"Spatial" mode?

Ian Malone ibm21 at cam.ac.uk
Wed Dec 15 21:17:00 UTC 2004


Romeyn Prescott wrote:

> 
> At 12:28 PM -0500 12/15/04, msimplay scribbled:
> 
>>hate spatial mode it mode
>>i don't see the logic in not having an address bar
>>and yes none of those articles are very convincing
>>Besides i thought Gnome was supposed to make it simple for users
>>spatial is something that goes in the opposite direction of simple and
>>its something you have to get used to but i rather not
>>i would have prefered if they added tabs like with Konqueror
> 
> 

I'm not particularly convinced by the argument for spatial, it runs
along the lines, "We have a story for this, let's keep it."

> 
> You only have to "get used to" something if you're already used to 
> something else!!  The original article at arstechnica made some 

I'm not overly fond of picking at people's words, but I can't help
but mention that you _do_ have to get used to something even if
you haven't used 'something else'.  You mention shortly that you
have had to explain to people new to computers how they work.
If their lack of exposure to previous UIs meant they didn't have
to get used to a new one then we could hit them with anything and
they would instantly understand it.  As it is, continually changing
the UI means that in addition to new users learning it, existing
users have to re-learn it. (And as a consequence, are less able to
help new users.)

> interesting observations noting that "spatial mode" more closely 
> mimics "Real Life" use of desktops, files (pieces of paper) and 
> folders and is that to which most people can most easily relate.  If 
> you were weened on the CLI and were never used to seeing where you've 
> been or where you're going, then getting used to ANYTHING "different" 
> is going to be painful.
> 

Actually, with the CLI you generally have to remember where you are
in the file system.  In spatial you have to remember where a folder is.
In a navigator you have the location on the screen next to the
resource you're looking at.  I find that visual hint useful

> As a consultant on the side, I work with a LOT of people who finally 
> decided to take the plunge and get a computer.  Over the years I have 
> found that the very best thing to explain the vagaries of a 
> computer's OS and its presentation are to draw, whenever possible, 
> upon real-world analogies to things with which people are already 
> familiar.  Following that, I would have a hard time explaining why a 
> folder disappears when you open it, because that doesn't happen in 
> Real Life.  If I remove a hanging folder from a file cabinet and open 
> it and it contains a manila folder and I open THAT, I can still see 
> the hanging folder behind it.  It doesn't vanish in a puff of smoke!
> 

Analogies are two a penny.  Since you can't get change from a penny:

I have a drawer in my desk.  I open the drawer.  I no longer see the
drawer.  Why?  It's still there, but now I'm looking in it; not
standing at the other side of the room looking at the drawer and trying
to see its contents (although I could be, but I find this more useful).
I take out a book and open it.  I'm not trying to see the desk the
drawer and the book, and the page, I'm trying to read the book, so I see
the page.  Spatial is a little like lifting out the drawer, setting it
on my desk, taking out the book, opening it, and setting it next to the
drawer.  It hasn't done anything very different, except unnecessarily
reproduced real world clutter.

> Now maybe there are those OCD types whose Real-Life desktops are just 
> as clean as their virtual ones...the kind of person who realizes that 
> he's not USING the hanging folder at the moment and takes the time to 
> return it to the cabinet immediately lest it clutter his desk.  But I 
> think those types are few and far between!
> 

If my computer kept my desk clean for me I would be happy.  It can
help keep my screen clean though.

-- 
imalone




More information about the ubuntu-users mailing list