4 ms·

> redesigning a thing that works well I really dislike this recent trend we can see in Gnome, Unity, and Google even, but one would be blind to not see the rea

by gbog 13y ago

> redesigning a thing that works well I really dislike this recent trend we can see in Gnome, Unity, and Google even, but one would be blind to not see the reason behind: They all try to solve the touch issue. Desktops were designed for the mouse, and this do not translate well on touch screens. One could argue there is a gap that cannot be bridged, but we should not complain that some people are trying to bridge the gap and create an interface that is working well on both screen+keyboard+mouse and touchscreens.

tommorris 13y ago
I have a laptop. I can't remember ever thinking "I want to rub my grubby fingers all over the screen". If I wanted to do that, I'd grab a tablet or smartphone. Touch is a compromise. Touch screen devices are useful because they go where proper computers don't. I can look at my smartphone at the bus stop where I wouldn't pull my laptop out. I don't see the point in wasting huge amounts of time and creativity designing these silly hybrid OSes. It's like adding a horse trap to the front of your horseless carriage.
davidgerard 13y ago
For all its vaunted touch-friendliness (or touchiness), the evidence is that it was a couple of years before they even in fact tested GNOME 3 on an actual touch screen: http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3017371&cid=40835229 http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3017371&cid=4083522... Is being able to unlock the screen a "core functionality"?
thaumasiotes 13y ago
> One could argue there is a gap that cannot be bridged I'm going to make the argument. A mouse and your finger are both pointing devices; they compete directly with each other. A mouse is an excellent pointing device, and your finger is a terrible, nearly-dysfunctional pointing device. Redesigning your UI, built for a mouse, to be finger-compatible instead is essentially saying "the mouse worked too well. We're going to give you a huge functionality downgrade BECAUSE WE CAN." Yes, we should complain that people are trying to bridge the gap. Devices you're meant to carry around and use at a moment's notice use fingers because nobody ever forgets to bring those with them. But just because drinking lemon juice kept sailors from dying of scurvy, doesn't mean it's a good idea to tell everyone to drink it. Lemon juice is better than dying -- and if they're not dying, it's a very rare person who's willing to drink it at all. Where's the movement to make word processors more Twitter-compatible? Where's the movement to have sleeping bag alcoves, instead of beds, in your home?

by gbog 13y ago

tommorris 13y ago

I have a laptop. I can't remember ever thinking "I want to rub my grubby fingers all over the screen". If I wanted to do that, I'd grab a tablet or smartphone. Touch is a compromise. Touch screen devices are useful because they go where proper computers don't. I can look at my smartphone at the bus stop where I wouldn't pull my laptop out. I don't see the point in wasting huge amounts of time and creativity designing these silly hybrid OSes. It's like adding a horse trap to the front of your horseless carriage.

davidgerard 13y ago

For all its vaunted touch-friendliness (or touchiness), the evidence is that it was a couple of years before they even in fact tested GNOME 3 on an actual touch screen: http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3017371&cid=40835229 http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3017371&cid=4083522... Is being able to unlock the screen a "core functionality"?

thaumasiotes 13y ago

> One could argue there is a gap that cannot be bridged I'm going to make the argument. A mouse and your finger are both pointing devices; they compete directly with each other. A mouse is an excellent pointing device, and your finger is a terrible, nearly-dysfunctional pointing device. Redesigning your UI, built for a mouse, to be finger-compatible instead is essentially saying "the mouse worked too well. We're going to give you a huge functionality downgrade BECAUSE WE CAN." Yes, we should complain that people are trying to bridge the gap. Devices you're meant to carry around and use at a moment's notice use fingers because nobody ever forgets to bring those with them. But just because drinking lemon juice kept sailors from dying of scurvy, doesn't mean it's a good idea to tell everyone to drink it. Lemon juice is better than dying -- and if they're not dying, it's a very rare person who's willing to drink it at all. Where's the movement to make word processors more Twitter-compatible? Where's the movement to have sleeping bag alcoves, instead of beds, in your home?