Comments on: BumpTop, the failed metaphor http://www.nnyman.com/personal/2006/07/01/bumptop-the-failed-metaphor/ Niko Nyman's blog on shifting topics. Mon, 01 Dec 2008 21:58:04 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 By: /personal » Blog Archive » Why 3D in user interfaces goes wrong http://www.nnyman.com/personal/2006/07/01/bumptop-the-failed-metaphor/#comment-85961 /personal » Blog Archive » Why 3D in user interfaces goes wrong Tue, 20 Nov 2007 06:39:19 +0000 http://www.nnyman.com/personal/2006/07/01/bumptop-the-failed-metaphor/#comment-85961 <p>[...] rules of the projected 3D space when it makes more sense for the user. This might be why (I think) concepts like BumpTop fail. This entry was posted on Tuesday, November 20th, 2007 at 9:38 and is filed under English. [...]</p> [...] rules of the projected 3D space when it makes more sense for the user. This might be why (I think) concepts like BumpTop fail. This entry was posted on Tuesday, November 20th, 2007 at 9:38 and is filed under English. [...]

]]> By: /personal » Blog Archive » In need of casual interactions http://www.nnyman.com/personal/2006/07/01/bumptop-the-failed-metaphor/#comment-3441 /personal » Blog Archive » In need of casual interactions Thu, 07 Sep 2006 13:46:07 +0000 http://www.nnyman.com/personal/2006/07/01/bumptop-the-failed-metaphor/#comment-3441 <p>[...] In that sense, Bumptop had some ideas right (despite me calling it a failed metaphor). [...]</p> [...] In that sense, Bumptop had some ideas right (despite me calling it a failed metaphor). [...]

]]> By: Niko http://www.nnyman.com/personal/2006/07/01/bumptop-the-failed-metaphor/#comment-2036 Niko Tue, 04 Jul 2006 10:17:21 +0000 http://www.nnyman.com/personal/2006/07/01/bumptop-the-failed-metaphor/#comment-2036 <p>Definitely 2D. A 3D visualization on a computer monitor is a 2D projection, which makes it more difficult to understand. Not for those who have grown up playing first-person shooters, maybe.</p> <p>Secondly, I'm not completely sure about the usefulness of three dimensions in current operating systems: the way you can position windows on top of each other. It could be good, but then again, it could be just the best that people have figured out so far. And I don't believe adding "physical" dimensions will make these systems any simpler. Dimensions of meaning is different, though...</p> Definitely 2D. A 3D visualization on a computer monitor is a 2D projection, which makes it more difficult to understand. Not for those who have grown up playing first-person shooters, maybe.

Secondly, I’m not completely sure about the usefulness of three dimensions in current operating systems: the way you can position windows on top of each other. It could be good, but then again, it could be just the best that people have figured out so far. And I don’t believe adding “physical” dimensions will make these systems any simpler. Dimensions of meaning is different, though…

]]> By: Tommi Raivio http://www.nnyman.com/personal/2006/07/01/bumptop-the-failed-metaphor/#comment-2027 Tommi Raivio Tue, 04 Jul 2006 07:51:59 +0000 http://www.nnyman.com/personal/2006/07/01/bumptop-the-failed-metaphor/#comment-2027 <p>Would you bet for 2D or 3D? If you could only choose one... :)</p> Would you bet for 2D or 3D? If you could only choose one… :)

]]> By: Niko http://www.nnyman.com/personal/2006/07/01/bumptop-the-failed-metaphor/#comment-1994 Niko Sun, 02 Jul 2006 08:33:07 +0000 http://www.nnyman.com/personal/2006/07/01/bumptop-the-failed-metaphor/#comment-1994 <p>The transient stuff, that's where I absolutely agree. If there is a place for a desktop metaphor in the future, it should be a metaphor of desktop <em>use</em>, not a metaphor of what a desktop <em>looks</em> like. The desktop is something you put your working documents on, and when you're done, you file them back to their proper place. Or that's how an organized desktop <em>works</em>, of course there's nothing stopping someone from piling up all his stuff on the desktop. Maybe the desktop could be some kind of a "project view" to a set of documents?</p> <p>To replace desktop — personally I think I would enjoy a time/history based interface that wouldn't be hierarchical, although could be presented as different hierarchies if needed...</p> The transient stuff, that’s where I absolutely agree. If there is a place for a desktop metaphor in the future, it should be a metaphor of desktop use, not a metaphor of what a desktop looks like. The desktop is something you put your working documents on, and when you’re done, you file them back to their proper place. Or that’s how an organized desktop works, of course there’s nothing stopping someone from piling up all his stuff on the desktop. Maybe the desktop could be some kind of a “project view” to a set of documents?

To replace desktop — personally I think I would enjoy a time/history based interface that wouldn’t be hierarchical, although could be presented as different hierarchies if needed…

]]> By: Sparkplug 9 >> bizhack » Blog Archive » Bumptop Piles: Apple, are you listening? http://www.nnyman.com/personal/2006/07/01/bumptop-the-failed-metaphor/#comment-1993 Sparkplug 9 >> bizhack » Blog Archive » Bumptop Piles: Apple, are you listening? Sun, 02 Jul 2006 03:16:04 +0000 http://www.nnyman.com/personal/2006/07/01/bumptop-the-failed-metaphor/#comment-1993 <p>[...] Niko Nyman disagrees with the idea that Bumptop has possibilities. Some good points. [...]</p> [...] Niko Nyman disagrees with the idea that Bumptop has possibilities. Some good points. [...]

]]> By: John Koetsier http://www.nnyman.com/personal/2006/07/01/bumptop-the-failed-metaphor/#comment-1992 John Koetsier Sun, 02 Jul 2006 03:07:17 +0000 http://www.nnyman.com/personal/2006/07/01/bumptop-the-failed-metaphor/#comment-1992 <p>There's absolutely no question that as a metaphor for 1.5 million files, the desktop fails, and fails miserably.</p> <p>Where I see something like Bumptop as useful, however, is the transient stuff: the files for the 5 projects you have on the go right now. That's what is on your physical desktop: not all 1.5 million pieces of paper you've seen/touched/needed/wanted at some point in your entire life. And that's what's on your virtual desktop.</p> <p>However, ultimately you're right. The question is: what do we have to replace the desktop metaphor?</p> There’s absolutely no question that as a metaphor for 1.5 million files, the desktop fails, and fails miserably.

Where I see something like Bumptop as useful, however, is the transient stuff: the files for the 5 projects you have on the go right now. That’s what is on your physical desktop: not all 1.5 million pieces of paper you’ve seen/touched/needed/wanted at some point in your entire life. And that’s what’s on your virtual desktop.

However, ultimately you’re right. The question is: what do we have to replace the desktop metaphor?

]]>