then selecting tools from a palette on the edge with the pen and manipulating the diagram he was building. It certainly seemed mind-blowing to this 17 year old at the time.

lostgame 5y ago

…really? You realize that virtually every system ran off a command line interface - and the idea of virtually drawing so simply was very novel to start - to erase so simply actually implied a change of art entirely over to the digital era. I can’t understand what wasn’t significant about it.