It's time to change the way we use computers.

[supirman]

What's with everybody and wanting so much convergence? Not everybody wants a phone that's an mp3 player, which is also a media player, which is also an office assistant, which is a coffee maker, which can also be a car jack, etc. As somebody already mentioned, this unified application is called an OS. I like having a stand alone program for each task I do, as that's the way I like it. Do you dump all of your food into a bowl and smash it all together so that it all looks the same (like a big, gross mess)? Personally, I like to have my meat on one side of the plate, potatoes on another, corn on yet another, etc.

But, to each their own...

[Alex&Linux]

I consider Babbage's goal already accomplished,
To me, the desktop environment is a universal application.
Anytime you see your desktop wallpaper, consider that your universal application.
The personal computer itself is an answer to another layer of the same question, and Its fairly close to as far as its going to go.

I really enjoyed Einstein's quote earlier, explaining that simplicity can only be taken so far, and I believe that in regard to personal computers, and the operating systems that run them, the existing level of complexity is certainly not out of reach, and is very flexible.

I dont know what is commonly thought of this, but a simple desktop with a dock (avant window manager) and beryl window manager is absolutely perfect.
The dock allows all of my consistently used apps to be ready for launch, and keeps track of open apps on a separate devistion, allowing an "at a glance" understanding of the environment, and a 3d cube environment allows me to assign different sides to different tasks...making for a very efficient and organized workspace.
The only way I can imagine to make this more simple and convenient is to be able to control it with my mind, rather than a keyboard and mouse!

[slavik]

The browser that does it 'all' vs. separate things. In the Unix world, this has been fought over and beaten into the ground very long time ago.

Take Perl. It has ALL standard features of C and was designed for text processing. But, it is big and syntax is a mess. On the other hand, you have the small tools, like wget, grep, awk, sed which can replace Perl and even have more functionality (just look at the man page for wget, it can even act as a spider).

The battle of the 1 tool vs. many tools will always go on.

Sidenote: I am taking a basic music class in college, and we are required to use Rhapsody (part of book cost), this is why I realised that iTunes, Rhapsody and the rest are perfect for music classes. The problem is that the professor (not much of a tech, but knows about OSS, since one of the programs the Music Dept. wants on all public machines is Audacity) spends way too much time showing students how to use Rhapsody and I generally feel that the interface could've been better designed.

[aquavitae]

You can call me nuts but isn't it time for something like in the Matrix and numerous other movies? 3D environments in which you can be immersed and do all of your stuff using your brain and all of your body (if you want to). No more single finger mouse (an idea from the 70's) with an arbitrary number of buttons but a faster way of interacting with the internet community merely using computers as a means to an end. The Wii and its remote could be seen as a first step in the direction of this kind of interaction that requires more activity from its users, but also gives them more satisfaction and fun.

I agree, but this is more to do with hardware progression than software. I think if the hardware was available, the OSS would follow very rapidly.

[Pinger05]

My idea of teaching computers has always been to teach the concepts, not the buttons. If someone knows that "this is a spreadsheet", and knows the concepts behind what a spreadsheet does and how it works, then they can adapt to various spreadsheet programs. They will open a new spreadsheet program and say "hey, I was able to add 2 cells in another spreadsheet program...I wonder if I can do it in this?"

This sentance summs it up. It is about the attitude of the learners and the style of the teacher. Teaching which button to press when may not help them as much as teaching them the concepts behind the button.

If you really want to you can try this method:

At my work I have a web page that is nothing but a fancy looking link repository. Each link is clearly labeled with the task that it will help you accomplish. Some links are launchable databases, others are full fledged programs, and still others are links to other sites. As my technicans graduate from application to application they move further down the web page. When I consider them knolegable enough to work on their own all the links are there to accomplish what needs to be done. Perhaps something as simple as that may solve your problem?

Another idea is to program a Java application box that accomplishes the same thing as the above web page. While it is 40 times harder to do, perhaps the programming of it will help you develop exactly what you want...

[MeanderingCode]

This thread is interesting to me.

I would have to sound on the side of the statement that the OS is "the" app...That's what an OS is, a body of machine interface layers to allow programs to access functionality of the machines they're running on, as well as interact with each other and access universal code (i.e. the clock), without having to re-write everything, every time. A programmers maxim held by many is "write less code".

"Desktop Environments" seek to accomplish this seamlessness. Thank the divine there are so many choices, because everyone's needs are different. Yes, the "seamlessness" isn't the smoothest (i use a dark them with white text on my XFCE setup...even configuring for wrapping Gnome and KDE apps, some apps are written in ways that make my life difficult by specifying background but not text color or vice versa).

There are projects (Beryl, Looking Glass, i'm sure many i can't think of right now and many i know nothing about) seeking to revolutionize the interface and the way people think about interacting with their machines. Great. Innovation is what makes us human. I hope to see a revolution in interface, we're ready. Though i agree with some in this thread that it's mostly a hardware thing, much can be done with the two simple HIDs of keyboard and mouse/touchpad.

On that note...Please, i beseech the Open Source community (and even proprietary Scrooges) never to pander to the lazy. It encourages more laziness by saying "yes, we will put you on a sedan chair and haul you around to where you want to go...No, i wasn't doing anything important."

Of course, the next hurdle is to get folks to OPEN THE HELP FILE and READ THE HELP FILE. Those are 2 of the most adverse tasks in computing today. People don't want to read, because it's slow. If they absolutely have to learn something, they'd much rather WATCH A MOVIE on how something is done.

This is true, true, and true. If we do too much of this, however, we will be contributing to classism, not to mention wasting valuable time of programmers. Essentially, this is true because public school, et al, teaches people they shouldn't think and they're incapable of it. The more this is facilitated and we create ways for people to avoid having to think, the dumber we get as a species. As someone who does plenty of tech support for my local community, i'll say that telling people to "read the help file" meets with much upset..."But that's what i'm talking to you for"...My standard response is to inform them that, by reading the help file, not only will they have a better understanding of what their struggle is than they do now, they just might learn something unexpected that will give them even greater efficiency than they were going for. Yes, some folks are very visual learners...screencasts are on the rise, help movies are useful, above all, computer courses taught by live humans, in person, are a must. They are already readily available and will hopefully improve.

I'll stop ranting now, as i'm not being very elegant or complete, but i would like to plug:

In the Beginning...Was the Command Line, by Neal Stephenson.
Written in 1999 by a SF author who was (and is) a hobbyist programmer before authorhood, it is mostly about society and its need of interfaces. Funny reflection on Apple and Microsoft (though in a recent /. interview, Stephenson says that Apple's OS shift with OSX changes much of what he says about them in the book).

Thanks for obliging

[pmasiar]

Gentlemen, OP apparently has no intention or interest to discuss this topic. It is dawning on me that we've been trolled...

[CopaceticOpus]

Kitchens, and modern kitchens in particular, have done a great job of making food easier to use. As far as the end user is concerned most of the improvement has been done by making the kitchen General Utensil Interface (GUI), more intuitive, simple and consistent.

I think it’s time for a change in how the kitchen works, from the user’s point of view. The kitchen developer community has a unique opportunity to make the kitchen better than ever before, way beyond the “window dressing” of Bed, Bath, and Beyond. The over bearing profit imperative does not prevent open kitchen developers focusing on, what should be the true goal of a great kitchen; making food EASIER to use. Also there’s no great rivalry, neither is anyone competing for technical advantage, counter space, glory or huge revenues. Collaboration, is the only way to achieve this, and that’s where the Open Kitchen movement, and modern kitchens in particular, have a huge advantage. Only Open Kitchen projects and developers can collaborate and cooperate without harming their income or competing with each other.

I teach cooking, and those new to cooking find it difficult to understand the idea of appliances that do different things; for example, a toaster that only browns bread, a refrigerator that only cools and freezes, a microwave that only cooks and reheats, and then there’s the kitchen counter that supports different devices and utensils in your kitchen, like cutting boards, cheese graters and bowls. It all sounds very reasonable and logical to us, but to the average person new to cooking it’s all very confusing, unfriendly and overly complicated.

When I teach absolute beginners they open one appliance, then another, then another, and of course each appliance is a device that opens up with new functionality, that’s good; but also with a host of new buttons, shelves, and doors, most of which have to be learned, that’s very bad. The whole idea looks well, but the tabletop metaphor with its salt, pepper, and napkins is time consuming, confusing, complicated and unintuitive.

Should we all go back to the campfire or the picking of berries? No, that’s even worse, what I propose is a better alternative to what’s already there. The traditional kitchen interface hasn’t evolved, while it looks better and more polished than ever, the countertop itself has remained virtually unchanged for over 10 years.

There must be a better way to accomplish the same everyday cooking tasks, what’s needed is ONE appliance in the kitchen to do most of the things I want to do. The easiest and most familiar user interface, by far, is the refrigerator. So why can’t we develop a unified/multifunction refrigerator that I can use to do all the things I previously had to open several separate appliances to do? I should be able to toast a bagel, slice and dice onions, reheat Thanksgiving leftovers, search my cabinets and see bowls, cups, spoons, and every other utensil, from within my multifunction refrigerator.

[kerry_s]

Linux operating systems, and Ubuntu in particular, have done a great job of making the operating system easier to use. As far as the end user is concerned most of the improvement has been done by making the operating system Graphical User Interface (GUI), more intuitive, simple and consistent.

I think it’s time for a change in how the operating system works, from the user’s point of view. The Linux developer community has a unique opportunity to make the operating system better than ever before, way beyond the “window dressing” of Vista. The over bearing profit imperative does not prevent open source developers focusing on, what should be the true goal of a great OS; making the computer EASIER to use. Also there’s no great rivalry, neither is anyone competing for technical advantage, desktop space, glory or huge revenues. Collaboration, is the only way to achieve this, and that’s were the Open Source movement, and Linux in particular, have a huge advantage. Only Open Source software projects and developers can collaborate and cooperate without harming their income or competing with each other.

I teach computers, and those new to computing find it difficult to understand the idea of applications that do different things; for example, a web browser that only goes to addresses on the web, an email client that only sends and receives email, a word processing application that only produces and prints documents, and then there’s the computer browser that shows different places and items on your computer, like other network PC’s, disk drives and folders. It all sounds very reasonable and logical to us, but to the average person new to computing it’s all very confusing, unfriendly and overly complicated.

When I teach absolute beginners they click on icons, then on another, then another, and of course each icon represents a program that opens up with new functionality, that’s good; but also with a host of new buttons, commands and menus, most of which have to be learned, that’s very bad. The whole idea looks well, but the desktop metaphor with it’s trash can, windows and icons is time consuming, confusing, complicated and unintuitive.

Should we all go back to the command line or the terminal? No, that’s even worse, what I propose is a better alternative to what’s already there. The traditional GUI hasn’t evolved, while it looks better and more polished than ever, the desktop metaphor itself has remained virtually unchanged for over 10 years.

There must be a better way to accomplish the same everyday computing tasks, what’s needed is ONE user interface on the computer to do most the things I want to do. The easiest and most familiar user interface, by far, is the web browser. So why can’t we develop a unified/multifunction web browser that I can use to do all the things I previously had to open several separate applications to do? I should be able to surf the internet, send and receive emails, produce and print documents, search my computer and see files, folders, disk drives, and every other networked PC, from within my multifunction browser.

install seamonkey, it has all that.

[BLTicklemonster]

But I thought the desktop was basically a configurable browser? You add links to it that you want, or remove ones you don't want. You have a link that opens up more links to stuff you want (start button), too.

I hear people saying stuff like that often, and keep wondering why bother?

The Desktop: It Just Works





boooooo I know.