Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 20th Jun 2016 22:58 UTC
Hardware, Embedded Systems

Speaking of the Xerox Alto - let's move on a few years and talk about the Xerox Star, its successor and, like the Alto, one of the most influential computers ever made. There's this great demo up on YouTube, where some of its creators walk you through the basics of using the Xerox Star, from basic filing, down to the included virtual keyboard which could display any keyboard layout you wanted - including things like Japanese or a math panel.

I love watching videos of the Xerox Star in action, because it shows you just how little the basic concepts of the graphical user interfaces we use every day - OS X/Windows or iOS/Android or whatever - have changed since the '70s, when Xerox invented all the basic parts of it. Of course, it has been refined over the decades, but the basic structure and most important elements have changed little.

Like still relying on shoehorning a timesharing punchcard mainframe operating system onto a phone, we still rely on the same old Xerox concepts of icons and windows and dialogs on our phones as well. Hardware has progressed at an incredibly pace - we have watches tons more powerful than 100 Xerox Stars combined - but software, including UI, has not kept up.

We should have better by now.

Permalink for comment 630556
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Comment by ddc_
by tanishaj on Tue 21st Jun 2016 00:08 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by ddc_"
tanishaj
Member since:
2010-12-22

You can't expect software to become better if it is designed for less prepared users.


This statement seems backwards to me. I would expect software to improve (especially if we are specifically talking about interfaces and user experience) precisely BECAUSE it is designed for less prepared users.

If I am creating software for a user that has prepared himself through long hours of study and practice to understand and program the system, I can provide a very minimal set of services and still be useful. If I am creating software for somebody that is only willing to accept a few hours or a few minutes of training (or even none at all) then I am going to have to do a lot more work building software that takes on more responsibility for being useful to such a user. The more power I want to expose to unsophisticated users, the better my software needs to be.

Reply Parent Score: 2