4 ms·

Don't forget the author (Erik Sandberg-Diment) of that piece's FIRST comically wrong prediction about the imminent failure of Microsoft Windows (and general non

by mblevin 12y ago

Don't forget the author (Erik Sandberg-Diment) of that piece's FIRST comically wrong prediction about the imminent failure of Microsoft Windows (and general non-command line interfaces): http://www.nytimes.com/1984/12/25/science/value-of-windowing-is-questioned.html http://www.nytimes.com/1984/12/25/science/value-of-windowing... Before there was Paul Krugman writing "the internet is a fad" in the NYT, there was Erik Sandberg-Diment.

p1mrx 12y ago
Well he's not completely wrong. Displaying multiple windows is still possible today, but most people would prefer to interact with their computer using a tab-like model.
- woah 12y ago
  With multiple desktops I almost never use windows. The only time I do is when I am forced to use drag and drop for something.
ghshephard 12y ago
Actually, the author makes some really good points in the conclusion, "The windows could be individually expanded, of course, or the text in them scrolled, in order to see more. But that took considerably more time and effort than simply thumbing through a sheaf of papers. Windows were a great idea until you compared them with the old-fashioned, uncomputerized desk, at which point it became obvious that they were simply too complicated to be dealt with efficiently. They made life more difficult, not easier, and they will continue to do so until a video display the size of a desktop can make visible a number of complete documents, each in its own window. That is something unlikely to occur, if for no other reason than cost, for at least a decade." It's true, that windows really started to take off around 1993/1994, with windows for workgroups - coincident with higher resolution monitors. It's also true (to this day), that there are challenges with dealing with documents on a tablet/display screen, that don't exist when you have a sheaf of papers in front of you. I personally haven't printed anything in 2+ years, but I know there are a lot of people who just can't handle not having everything at their fingertip. All in all, no as bad a series of predictions as one might think.

by mblevin 12y ago

p1mrx 12y ago

Well he's not completely wrong. Displaying multiple windows is still possible today, but most people would prefer to interact with their computer using a tab-like model.

woah 12y ago
With multiple desktops I almost never use windows. The only time I do is when I am forced to use drag and drop for something.

ghshephard 12y ago

Actually, the author makes some really good points in the conclusion, "The windows could be individually expanded, of course, or the text in them scrolled, in order to see more. But that took considerably more time and effort than simply thumbing through a sheaf of papers. Windows were a great idea until you compared them with the old-fashioned, uncomputerized desk, at which point it became obvious that they were simply too complicated to be dealt with efficiently. They made life more difficult, not easier, and they will continue to do so until a video display the size of a desktop can make visible a number of complete documents, each in its own window. That is something unlikely to occur, if for no other reason than cost, for at least a decade." It's true, that windows really started to take off around 1993/1994, with windows for workgroups - coincident with higher resolution monitors. It's also true (to this day), that there are challenges with dealing with documents on a tablet/display screen, that don't exist when you have a sheaf of papers in front of you. I personally haven't printed anything in 2+ years, but I know there are a lot of people who just can't handle not having everything at their fingertip. All in all, no as bad a series of predictions as one might think.