Adaptive Path's Aurora ... Discuss

5 Aug 2008 - 7:12am
6 years ago
34 replies
927 reads
Dave Malouf
2005

I have to say there are so many elements I like about this concept and
it is only part 1 of the video.
Kudos to Jesse James Garrett and the rest of the AP design team on Aurora.

Check out the demo video of their browser concept video.

http://adaptivepath.com/aurora/

--
David Malouf
http://synapticburn.com/
http://ixda.org/
http://motorola.com/

Comments

5 Aug 2008 - 7:22am
SemanticWill
2007

I am most interested in/excited about the semantic analysis for clustering
around shared concepts.

On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 8:12 AM, David Malouf <dave.ixd at gmail.com> wrote:

> I have to say there are so many elements I like about this concept and
> it is only part 1 of the video.
> Kudos to Jesse James Garrett and the rest of the AP design team on Aurora.
>
> Check out the demo video of their browser concept video.
>
> http://adaptivepath.com/aurora/
>
> --
> David Malouf
> http://synapticburn.com/
> http://ixda.org/
> http://motorola.com/
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>

--
~ will

"Where you innovate, how you innovate,
and what you innovate are design problems"

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Will Evans | User Experience Architect
tel +1.617.281.1281 | will at semanticfoundry.com
twitter: https://twitter.com/semanticwill
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

5 Aug 2008 - 4:01pm
ambroselittle
2008

I think Aurora looks pretty darn cool. Whoever that guy was on the other
end, it reminded me of somebody on *Prarie Home Companion*. Very folksy and
friendly. Nice touch. :)

I was surprised by a few things that I'd love to hear the thinking behind.
I do get that this is about dreaming of the future, so these are not
criticisms, just curious questions to see what of this we might think about
working towards any time in the near future, i.e., incorporating interaction
ideas into current stuff we're working on.

* The radial menu thing - at least in lo-res, it was entirely unclear what
was going on and my sense was that the options were very small. Has testing
been done on this sort of thing to show it works well? I've seen these more
in tablet interfaces, but they're usually bigger options that allow for
(what seems to be) more fudging in accuracy of user targeting.
* The 3D collages. I like the idea of stuff moving away as time goes on;
that seems to make sense intuitively. I found the overall clustering to be
a bit overwhelming/confusing. May be just that it doesn't come off as well
in video, but it seems like understanding and navigating those could require
a high degree of adaptation. Have these been tested to see how well folks
could cope with them (and deal with 3D space through a 2D interface device)?

* Calling things "objects" - This may be my oversimplifying the average
user's grasp of jargon, but it seems to me that referring to all these
things as "objects" is a bit specialized. I mean, do people generally point
to something and say "hand me that object"? Seems like the language should
be more natural to go along with the more natural interface approach that
this seems to be targeting. Is it necessary to call all these things
objects? Can we just call them "things" like we probably normally would?

* Was that some new user input device I saw on her left there? Looked like
a 3D mouse that I can only guess would facilitate the pulling, pushing,
lifting, dropping interactions that were alluded to. Or maybe it was just
that thing from *Flight of the Navigator*? :)

Anyways, cool stuff. Again, not criticizing.. just curious.

--Ambrose

5 Aug 2008 - 4:26pm
Andy Edmonds
2004

The bigger point here is that this is part of a CFP from Mozilla Labs
for contributions from designers for whom the normal open source
contribution channels are a bit challenging:
http://labs.mozilla.com/2008/08/introducing-the-concept-series-call-for-participation/

This is an interesting change, especially in light of Matthew Thomas'
recently published hard-earned insights into UX and open source. My
commentary at http://surfmind.com/muzings/?p=161

On another meta point, the Adaptive Path video is an exceptionally high
fidelity UI prototype & scenario depiction, apparently with a tangible
Flash based release coming soon. It seems to me that this really rich
form of product pitch is very cool and potentially a great driver of
product leadership decision making but actually is not enough to really
form a contribution to open source without more formalization of the
underlying task models and adaption to scenarios other than the ones
pictured.

-A

David Malouf wrote:
> I have to say there are so many elements I like about this concept and
> it is only part 1 of the video.
> Kudos to Jesse James Garrett and the rest of the AP design team on Aurora.
>
> Check out the demo video of their browser concept video.
>
> http://adaptivepath.com/aurora/
>
>

5 Aug 2008 - 4:41pm
gretchen anderson
2005

>Was that some new user input device I saw on her left there? Looked
like a 3D mouse that I can only >guess would facilitate the pulling,
pushing, lifting, dropping interactions that were alluded to. Or >maybe
it was just that thing from *Flight of the Navigator*? :)

Looks like the Novint Falcon, designed and engineered by LUNAR!

5 Aug 2008 - 5:57pm
Loren Baxter
2007

Also see Andy Rutledge's commentary on their vision for the New York
Times of 2018:

http://www.andyrutledge.com/times-new-omen.php#fragment-5

I thought the concept of simple audio navigation was interesting.
Saying "politics" will take you to articles related to politics,
and so forth. This is reminiscent of older, Hollywood inspired
visions of developing technology ("Computer, activate!"), but
remains a concept that I think may be revisited in the future.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=31824

6 Aug 2008 - 10:39am
Stew Dean
2007

Some quick thoughts..

There's some strong ideas in here. The concept of presentation views is good
and the collaboration works well. Where it is weak is in the actual
interface. There is simply too much competing on the screen to make this a
strong interface from user experience point of view. Demos often do take the
'show it on screen' approach as they can showcase more features as opposed
to an interface that uses time more.

In general it takes many ideas that exist (the 3D space to explore files has
been done many times) and puts them together in a very condensed way. Users
may get very confused using the interface shown, not to mention 'Gorilla
arm' from using that 3D mouse.

So some good background thinking but the execution is fairly weak in terms
of strong clear user interface. Respect to them for putting this together
but some better interface design could have presented the ideas better.

Cheers

Stewart Dean

2008/8/5 David Malouf <dave.ixd at gmail.com>

> I have to say there are so many elements I like about this concept and
> it is only part 1 of the video.
> Kudos to Jesse James Garrett and the rest of the AP design team on Aurora.
>
> Check out the demo video of their browser concept video.
>
> http://adaptivepath.com/aurora/
>
> --
> David Malouf
> http://synapticburn.com/
> http://ixda.org/
> http://motorola.com/
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>

--
Stewart Dean

6 Aug 2008 - 11:03am
Dave Malouf
2005

I wonder what it would be like to demo this on an HP TouchSmart or
similar type multi-touch/direct action desktop device, as opposed to
a moused-system like this one.

I'm not sure I agree with all of Stews complaints because it is very
unclear from the video the full interaction design model.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=31824

6 Aug 2008 - 11:18am
Shaun Bergmann
2007

That would be interesting, because I'm assuming the robo-arm ball they are
currently using works much like the Novint Falcon: navigation through the 3D
space is achieved by pushing away and pulling toward the user.

The two-finger pinch and spread pattern that Microsoft Surface uses to "zoom
in and zoom out" wouldn't be quite the same experience as the ability to
"drive through" the interface with this more lifelike control ball.

(however yes, the repetitive strain injuries yet to be discovered are going
to be fun to watch for)

On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 9:03 AM, dave malouf <dave.ixd at gmail.com> wrote:

> I wonder what it would be like to demo this on an HP TouchSmart or
> similar type multi-touch/direct action desktop device, as opposed to
> a moused-system like this one.
>
> I'm not sure I agree with all of Stews complaints because it is very
> unclear from the video the full interaction design model.
>
>
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> Posted from the new ixda.org
> http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=31824
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>

6 Aug 2008 - 12:23pm
Greg Petroff
2004

I like the production value of the piece. Most of the concepts exist
already, from shotgun menus to navigating a dimensional space. But
putting them together with visual quality enables people to invision
a potential future.

It reminds me of the Sun Starfire video from wayback. Where I found
it lacking however was in the banal scenario. Seemed designed more to
show the ui then describing something someone would actually do. The
cases where things are going to interesting in the future have to do
with the juxtaposition / mix of transactions and adhoc unscripted
problems from my pov.

The area that is ripe for looking at the future directions of ux is
the film production tools market where they have been using these
constructs for years.

-gp

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=31824

6 Aug 2008 - 1:29pm
Evan K. Stone
2008

> (however yes, the repetitive strain injuries yet to be discovered are
going
> to be fun to watch for)

...that was the first thing I thought of when I saw her using the arm
device. yikes.

///eks

6 Aug 2008 - 2:15pm
jet
2008

Shaun Bergmann wrote:

> (however yes, the repetitive strain injuries yet to be discovered are going
> to be fun to watch for)

Why are those 3d/space balls always sitting way forward on someone's
desk? Why not beside the chair, or held in the lap like a game
controller? In the dark ages I tried making a strap for a spaceball so
I could hold it on my thigh, but it was just too damned heavy.

Also, see "Gorilla Arm" in the Hacker's Dictionary:

<http://www.ccil.org/jargon/jargon_22.html>

gorilla arm /n./

The side-effect that destroyed touch-screens as a mainstream input
technology despite a promising start in the early 1980s. It seems the
designers of all those spiffy touch-menu systems failed to notice that
humans aren't designed to hold their arms in front of their faces making
small motions. After more than a very few selections, the arm begins to
feel sore, cramped, and oversized -- the operator looks like a gorilla
while using the touch screen and feels like one afterwards. This is now
considered a classic cautionary tale to human-factors designers;
"Remember the gorilla arm!" is shorthand for "How is this going to fly
in real use?".

--
jet / KG6ZVQ
http://www.flatline.net
pgp: 0xD0D8C2E8 AC9B 0A23 C61A 1B4A 27C5 F799 A681 3C11 D0D8 C2E8

6 Aug 2008 - 3:06pm
Shaun Bergmann
2007

I surely don't want to detract from the bigger picture of the concepts
behind the app. Aside from the controller there are some really great ideas
presented here.

Part 2 has been released of the presentation, which focuses completely on a
small mobile device and its experience.
I particularly like the incorporation of GPS into the decision making
process of social plans. (as long as you can turn that part off of course!)

http://www.vimeo.com/1476338

On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 12:15 PM, j. eric townsend <jet at flatline.net> wrote:

> Shaun Bergmann wrote:
>
> (however yes, the repetitive strain injuries yet to be discovered are
>> going
>> to be fun to watch for)
>>
>
> Why are those 3d/space balls always sitting way forward on someone's desk?
> Why not beside the chair, or held in the lap like a game controller? In
> the dark ages I tried making a strap for a spaceball so I could hold it on
> my thigh, but it was just too damned heavy.
>
>
> Also, see "Gorilla Arm" in the Hacker's Dictionary:
>
> <http://www.ccil.org/jargon/jargon_22.html>
>
> gorilla arm /n./
>
> The side-effect that destroyed touch-screens as a mainstream input
> technology despite a promising start in the early 1980s. It seems the
> designers of all those spiffy touch-menu systems failed to notice that
> humans aren't designed to hold their arms in front of their faces making
> small motions. After more than a very few selections, the arm begins to feel
> sore, cramped, and oversized -- the operator looks like a gorilla while
> using the touch screen and feels like one afterwards. This is now considered
> a classic cautionary tale to human-factors designers; "Remember the gorilla
> arm!" is shorthand for "How is this going to fly in real use?".
>
>
>
> --
> jet / KG6ZVQ
> http://www.flatline.net
> pgp: 0xD0D8C2E8 AC9B 0A23 C61A 1B4A 27C5 F799 A681 3C11 D0D8 C2E8
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>

6 Aug 2008 - 3:40pm
Dan Saffer
2003

Also, here are some more detailed documents about the concepts and
interface design:

<http://www.adaptivepath.com/blog/2008/08/06/aurora-interface-guide-and-design-concepts/
>

Dan

5 Aug 2008 - 9:52am
Anonymous

Very innovative!!! They are using a "novint falcon" in the video
demo.
http://home.novint.com/products/novint_falcon.php

5 Aug 2008 - 4:46pm
Anonymous

On 5 août 08, at 16:52, Drausio

Very innovative!!! They are using a "novint falcon" in the video demo.
Http://home.novint.com/products/novint_falcon.php

5 Aug 2008 - 6:55pm
RyanDevenish
2008

I'm a little disappointed that the mouse-like controller for Aurora
was seemingly industrial and not very fitting for a home-based
setting.... contrast that with the entirely touch-based mobile
device... it starts to make Aurora look like old news, not the
future.
This Aurora video was reliant on a very specialized device for
control as opposed to devices that can adapt and change as the
application deems necessary--ie. touchscreen

Seeing that the human touch is on its way in, I'm interested in
hearing whether any touch interfaces were explored, or even
considered.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=31824

6 Aug 2008 - 11:08am
RyanDevenish
2008

re: aurora
i'm saddened that this application relies on some crazy
unconventional mouse that no person would ever have in their home.
how about touchscreen considering gestures are on the way in... not
huge industrial mouse-like controllers
was any of that even considered for this?

re: touchsmart
well it's pretty un-impressive, so i can't imagine this non-touch
interface would do all that well on a not-very-good touch interface.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=31824

6 Aug 2008 - 4:55pm
Alain D. M. G. ...
2003

I wish that they'd hosted this on their own machines. Vimeo is
considered a "bad" site by my department in the government of Canada,
so all I get is this message when I try to see the videos:

"We have blocked access to this site as it may contain questionable
subject matter. If you have questions, please contact the National
Service Desk"

--- Shaun Bergmann <shaunbergmann at gmail.com> a écrit :

> I surely don't want to detract from the bigger picture of the
> concepts
> behind the app. Aside from the controller there are some really
> great ideas
> presented here.
>
> Part 2 has been released of the presentation, which focuses
> completely on a
> small mobile device and its experience.
> I particularly like the incorporation of GPS into the decision making
> process of social plans. (as long as you can turn that part off of
> course!)
>
>
> http://www.vimeo.com/1476338
>
> On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 12:15 PM, j. eric townsend <jet at flatline.net>
> wrote:
>
> > Shaun Bergmann wrote:
> >
> > (however yes, the repetitive strain injuries yet to be discovered
> are
> >> going
> >> to be fun to watch for)
> >>
> >
> > Why are those 3d/space balls always sitting way forward on
> someone's desk?
> > Why not beside the chair, or held in the lap like a game
> controller? In
> > the dark ages I tried making a strap for a spaceball so I could
> hold it on
> > my thigh, but it was just too damned heavy.
> >
> >
> > Also, see "Gorilla Arm" in the Hacker's Dictionary:
> >
> > <http://www.ccil.org/jargon/jargon_22.html>
> >
> > gorilla arm /n./
> >
> > The side-effect that destroyed touch-screens as a mainstream input
> > technology despite a promising start in the early 1980s. It seems
> the
> > designers of all those spiffy touch-menu systems failed to notice
> that
> > humans aren't designed to hold their arms in front of their faces
> making
> > small motions. After more than a very few selections, the arm
> begins to feel
> > sore, cramped, and oversized -- the operator looks like a gorilla
> while
> > using the touch screen and feels like one afterwards. This is now
> considered
> > a classic cautionary tale to human-factors designers; "Remember the
> gorilla
> > arm!" is shorthand for "How is this going to fly in real use?".
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > jet / KG6ZVQ
> > http://www.flatline.net
> > pgp: 0xD0D8C2E8 AC9B 0A23 C61A 1B4A 27C5 F799 A681 3C11 D0D8
> C2E8
> >
> > ________________________________________________________________
> > Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> > To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> > Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> > List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> > List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
> >
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>

Découvrez les photos les plus intéressantes du jour.
http://www.flickr.com/explore/interesting/7days/

6 Aug 2008 - 5:57pm
Evan K. Stone
2008

> i'm saddened that this application relies on some crazy
> unconventional mouse that no person would ever have in their home.

hmmm... I didn't get the sense that the application necessarily *relied*
on it, but that the application could interpret input from alternate
controllers should you feel inclined to use one (or more). But then
again, I could be mistaken -- and that would be good news for Novint! ;)

[tangent]
One thing I found interesting is that on a USB-based DJ controller I
recently purchased, I can configure it so that it receives MIDI messages
that cause indicator lights to turn on.... this just got me thinking
about other physical (haptic?) controllers that not only feed controller
data *to* a target application, but also can respond to data coming
*from* the application. It's a little thing, I guess, and it's
definitely not anything new or groundbreaking, but it did give me a
little "aha!" since I had to set it up myself (I guess it's something
akin to the Haptic Pen project that was discussed a while back...).
[/tangent]

evan k. stone | ux | dragnet solutions, inc.

6 Aug 2008 - 6:36pm
jet
2008

Evan K. Stone wrote:
> [tangent]
> One thing I found interesting is that on a USB-based DJ controller I
> recently purchased, I can configure it so that it receives MIDI messages
> that cause indicator lights to turn on.... this just got me thinking
> about other physical (haptic?) controllers that not only feed controller
> data *to* a target application, but also can respond to data coming
> *from* the application.

Go buy/borrow a modern game console and check out the various "rumble"
and "shock" controllers. It really does make a significance difference
in gameplay.

It's a pretty straightforward translation -- I'd really like a mouse
that "thumps" as I rollover links on a page or active spots on a map.
I'd be surprised if someone hasn't already made that yet.

--
jet / KG6ZVQ
http://www.flatline.net
pgp: 0xD0D8C2E8 AC9B 0A23 C61A 1B4A 27C5 F799 A681 3C11 D0D8 C2E8

6 Aug 2008 - 7:05pm
Evan K. Stone
2008

> Go buy/borrow a modern game console and check out the various "rumble"
> and "shock" controllers. It really does make a significance
difference
> in gameplay.

yes, of course! I'm not a console gamer, but you're right - like the
steering consoles that rumble/shake when you "drive" over rough terrain.
I think I was just sort of mesmerized by the glowing lights... plus, the
discovery was almost accidental. Things started "magically" lighting up
on the controller after configuring my software to send messages out.

At any rate, it generated some thoughts on giving feedback to
controllers, FWIW...

> It's a pretty straightforward translation -- I'd really like a mouse
> that "thumps" as I rollover links on a page or active spots on a map.
> I'd be surprised if someone hasn't already made that yet.

I'm sure it's on its way! ;)

///eks.

6 Aug 2008 - 7:21pm
Dave Malouf
2005

There was a logitech mouse that did just this. When you rolled over
links, window borders or other "known" targets it would "thump"
as you put it.

It was geared towards people who were visually impaired.

I tried it and after an hour, I turned off the feedback. While game
console feedback is immersive, this type of feedback actually got
annoying real quick!!!!

- dave

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=31824

6 Aug 2008 - 9:10pm
Shaun Bergmann
2007

When we've finally perfected a touchscreen that can incorporate the users
ability to "reach in" and "pull out" I think we're in business. One of the
most compelling things I found about the Aurora experience was the (for lack
of a better term) 'intuitive' incorporation of the 'z axis' which,
apparently, the user can control with an obvious and physically expected
dimensional control.

Is the robo-arm-ball thing a perfect control peripheral for long term (think
8 hour office day) usage? Probably not. But looking past the possibly
cumbersome "mouse" and just focusing on the possibilities of the interaction
on the screen, I think this could really spawn a lot of new innovations, and
hopefully help the financing of the companies developing more robust touch
sensitive interfaces.

We're already allowing access to the z axis through a series of multi-touch
gestures which are *somewhat *easily learned (unless you delve into what
will only be referenced as the "Gesture Patent" here.
http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/02/apple-patent-attack-the-multi-touch-gesture-dictionary/).
The IxD community is already running with the idea and producing some
pretty stellar apps, and maybe I'm all star-struck and woozy as I
bow-down-not-worthy to Aurora, but I'm totally able to accept that this type
of control interface is all we've got right now that allows for a connection
to such an application.

Let's not whip the horse over an uncomfortable saddle.

If there are any engineering firms out there keeping up on these things;
Is it possible to have some sort of touch sensitive interface that has, say,
a 2 or 3 inch field in front of the panel that is able to differentiate
distance from the screen? Infrared? Laser?
Proximity and speed of hand movements in relation to the touch overlay, in
combination with pressure of touch when actually making contact with the
overlay?

I agree that we're not built to be holding our arms in a forward floating
motion for an 8 hour day at the office, the shoulder injuries, cramping and
headaches would probably be a deterrent.

Another thought: Would it be as acceptable to offer the same x-y-z control
from a flat surface where the users forearm is parallel to the floor, the
elbow at 90 degrees, and bringing in the vertical 'z-sensitive' proximity
sensors in addition to our already understood x-y control of a mouse? Like
jigging an ice-fishing hook.

Thoughts?

- Shaun

On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 9:08 AM, ryan devenish <
ryan.devenish at smartdesignworldwide.com> wrote:

> re: aurora
> i'm saddened that this application relies on some crazy
> unconventional mouse that no person would ever have in their home.
> how about touchscreen considering gestures are on the way in... not
> huge industrial mouse-like controllers
> was any of that even considered for this?
>
> re: touchsmart
> well it's pretty un-impressive, so i can't imagine this non-touch
> interface would do all that well on a not-very-good touch interface.
>
>
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> Posted from the new ixda.org
> http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=31824
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>

6 Aug 2008 - 10:36pm
Dave Malouf
2005

I have a question about everyone's "gorilla arm" concern.
Is web browsing (the primary thing we are talking about here) a
sovereign activity like say composition? Or let me be more precise,
unlike say photoshop which is about 90% mouse control, does web
browsing really require the same percentage of "flex" time? Isn't
there quite a bit of rest moments when using a web browser. For
example, I have not touched my mouse once since the moment I focused
on this text area to type, yet I'm in a web browser, no?

I often feel that people who are concerned about the ergonomics of it
all are well decontextualizing the action and making a generalization.

Putting that aside for a moment. Why is it that this group is so
freakin' negative? Am I the only person who sees the possibilities
and wants to dig deeper into those? Sometimes (and maybe this was
Andrei's point about Cuil) when doing concept work like this (not
that Cuil was a concept, but this surely is), it is probably a better
process to dig out the positive elements instead of jumping straight
into negativity. Here's why:
1) Negativity breeds judgement which stifles conversation.
2) We will loose the positive nuggets of this exploration, meaning we
loose the hope of building, incorporating, assimilating even the
smallest aspects of positive contribution.

So what did I like?
1) The attempt to re-think the organization of "what is important to
me?" (avoiding the use of the term favorite, or bookmark)
2) How collaboration as a scenario was done. I often struggle w/
"web co-browsing" as a scenario, but I know it happens all the
time. Mostly between my wife and I when I'm at work and she is at
home. I think the scenario they portrayed was friendly and realistic
and their solutions were intriguing.
3) The manipulation, and objectification of any and all data
units/collections/representations. This was probably the biggest
thing there and contributed to a big useful area of collaboration in
the business stting.

I'm going to move right on to the next segment (take a look if you
haven't). It's the mobile setting:
1) Location Base Services mashed with "personal cloud". I thought
this was nicely done including the privacy components.

2) When to/how to share amongst groups of individuals and the means
for declaring those groups was really well done.

3) I loved the concept of "what's along my path" from pt starting
to point ending. That "context" is not commonly understood in most
LBS applications. It is mostly radius derived, and not path derived.

4) Symmetry between the UI in the desktop and the mobile device.

I'm all for critique as much as the next guy. It is one of the
defining practices of design, but folks, please ... can we move from
negativity to constructive criticism, please? BTW, constructive
criticism usually only works in juxtaposition with appreciation.

I'd also be curious as to the references some people are implying to
the redundancy, or co-opting of other's ideas. I'd love some
pointers, personally. BTW, building off of other people's ideas and
recreating a new whole is one of the best definitions of innovation I
have seen. And if ya look at the history of Apple, you can see that is
exactly what they've done.

Again, Kudos to the AP team.

-- dave

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=31824

7 Aug 2008 - 12:28am
Shaun Bergmann
2007

What David said.
I think as a group we could really put a lot more work into supporting and
recognizing the work that goes into some of the things this list is so ready
to dissect... to be more supportive as an international team.... but it's
late, so I will step down off this box.

In lieu of my supportive rant, I'll simply post a link to a youtube clip.
If you haven't had a chance to see Scott Berkin's talk about the Myth's of
Innovation, it's an interesting side dish to this topic, and in line.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6gaj6huCp0

On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 8:36 PM, dave malouf <dave at ixda.org> wrote:

> I have a question about everyone's "gorilla arm" concern.
> Is web browsing (the primary thing we are talking about here) a
> sovereign activity like say composition? Or let me be more precise,
> unlike say photoshop which is about 90% mouse control, does web
> browsing really require the same percentage of "flex" time? Isn't
> there quite a bit of rest moments when using a web browser. For
> example, I have not touched my mouse once since the moment I focused
> on this text area to type, yet I'm in a web browser, no?
>
> I often feel that people who are concerned about the ergonomics of it
> all are well decontextualizing the action and making a generalization.
>
> Putting that aside for a moment. Why is it that this group is so
> freakin' negative? Am I the only person who sees the possibilities
> and wants to dig deeper into those? Sometimes (and maybe this was
> Andrei's point about Cuil) when doing concept work like this (not
> that Cuil was a concept, but this surely is), it is probably a better
> process to dig out the positive elements instead of jumping straight
> into negativity. Here's why:
> 1) Negativity breeds judgement which stifles conversation.
> 2) We will loose the positive nuggets of this exploration, meaning we
> loose the hope of building, incorporating, assimilating even the
> smallest aspects of positive contribution.
>
> So what did I like?
> 1) The attempt to re-think the organization of "what is important to
> me?" (avoiding the use of the term favorite, or bookmark)
> 2) How collaboration as a scenario was done. I often struggle w/
> "web co-browsing" as a scenario, but I know it happens all the
> time. Mostly between my wife and I when I'm at work and she is at
> home. I think the scenario they portrayed was friendly and realistic
> and their solutions were intriguing.
> 3) The manipulation, and objectification of any and all data
> units/collections/representations. This was probably the biggest
> thing there and contributed to a big useful area of collaboration in
> the business stting.
>
> I'm going to move right on to the next segment (take a look if you
> haven't). It's the mobile setting:
> 1) Location Base Services mashed with "personal cloud". I thought
> this was nicely done including the privacy components.
>
> 2) When to/how to share amongst groups of individuals and the means
> for declaring those groups was really well done.
>
> 3) I loved the concept of "what's along my path" from pt starting
> to point ending. That "context" is not commonly understood in most
> LBS applications. It is mostly radius derived, and not path derived.
>
> 4) Symmetry between the UI in the desktop and the mobile device.
>
> I'm all for critique as much as the next guy. It is one of the
> defining practices of design, but folks, please ... can we move from
> negativity to constructive criticism, please? BTW, constructive
> criticism usually only works in juxtaposition with appreciation.
>
> I'd also be curious as to the references some people are implying to
> the redundancy, or co-opting of other's ideas. I'd love some
> pointers, personally. BTW, building off of other people's ideas and
> recreating a new whole is one of the best definitions of innovation I
> have seen. And if ya look at the history of Apple, you can see that is
> exactly what they've done.
>
> Again, Kudos to the AP team.
>
> -- dave
>
>
>
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> Posted from the new ixda.org
> http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=31824
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>

7 Aug 2008 - 1:22am
stauciuc
2006

On the one hand, I would want to say that the concept isn't at all about the
mouse - it's about the browser. The mouse is just there to look futuristic -
so although discussions about input devices are interesting, they're not at
all related to the main idea of this video.
On the other hand, since there are so many people complaining about the
mouse, maybe it was asking for trouble to use it (or show it) in the video.
On the third hand, I had to watch the video the second time to even notice
the mouse - it was clearly out of the main focus.

Sebi

On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 9:29 PM, Evan K. Stone <
evan.stone at dragnetsolutions.com> wrote:

> > (however yes, the repetitive strain injuries yet to be discovered are
> going
> > to be fun to watch for)
>
> ...that was the first thing I thought of when I saw her using the arm
> device. yikes.
>
> ///eks
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>

--
Sergiu Sebastian Tauciuc
http://www.sergiutauciuc.ro/en/

6 Aug 2008 - 8:13pm
Neil Cadsawan
2008

I think the demo was fine. But what I'd like to question is the
necessity of a "browser" in the first place. From all the tasks
that were demonstrated, the browser was acting like the OS, except
for all things online. Why not just get back to the real issues at
hand and think about doing away with applications and look at the
tasks a user wants to perform. Who cares if it's online or on the
desktop?

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=31824

6 Aug 2008 - 6:18pm
Valeska OLeary
2008

Looks sharp -- just what I'd like to imagine for a Semantic Web desktop.

Could
be done by clicking and dragging RDF named-graphs, in which case the
API for all the apps and files would be already standardized (assuming there would be RDF behind the scenes). Bravo!

~valeska o'leary

> Also, here are some more detailed documents about the concepts and interface design:

<http://www.adaptivepath.com/blog/2008/08/06/aurora-interface-guide-and-design-concepts/>

> Dan
________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help

7 Aug 2008 - 9:18am
Dave Malouf
2005

to the point about the "web browser". Is AIR just an "invisible"
web browser to specific data points or applications? Try to be
flexible in your response. What I mean to say is that you are right
and wrong.

I don't think the OS is the right place to do what you are thinking,
but the appearance of it being part of the OS is what makes sense.

What does a browser do that a platform or OS can't? Be completely
hardware/vendor agnostic, no? Mozilla does this, as does AIR, JavaFX
and other RIA technologies, renderers, google desktop, etc.

My point is that the "browser" in my mind is still an important
distinction from the OS, or someone has to win the OS wars and while
I know who the winner should be, I doubt that the OSS or Microsoft
would want it that way. ;-)

-- dave

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=31824

7 Aug 2008 - 9:36am
Alexis Brion
2007

Well, the web browser is becoming so important that maybe it should
become an even more relevant part of the OS. Or maybe it should
become "the" OS.

It could also work the other way round, the OS becoming nothing more
than a web browser...

Alex

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=31824

7 Aug 2008 - 10:21am
Dave Malouf
2005

the lines are definitely blurring, but I believe that OS providers do
so because they want to take advantage of their proximity tot he OS
code in their task oriented applications, that put them at an
advantage to other vendors who aren't creating OS. Further, MOST of
an OS has little to do with UI, and mostly to do with interfacing to
the hardware, and the quality there is a HUGE differentiator. Making
that "cross-platform" would be a really bad business move, IMHO.

-- dave

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=31824

7 Aug 2008 - 7:07pm
Loren Baxter
2007

The contraption they have for a mouse could cause some 'gorilla arm'
issues, but there are other 3D input devices that work fine - anyone
played a Wii?

The second and third videos don't show all the different contexts
the mobile device could get used in, but I think something really
interesting lives in the concept of action-context-awareness - based
on imaging, touchscreen signatures, and accelerometer input.

If you bring the mobile device to your ear, it switches to voice
activated phone.
If you bring it to your eye, it goes to camera mode.
If you start walking around, the accelerometer detects the movement
and goes into some customizable mode such as GPS maps directions.
If you drop it, it runs a self diagnostic for damage.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=31824

7 Aug 2008 - 11:24am
Sharon Greenfield5
2008

Hello, cloud computing.

On Aug 7, 2008, at 7:36 AM, Alexis Brion wrote:

> Well, the web browser is becoming so important that maybe it should
> become an even more relevant part of the OS. Or maybe it should
> become "the" OS.
>
> It could also work the other way round, the OS becoming nothing more
> than a web browser...
>
> Alex

12 Aug 2008 - 1:59am
Kontra
2007

> And if ya look at the history of Apple, you can see that is
> exactly what they've done.

Cuil is not much more than a concept product, not terribly mindful of
real-life constraints in competing against Google. While Apple is certainly
peerless in packaging technology into products people want to buy, it
doesn't do public concept products, like Cuil, as I explained in:

Why Apple doesn't do "Concept Products"
http://counternotions.com/2008/08/12/concept-products/

--
Kontra
http://counternotions.com

Syndicate content Get the feed