On 6/24/06, Joel M. Sciamma <joel@inventors-emporium.co.uk> wrote:
> I have played around with various 3D Finder replacements on the Mac
> over the years but I am still not convinced they make it easier to
> deal with large numbers of objects - the sorts of tasks computers are
> generally most useful for.
the problem of trying to convert a 3D real world workspace to a
non-physical computer-screen representation ought to be obvious to
anyone. Which is why they worked so hard to help with the
illusion--and it's a pretty good one, in fact, the best I've seen, but
I don't see how it would work, and for me there is one, simple reason.
I got the computer to try to free me from the jumbled mess that is my
desk! Why would I want to bring that jumble and mess to my computer
desktop???!!! :-) Besides that, the most important plus of real paper,
etc. is the tactile feedback, and the genuine 3D cues. You can only
hope to approximate it at best, but again, you are back to duplicating
the non-structured mess that existed in the first place! IMO, the key
is not how it looks, but how it runs under the hood. For example, the
Spotlight searching on the Mac OS, and QuickSilver. I can keep a
fairly simple file structure--across multiple disks, and allow these
two utilities to do the finding for me. Yes, interface for such a tool
is important, but the nuts and bolts that do the finding are
essential, in that they need to find the right items, and then present
it in a way that makes it simple to drill to the very file you need,
out of the potentially thousands of results.
-- -Jon Glass Krakow, Poland <jonglass@usa.net> There is no such thing as public opinion. There is only published opinion. --Winston Churchill -- This is the NewtonTalk list - http://www.newtontalk.net/ for all inquiries Official Newton FAQ: http://www.chuma.org/newton/faq/ WikiWikiNewt for all kinds of articles: http://tools.unna.org/wikiwikinewt/Received on Sat Jun 24 02:44:27 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Jun 24 2006 - 18:30:00 EDT