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 ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help

Reply via email to