On 18-Jan-04, Ed O'Connor wrote: > I downloaded and played with it a bit on Friday. I was very > underwhelmed. It's an interesting approach, but ultimately it felt > like an experimental learning environment.
> FYI: There's an interesting review on OS News: > http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=5687 And going by this pic... http://img.osnews.com/img/5687/nbor1.png it certainly looks windowish - quite a bit of over-lapping rectangles there. > Creating a genuinely better GUI is doable, but it requires a > painstaking amount of user research, testing and refinement. Most > small companies & open source projects simply don't have the right > mix of resources to do it right, and are much better off aping > current GUIs. Now and then we see a small evolutionary improvement, > and eventually it gets incorporated in GUI toolkits. Maybe something > will shake out of NBOR. Yeah - but most everything else will be kept, so just added to the clutter. > Long-shot bets are fun, but I wouldn't advise RT to go into more > experimental areas until they have a standard widget set well > implemented. I wasn't thinking RT should attempt it. We can make our own VIDs from View after all. > The current minimum set is probably HTML (mixed with > whatever can be done with DOM/Javascript)-- which is a respectably > high standard. Does anyone know if the VID project has published > list of VID improvements on the way? This what you want... http://www.rebol.net/cgi-bin/projects/track.r ? See the "Completed Requests" starting about halfway down. > With regard to being sick of WIMP interfaces, amen. I'm hoping we'll > see some creative interfaces that provide CLI/console productivity > integrated in rich interfaces. Kinda hard to describe what that > would look like, though! Yeah. Even if you have a good GUI idea, trying to explain it's near impossible. -- Carl Read -- To unsubscribe from this list, just send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe as the subject.
