3 ms·

I’m conflicted about this spatial interface thing (alternatively known as the “object-oriented user interface”). On one hand, for file managers it sounds like i

I’m conflicted about this spatial interface thing (alternatively known as the “object-oriented user interface”). On one hand, for file managers it sounds like it should make sense, even if the overwhelming majority of file managers I’ve used (from Norton Commander to Windows 98+ Explorer to Far Manager to mc to Nautilus) don’t follow it. Even in general I’d very much like it to work, if nothing else because it pleasantly constrains the design space for GUIs. On the other, for text editors and similar apps not following it (i.e. being capable of displaying multiple views of a single buffer) is a killer feature; people rave about split editing every time it is first implemented in a given app category (text editors, word processors, spreadsheets, online spreadsheets, you name it). I’d also probably be less than enthused about a web browser that could only open a single view of a given URL. Now that I’m thinking about it, “Open a Copy” is perhaps my favourite feature in Evince and the main think I miss in other PDF viewers. The problem is, to some extent you want the view to be a separate “thing”, for example so that it can serve as a conceptual host for navigation history. Maybe the responsibility of maintaining said history could be hoisted onto the window manager, but I can’t say I’ve heard anyone mention this option, even if only to say it’s dumb and won’t work for such-and-such simple reason. I’d very much this to work, it’s just that all the gravestones (CUA, Cairo, etc.) make me wary and half the questions (that now seem obvious) don’t appear to even have been asked (many years ago, when people actually tried making this).

fzzzy 5y ago
Nah. I definitely don't rave about split views. Don't like them at all.
simondotau 5y ago
It’s really quite simple. Spatial memory is a viable system when you have tens of folders and hundreds of files. Once you have thousands of folders and millions of files, the metaphor rapidly becomes a hinderance. By analogy, think of the contents of your pantry versus the contents of your local supermarket. You can comprehend the former spatially, whereas the latter is mostly navigated hierarchically. Sure, you can usually remember where the bread aisle is — and then someone updates the operating system and bread gets moved to the other side of the store.
- chongli 5y ago
  You bring up the example of a supermarket and another comment brought up a public library as examples of buildings with much larger collections that can’t be relied on for spatial navigation. I think both of these examples show exactly the opposite. Ask any librarian or supermarket shelf stocker how they locate things in the building: the answer is spatial! They have an intuitive picture in their mind of where everything is located, not only in terms of which shelf the object is on but how those shelves actually look based on the relative positions of everything on them. then someone updates the operating system and bread gets moved to the other side of the store This never happened in the classic Mac Finder and it certainly doesn’t happen in a supermarket or library. The fact that modern computers do this is another strike against them and in favour of the old spatial Finder. It’s the principle of least surprise. The more your computer works to keep everything exactly the way you left it the more comfortable you’ll feel as a user, confident that nothing will move around when you’re not looking. The fact that today’s operating systems are so much more jam packed with extra features — and that this may complicate the task of preserving user’s spatial memory — is not a point in their favour.
  - simondotau 5y ago
    The library example is spatial in the sense that results being returned in alphabetical order is spatial. You will intuitively expect "Yellow" to be towards the bottom. But that's not really spatial memory, even though it has superficial similarities. Between 1985 and 1995 I was almost exclusively using the Macintosh platform. The spatial memory of Finder is a native concept for me. > The fact that today’s operating systems are so much more jam packed with extra features — and that this may complicate the task of preserving user’s spatial memory — is not a point in their favour. Nonsense, it's entirely a point in their favour. As much as we might have nostalgia for simpler computers of our youth, our expectation of what functions are included within a consumer-facing operating system have dramatically and permanently expanded. From Bluetooth to Unicode, modern operating systems are devilishly complicated—and we rarely stop to see just how far we've come.
    - chongli 5y ago

fzzzy 5y ago

Nah. I definitely don't rave about split views. Don't like them at all.

simondotau 5y ago

It’s really quite simple. Spatial memory is a viable system when you have tens of folders and hundreds of files. Once you have thousands of folders and millions of files, the metaphor rapidly becomes a hinderance. By analogy, think of the contents of your pantry versus the contents of your local supermarket. You can comprehend the former spatially, whereas the latter is mostly navigated hierarchically. Sure, you can usually remember where the bread aisle is — and then someone updates the operating system and bread gets moved to the other side of the store.

chongli 5y ago
You bring up the example of a supermarket and another comment brought up a public library as examples of buildings with much larger collections that can’t be relied on for spatial navigation. I think both of these examples show exactly the opposite. Ask any librarian or supermarket shelf stocker how they locate things in the building: the answer is spatial! They have an intuitive picture in their mind of where everything is located, not only in terms of which shelf the object is on but how those shelves actually look based on the relative positions of everything on them. then someone updates the operating system and bread gets moved to the other side of the store This never happened in the classic Mac Finder and it certainly doesn’t happen in a supermarket or library. The fact that modern computers do this is another strike against them and in favour of the old spatial Finder. It’s the principle of least surprise. The more your computer works to keep everything exactly the way you left it the more comfortable you’ll feel as a user, confident that nothing will move around when you’re not looking. The fact that today’s operating systems are so much more jam packed with extra features — and that this may complicate the task of preserving user’s spatial memory — is not a point in their favour.
- simondotau 5y ago
  The library example is spatial in the sense that results being returned in alphabetical order is spatial. You will intuitively expect "Yellow" to be towards the bottom. But that's not really spatial memory, even though it has superficial similarities. Between 1985 and 1995 I was almost exclusively using the Macintosh platform. The spatial memory of Finder is a native concept for me. > The fact that today’s operating systems are so much more jam packed with extra features — and that this may complicate the task of preserving user’s spatial memory — is not a point in their favour. Nonsense, it's entirely a point in their favour. As much as we might have nostalgia for simpler computers of our youth, our expectation of what functions are included within a consumer-facing operating system have dramatically and permanently expanded. From Bluetooth to Unicode, modern operating systems are devilishly complicated—and we rarely stop to see just how far we've come.
  - chongli 5y ago