Can we make Linux Desktop Enviroment beyond the Desktop Metaphor? - X

This is a discussion on Can we make Linux Desktop Enviroment beyond the Desktop Metaphor? - X ; Can we make Linux Desktop Enviroment beyond the Desktop Metaphor? Should Linux Desktop Enviroment (e.g.KDE,Gnome,CDE)look like Microsoft Windows or Mac OSX ? I imagine Linux Desktop Enviroment to have some features different from current OS desktop, I think Linux can ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Can we make Linux Desktop Enviroment beyond the Desktop Metaphor?

  1. Can we make Linux Desktop Enviroment beyond the Desktop Metaphor?

    Can we make Linux Desktop Enviroment beyond the Desktop Metaphor?
    Should Linux Desktop Enviroment (e.g.KDE,Gnome,CDE)look like Microsoft
    Windows or Mac OSX ?

    I imagine Linux Desktop Enviroment to have some features different
    from current OS desktop, I think Linux can do better in Desktop OS
    field.

    mockup :
    http://groups.google.com/group/ixdea...%20Desktop.png

    Main Features:

    1, Everything on the desktop is applet, also is document and device,
    but is not application;
    2, As everything starts from the root directory in Linux, everything
    starts from the desktop. In other words,"desktop" is root directory,
    all your data stored here;
    3, Usually, other components of the environment, including the
    removable disk or local device, can be reached from the desktop
    directly;
    4, Never need to open or close a window, the applets run on desktop
    starts, documents always opened on the desktop;
    5, Muti-touch and Zoomable desktop. Zooming infinitely by your
    finger,so you have an infinite flat surface/desktop;
    6, Without Windows-like concept on this desktop, such as Startmenu,
    Taskbar, system tray ,My Computer, Shortcut,Folder,etc.
    7, Use "object" metaphor replace "file/icon"metaphor;
    8, While you're writting in a text-editor(applet), the data saved
    automatically; user wouldn't asked to save it with a filename, but
    they can tag it with any words;
    9, Just drag and drop to arrange/organize your document and applet on
    desktop by pile and stack;
    10, The applets or documents show its thumbnail while it minimized.
    ......

    Do you have any suggestion?

  2. Re: Can we make Linux Desktop Enviroment beyond the Desktop Metaphor?

    On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 05:55:47 -0800 (PST), Benjamin wrote:
    > 4, Never need to open or close a window, the applets run on desktop
    > starts, documents always opened on the desktop;


    At work I run with 16 windows under fvwm.
    Here at home, running KDE with 8 desktop windows.

    Currently I have 32 custom desktop shortcuts spread around the edges
    because it is nothing for me to have 2 to 4 apps in running in any of
    the 8 desktop windows I happen to be in at the time.
    In your suggestion, I would constantly be window shading/minimizing
    apps to get to applets.

    > 8, While you're writting in a text-editor(applet), the data saved
    > automatically; user wouldn't asked to save it with a filename,


    Not in my world. Every once in awhile I have to scrap the work, and
    start over.

    > 9, Just drag and drop to arrange/organize your document and applet on
    > desktop by pile and stack;


    Excuse me, but pile and stack just become the menu I already have in the
    Task bar.

  3. Re: Can we make Linux Desktop Enviroment beyond the Desktop Metaphor?

    thanks for your point of view.

    1, In the desktop metaphor, "windows" that does not exist.
    Whatever you have any amount of windows or applets, you don't have to
    minimize the windows, just simply zoom in/out to get to applets.

    2,If you're going to give up changed , just drag the document to
    trash-applet to delete it or creat a new docment,
    as you working in physical desktop

    3,What I mean is that you can pile and stack applets or documents on
    desktop

    thinking more about our physical desktop

    On 1月10日, 下午10时46分, Bit Twister wrote:
    > On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 05:55:47 -0800 (PST), Benjamin wrote:
    > > 4, Never need to open or close a window, the applets run on desktop
    > > starts, documents always opened on the desktop;

    >
    > At work I run with 16 windows under fvwm.
    > Here at home, running KDE with 8 desktop windows.
    >
    > Currently I have 32 custom desktop shortcuts spread around the edges
    > because it is nothing for me to have 2 to 4 apps in running in any of
    > the 8 desktop windows I happen to be in at the time.
    > In your suggestion, I would constantly be window shading/minimizing
    > apps to get to applets.
    >
    > > 8, While you're writting in a text-editor(applet), the data saved
    > > automatically; user wouldn't asked to save it with a filename,

    >
    > Not in my world. Every once in awhile I have to scrap the work, and
    > start over.
    >
    > > 9, Just drag and drop to arrange/organize your document and applet on
    > > desktop by pile and stack;

    >
    > Excuse me, but pile and stack just become the menu I already have in the Task bar.



  4. Re: Can we make Linux Desktop Enviroment beyond the Desktop Metaphor?

    On Jan 10, 8:55 am, Benjamin wrote:
    > Can we make Linux Desktop Enviroment beyond the Desktop Metaphor?
    > Should Linux Desktop Enviroment (e.g.KDE,Gnome,CDE)look like Microsoft
    > Windows or Mac OSX ?
    >
    > I imagine Linux Desktop Enviroment to have some features different
    > from current OS desktop, I think Linux can do better in Desktop OS
    > field.
    >
    > mockup :http://groups.google.com/group/ixdea...%20Desktop.png
    >
    > Main Features:
    >
    > 1, Everything on the desktop is applet, also is document and device,
    > but is not application;

    [snip]
    > 4, Never need to open or close a window, the applets run on desktop
    > starts, documents always opened on the desktop;

    [snip]
    > 7, Use "object" metaphor replace "file/icon"metaphor;
    > 8, While you're writting in a text-editor(applet), the data saved
    > automatically; user wouldn't asked to save it with a filename, but
    > they can tag it with any words;

    [snip]
    > 10, The applets or documents show its thumbnail while it minimized.



    > Do you have any suggestion?


    Before my suggestion, let me make an at-first-glance off-topic
    observation: While a clay brick is most commonly used to build
    decorative walls with, it can also be used as a doorstop, a
    paperweight, a weapon, and an anchor. The brick does not change (it is
    a single unique entity) but the activities that can be performed on or
    with it are various and unnumberable.

    An "object" (in your world) is similar to that brick; the object
    cannnot be limited to a single inherent action; it must be free to be
    used in many ways. Unfortunately, your scheme implies that an object
    containing text may only be edited (and never compiled, printed,
    debugged, or used as data for a randomizer), an object representing a
    USB memory stick can only be traversed as a filesystem (never used as
    raw data, reformatted or otherwise manipulated), and so one.

    Frankly, the desktop metaphor (where manipulations to objects are
    limited to only one view of the object, like editing a textual
    document) is a poor one, and is ill-suited to proper manipulation of
    data.



  5. Re: Can we make Linux Desktop Enviroment beyond the Desktop Metaphor?

    Benjamin wrote:
    > Can we make Linux Desktop Enviroment beyond the Desktop Metaphor?
    > Should Linux Desktop Enviroment (e.g.KDE,Gnome,CDE)look like Microsoft
    > Windows or Mac OSX ?
    >
    > Do you have any suggestion?


    I'm not sure if you can go beyond that metafor. The desktop environment
    is not something that was 'just' invented, but it was something that has
    evolved according to the needs of the users. A hierarchy on storage was
    invented to be able to organize the ever growing amount of data. Unless
    there's some alternative to a hierarchy in which you can store massive
    amounts of data, you can't exactly go to a different principle, you can
    only alter it's appearance slightly, but the storage metaphor remains as
    it is. It has evolved from simple byte storage to an abstract interface
    in which you traverse though the hierarchy of directories. It's
    effective and highly usable.

    Windows (and I don't mean the OS) have also evolved according to the
    needs of users. Along with the need to be able to have multiple programs
    running at once, the need arose to witness multiple outputs at once. So
    a division of screen was devised. This resulted in the 'window'. The
    window in its current shape is what's most usable for a lot of users.

    The menu buttons, taskbar and system tray are also items that evolved
    according to the needs of users. When your screen is filled with
    window(s) you still want easy access to open other programs, without
    having to minimize the output you have. So a always on top menu was
    invented. Same with the clock, people want easy access to tell time.
    And ofc, people want to see what programs are currently running.
    The taskbar is a funny thing, windows has a bar with currently running
    tabs on it. MacOS has a drop-down menu with all running programs and
    linux can have either way. Still different ways to implement the same
    things.

    But in essence, all dekstop environments are the same. Not because they
    are just copying from eachother, but rather because how it's evolved
    according to the needs of the user. So if you can implement something
    that still fulfills all the needs, it will work. But if you create
    something that does not map with the needs of the user, it's useless.

    In short: No, I don't think we can make the Linux Desktop Environment
    beyond the desktop metaphor. Mainly because it's already how we want it
    to be. I myself would not want a different interface, not just because
    I'm used to it, but rather because I can't think of other ways to do the
    same things with the same efficiency.
    Sure, I could think of a different way to start programs without the use
    of menus, but it would not be as efficient. The desktop environments are
    constantly changing, but not in essence. They are constantly evolving
    into a more definite form. And it's funny to see how all of them are
    evolving to eachother.

  6. Re: Can we make Linux Desktop Enviroment beyond the Desktop Metaphor?

    >Lew Pitcher:
    Where do you see from the "object" what I said can only be used for
    editing?in fact,"object" is a abstract concept, it isn't the existence
    of separate, it should be combined/connect with other object, for
    example, in my scheme, the documents not only can be dragged to
    "trash" to delete it, bust also can be dragged to an object
    representing a printer for printing,and rotating, scaling, folding and
    so on.

    >Jurgen Haan:

    I agree with your opnion of the point: The OS desktop evolved
    according to the needs of the user.But I dont't think every product
    comes with the needs of the user,especially innovative product and
    idea. When the Xerox PARC team codified the WIMP (windows, icons,
    menus and pointers/pull-down menus) paradigm, who is the user? How
    much people need such a thing named GUI?

    Although modern OS implement the same things in different ways,they
    brought different user experience. Generally, for ordinary users,
    MacOS/Windows is the best choice, Linux next. Why?The key is detail.
    Linux hadn't found a better way which is different from MacOS/Windows
    to make ordinary user easiler to use the desktop OS, that's why Linux
    cannot open the Desktop OS markets all along.


    On 1月11日, 下午6时56分, Jurgen Haan wrote:
    > Benjamin wrote:
    > > Can we make Linux Desktop Enviroment beyond the Desktop Metaphor?
    > > Should Linux Desktop Enviroment (e.g.KDE,Gnome,CDE)look like Microsoft
    > > Windows or Mac OSX ?

    >
    > > Do you have any suggestion?

    >
    > I'm not sure if you can go beyond that metafor. The desktop environment
    > is not something that was 'just' invented, but it was something that has
    > evolved according to the needs of the users. A hierarchy on storage was
    > invented to be able to organize the ever growing amount of data. Unless
    > there's some alternative to a hierarchy in which you can store massive
    > amounts of data, you can't exactly go to a different principle, you can
    > only alter it's appearance slightly, but the storage metaphor remains as
    > it is. It has evolved from simple byte storage to an abstract interface
    > in which you traverse though the hierarchy of directories. It's
    > effective and highly usable.
    >
    > Windows (and I don't mean the OS) have also evolved according to the
    > needs of users. Along with the need to be able to have multiple programs
    > running at once, the need arose to witness multiple outputs at once. So
    > a division of screen was devised. This resulted in the 'window'. The
    > window in its current shape is what's most usable for a lot of users.
    >




  7. Re: Can we make Linux Desktop Enviroment beyond the DesktopMetaphor?

    I don't use right-click to open application menu on desktop. I don't
    use desktop shortcuts, either. Actually, I seldom see the desktop
    background, as I usually have some window(s) covering it. But I use
    taskbar and another always-on-top panel, that provide me information
    about the system and give me UI. I am not big fan of dragging
    and resizing windows; usually I use windows maximized. It is so fast to
    switch between applications using the taskbar. (In my taskbar I first
    choose application that I usually identify by icon, then I choose
    window by its title.) I am currently using Xfce, but I have read about
    some interesting features in window managers such as Ratpoison, where
    you can manage windows differently, but I suppose current
    implementations are not so easy for beginners.

    --
    Jarno Suni - http://iki.fi/8/
    Ole hyv盲 ja k盲yt盲 XHTML-yhteensopivaa WWW-selainta.
    Please use a XHTML compliant web browser.


  8. Re: Can we make Linux Desktop Enviroment beyond the DesktopMetaphor?

    Here's introduction to the philosophy of Ion window manager:
    http://modeemi.cs.tut.fi/~tuomov/ion/

    --
    Jarno Suni - http://iki.fi/8/
    Ole hyv盲 ja k盲yt盲 XHTML-yhteensopivaa WWW-selainta.
    Please use a XHTML compliant web browser.


  9. Re: Can we make Linux Desktop Enviroment beyond the Desktop Metaphor?

    Benjamin wrote:

    > Linux hadn't found a better way which is different from MacOS/Windows
    > to make ordinary user easiler to use the desktop OS, that's why Linux
    > cannot open the Desktop OS markets all along.


    Nah... I blame lack of marketing. :P

  10. Re: Can we make Linux Desktop Enviroment beyond the Desktop Metaphor?

    Thank you for your advice.
    Ion is an interesting window manager, but it seem to be rather suited
    to the user who preferred to use the computer primarily with keyboard.
    Ordinary users need tabbing and tiling feature, but not this way.

    On 1鏈13鏃, 涓婂崍1鏃17鍒, Jarno Suni wrote:
    > I don't use right-click to open application menu on desktop. I don't
    > use desktop shortcuts, either. Actually, I seldom see the desktop
    > background, as I usually have some window(s) covering it. But I use
    > taskbar and another always-on-top panel, that provide me information
    > about the system and give me UI. I am not big fan of dragging
    > and resizing windows; usually I use windows maximized. It is so fast to
    > switch between applications using the taskbar. (In my taskbar I first
    > choose application that I usually identify by icon, then I choose
    > window by its title.) I am currently using Xfce, but I have read about
    > some interesting features in window managers such as Ratpoison, where
    > you can manage windows differently, but I suppose current
    > implementations are not so easy for beginners.



    On 1鏈13鏃, 涓婂崍1鏃21鍒, Jarno Suni wrote:
    > Here's introduction to the philosophy of Ion window manager:http://modeemi..cs.tut.fi/~tuomov/ion/
    >
    > --
    > Jarno Suni -http://iki.fi/8/
    > Ole hyv盲 ja k盲yt盲 XHTML-yhteensopivaa WWW-selainta.
    > Please use a XHTML compliant web browser.


  11. Re: Can we make Linux Desktop Enviroment beyond the Desktop Metaphor?

    On 1月17日, 下午6时47分, Jurgen Haan wrote:
    > Benjamin wrote:
    > > Linux hadn't found a better way which is different from MacOS/Windows
    > > to make ordinary user easiler to use the desktop OS, that's why Linux
    > > cannot open the Desktop OS markets all along.

    >
    > Nah... I blame lack of marketing. :P


    Em....Wordiness,hope you don't mind

  12. Re: Can we make Linux Desktop Enviroment beyond the Desktop Metaphor?

    Benjamin wrote:
    > Can we make Linux Desktop Enviroment beyond the Desktop Metaphor?
    > Should Linux Desktop Enviroment (e.g.KDE,Gnome,CDE)look like Microsoft
    > Windows or Mac OSX ?
    >
    > I imagine Linux Desktop Enviroment to have some features different
    > from current OS desktop, I think Linux can do better in Desktop OS
    > field.
    >
    > mockup :
    > http://groups.google.com/group/ixdea...%20Desktop.png
    >
    > Main Features:
    >
    > 1, Everything on the desktop is applet, also is document and device,
    > but is not application;
    > 2, As everything starts from the root directory in Linux, everything
    > starts from the desktop. In other words,"desktop" is root directory,
    > all your data stored here;
    > 3, Usually, other components of the environment, including the
    > removable disk or local device, can be reached from the desktop
    > directly;
    > 4, Never need to open or close a window, the applets run on desktop
    > starts, documents always opened on the desktop;
    > 5, Muti-touch and Zoomable desktop. Zooming infinitely by your
    > finger,so you have an infinite flat surface/desktop;
    > 6, Without Windows-like concept on this desktop, such as Startmenu,
    > Taskbar, system tray ,My Computer, Shortcut,Folder,etc.
    > 7, Use "object" metaphor replace "file/icon"metaphor;
    > 8, While you're writting in a text-editor(applet), the data saved
    > automatically; user wouldn't asked to save it with a filename, but
    > they can tag it with any words;
    > 9, Just drag and drop to arrange/organize your document and applet on
    > desktop by pile and stack;
    > 10, The applets or documents show its thumbnail while it minimized.
    > .....
    >
    > Do you have any suggestion?



    It sounds almost like Squeak (a Smalltalk implementation) or Microsoft's
    Bob. You might want to look into Squeak. Microsoft's Bob was supposed
    to take over the world, but by and large failed. There have also been
    other implementations of similar things. I think Smalltalk was really
    where this set of ideas started, so you should investigate Squeak.

    Personally, I'm not impressed by most ZUI anymore.

    I think that having a unified desktop where most things are built from
    the same basic primitives in a dynamic language is a good thing. The
    problem is that most current applications aren't built using such a
    layer. So for example in my window system that I've been developing the
    last 3 years I've had to rely on some older tools, and I've been
    developing an X server that enables running some X apps. Unfortunately
    I'm about ready to can the whole project, and start over, and your
    message reminds me of what I'm missing to some extent.

    I just took a basic framebuffer, constructed a tree of windows in C (the
    COOP language actually, but it generates C), and each window struct has
    2 buffers. One is a shared memory buffer, that is shared with each
    application process via mmap and a specific file system path for each
    window, and the other is the buffer to composite with the framebuffer.
    I also added window rotation. So everytime the client sends a request
    over a socket to update the application's display, the bytes get copied,
    rotated if needed, and composited. Most rendering occurs in the
    application, such as text rendering, or line drawing. The window system
    doesn't even have such primitives built in.

    I suppose my disappointment is at an architectural level. I originally
    had mmap shared window buffers for every window in the tree, and then I
    came to realize after building a grid geometry manager, that it was too
    slow, with shared memory and the resizing of subwindows. So now each
    client toplevel gets a single shared memory buffer, and subwindows are
    composited and allocated with malloc.


    George

  13. Re: Can we make Linux Desktop Enviroment beyond the Desktop Metaphor?

    On 1月20日, 下午5时07分, George Peter Staplin
    wrote:
    > Benjamin wrote:
    > > Can we make Linux Desktop Enviroment beyond the Desktop Metaphor?
    > > Should Linux Desktop Enviroment (e.g.KDE,Gnome,CDE)look like Microsoft
    > > Windows or Mac OSX ?

    >
    > > I imagine Linux Desktop Enviroment to have some features different
    > > from current OS desktop, I think Linux can do better in Desktop OS
    > > field.

    >
    > > mockup :
    > >http://groups.google.com/group/ixdea...%20Desktop.png

    >
    > > Main Features:

    >
    > > 1, Everything on the desktop is applet, also is document and device,
    > > but is not application;
    > > 2, As everything starts from the root directory in Linux, everything
    > > starts from the desktop. In other words,"desktop" is root directory,
    > > all your data stored here;
    > > 3, Usually, other components of the environment, including the
    > > removable disk or local device, can be reached from the desktop
    > > directly;
    > > 4, Never need to open or close a window, the applets run on desktop
    > > starts, documents always opened on the desktop;
    > > 5, Muti-touch and Zoomable desktop. Zooming infinitely by your
    > > finger,so you have an infinite flat surface/desktop;
    > > 6, Without Windows-like concept on this desktop, such as Startmenu,
    > > Taskbar, system tray ,My Computer, Shortcut,Folder,etc.
    > > 7, Use "object" metaphor replace "file/icon"metaphor;
    > > 8, While you're writting in a text-editor(applet), the data saved
    > > automatically; user wouldn't asked to save it with a filename, but
    > > they can tag it with any words;
    > > 9, Just drag and drop to arrange/organize your document and applet on
    > > desktop by pile and stack;
    > > 10, The applets or documents show its thumbnail while it minimized.
    > > .....

    >
    > > Do you have any suggestion?

    >
    > It sounds almost like Squeak (a Smalltalk implementation) or Microsoft's
    > Bob. You might want to look into Squeak. Microsoft's Bob was supposed
    > to take over the world, but by and large failed. There have also been
    > other implementations of similar things. I think Smalltalk was really
    > where this set of ideas started, so you should investigate Squeak.
    >
    > Personally, I'm not impressed by most ZUI anymore.
    >
    > I think that having a unified desktop where most things are built from
    > the same basic primitives in a dynamic language is a good thing. The
    > problem is that most current applications aren't built using such a
    > layer. So for example in my window system that I've been developing the
    > last 3 years I've had to rely on some older tools, and I've been
    > developing an X server that enables running some X apps. Unfortunately
    > I'm about ready to can the whole project, and start over, and your
    > message reminds me of what I'm missing to some extent.
    >
    > I just took a basic framebuffer, constructed a tree of windows in C (the
    > COOP language actually, but it generates C), and each window struct has
    > 2 buffers. One is a shared memory buffer, that is shared with each
    > application process via mmap and a specific file system path for each
    > window, and the other is the buffer to composite with the framebuffer.
    > I also added window rotation. So everytime the client sends a request
    > over a socket to update the application's display, the bytes get copied,
    > rotated if needed, and composited. Most rendering occurs in the
    > application, such as text rendering, or line drawing. The window system
    > doesn't even have such primitives built in.
    >
    > I suppose my disappointment is at an architectural level. I originally
    > had mmap shared window buffers for every window in the tree, and then I
    > came to realize after building a grid geometry manager, that it was too
    > slow, with shared memory and the resizing of subwindows. So now each
    > client toplevel gets a single shared memory buffer, and subwindows are
    > composited and allocated with malloc.
    >
    > George


    Microsoft's Bob have proven poor metaphor as desktop, no because its
    interface, but because the limitations of its metaphor behind the
    interface. It cannot enhance people's ability(such as imagination and
    creativity)neither work nor entertainment.

    Squeak reach those goals to some extent, but it wasn't endowed with
    humanized interface to ordinary users,it was rather suited to the GUI
    developer as IDE.

    Here is introduction of ZUI:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zooming_user_interface

    In order for you to understand the featuers that I have mentioned,
    here is my mockup by Flash:
    http://ixdea.googlegroups.com/web/sl...24Gn1TIBNSTd44
    http://ixdea.googlegroups.com/web/la...jAZbZnGoiqIDSQ

    Maybe the title is misleading, anyway, here is UserInterface that I
    described.

  14. Re: Can we make Linux Desktop Enviroment beyond the Desktop Metaphor?

    On 1月24日, 下午4时18分, Benjamin wrote:
    > On 1月20日, 下午5时07分, George Peter Staplin
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > wrote:
    > > Benjamin wrote:
    > > > Can we make Linux Desktop Enviroment beyond the Desktop Metaphor?
    > > > Should Linux Desktop Enviroment (e.g.KDE,Gnome,CDE)look like Microsoft
    > > > Windows or Mac OSX ?

    >
    > > > I imagine Linux Desktop Enviroment to have some features different
    > > > from current OS desktop, I think Linux can do better in Desktop OS
    > > > field.

    >
    > > > mockup :
    > > >http://groups.google.com/group/ixdea...%20Desktop.png

    >
    > > > Main Features:

    >
    > > > 1, Everything on the desktop is applet, also is document and device,
    > > > but is not application;
    > > > 2, As everything starts from the root directory in Linux, everything
    > > > starts from the desktop. In other words,"desktop" is root directory,
    > > > all your data stored here;
    > > > 3, Usually, other components of the environment, including the
    > > > removable disk or local device, can be reached from the desktop
    > > > directly;
    > > > 4, Never need to open or close a window, the applets run on desktop
    > > > starts, documents always opened on the desktop;
    > > > 5, Muti-touch and Zoomable desktop. Zooming infinitely by your
    > > > finger,so you have an infinite flat surface/desktop;
    > > > 6, Without Windows-like concept on this desktop, such as Startmenu,
    > > > Taskbar, system tray ,My Computer, Shortcut,Folder,etc.
    > > > 7, Use "object" metaphor replace "file/icon"metaphor;
    > > > 8, While you're writting in a text-editor(applet), the data saved
    > > > automatically; user wouldn't asked to save it with a filename, but
    > > > they can tag it with any words;
    > > > 9, Just drag and drop to arrange/organize your document and applet on
    > > > desktop by pile and stack;
    > > > 10, The applets or documents show its thumbnail while it minimized.
    > > > .....

    >
    > > > Do you have any suggestion?

    >
    > > It sounds almost like Squeak (a Smalltalk implementation) or Microsoft's
    > > Bob. You might want to look into Squeak. Microsoft's Bob was supposed
    > > to take over the world, but by and large failed. There have also been
    > > other implementations of similar things. I think Smalltalk was really
    > > where this set of ideas started, so you should investigate Squeak.

    >
    > > Personally, I'm not impressed by most ZUI anymore.

    >
    > > I think that having a unified desktop where most things are built from
    > > the same basic primitives in a dynamic language is a good thing. The
    > > problem is that most current applications aren't built using such a
    > > layer. So for example in my window system that I've been developing the
    > > last 3 years I've had to rely on some older tools, and I've been
    > > developing an X server that enables running some X apps. Unfortunately
    > > I'm about ready to can the whole project, and start over, and your
    > > message reminds me of what I'm missing to some extent.

    >
    > > I just took a basic framebuffer, constructed a tree of windows in C (the
    > > COOP language actually, but it generates C), and each window struct has
    > > 2 buffers. One is a shared memory buffer, that is shared with each
    > > application process via mmap and a specific file system path for each
    > > window, and the other is the buffer to composite with the framebuffer.
    > > I also added window rotation. So everytime the client sends a request
    > > over a socket to update the application's display, the bytes get copied,
    > > rotated if needed, and composited. Most rendering occurs in the
    > > application, such as text rendering, or line drawing. The window system
    > > doesn't even have such primitives built in.

    >
    > > I suppose my disappointment is at an architectural level. I originally
    > > had mmap shared window buffers for every window in the tree, and then I
    > > came to realize after building a grid geometry manager, that it was too
    > > slow, with shared memory and the resizing of subwindows. So now each
    > > client toplevel gets a single shared memory buffer, and subwindows are
    > > composited and allocated with malloc.

    >
    > > George

    >
    > Microsoft's Bob have proven poor metaphor as desktop, no because its
    > interface, but because the limitations of its metaphor behind the
    > interface. It cannot enhance people's ability(such as imagination and
    > creativity)neither work nor entertainment.
    >
    > Squeak reach those goals to some extent, but it wasn't endowed with
    > humanized interface to ordinary users,it was rather suited to the GUI
    > developer as IDE.
    >
    > Here is introduction of ZUI:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zooming_user_interface
    >
    > In order for you to understand the featuers that I have mentioned,
    > here is my mockup by Flash:http://ixdea.googlegroups.com/web/sl...apps.swf?gda=q...
    >
    > Maybe the title is misleading, anyway, here is UserInterface that I
    > described.- 隐藏被引用文字 -
    >
    > - 显示引用的文字 -


    Update feature : "floating'n'docking the object on your desktop"

    http://bice0326.googlepages.com/floatingndocking.swf
    (mockup by flash)

    You can lock the position of object (e.g. clock) on desktop ,when you
    "sliding/moving" the desktop,
    the position of object would not to be changed , it seems to float
    above the desktop.

+ Reply to Thread