3 Matching Annotations
  1. Oct 2023
    1. Imagine having your own self-contained knowledge manipulator in a portable package the size andshape of an ordinary notebook. How would you use it if it had enough power to outrace yoursenses of sight and hearing, enough capacity to store for later retrieval thousands of page-equivalentsof reference materials, poems, letters, recipes, drawings, animations, musical scores, waveforms,dynamic simulations, and anything else you would like to create, remember, and change?

      Fascinating how Even though we did realized some of this with the mobile phone we still have a system that's so fragmented that it's fundamentally getting in the way of progress

  2. May 2017
    1. Neither Apple nor Microsoft really captured the essence of what made the Smalltalk system powerful. They used it as a model to make computers more accessible, but they left out the aspect of letting people bend the system to their will, to customize it to be just what they want. Their systems were really an object-oriented facade over a traditional, non-object-oriented system. They lacked a consistent metaphore of everything being an object. The web has been even more stultifying in this regard (I mean the web interface), though Firefox has helped some, so I hear, with the concept of browser extensions.
  3. Mar 2017
    1. Some key themes arise from the two NNG reports on iPad usability: App designers should ensure perceived affordances / discoverability There is a lack of consistency between apps, lots of ‘wacky’ interaction methods. Designers should draw upon existing conventions (either OS or web) or users won’t know what to do. These are practical interaction design observations, but from a particular perspective, that of perceptual psychology. These conclusions are arrived at through a linear, rather than lateral process. By giving weight to building upon existing convention, because they are familiar to the user, there is a danger that genuinely new ideas (and the kind of ambition called for by Victor Bret) within tablet design will be suppressed. Kay’s vision of the Dynabook came from lateral thinking, and thinking about how children learn. Shouldn’t the items that we design for this device be generated in the same way?

      The idea of lateral thinking here is the key one. Can informatics be designed by nurturing lateral thinking? That seems related with the Jonas flopology