To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I mean where applications are treated as objects, and not as modes (as I went into in great depth in an earlier comment). Thom did a brief overview here http://osnews.com/story.php/18829/Common-Usability-Terms-pt.-I-Spat...
For something more in depth, there is an article John Siracusa did a few years ago that everyone points to as soon as the spatial metaphor comes up http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/finder.ars
I don't think that spatial design is the be all and end all (I REALLY like what Jef Raskin was talking about in The Humane Interface before he died), but I do think that the spatial metaphor is still a more elegant solution then what is the norm today.
ok, ok, i guess i was jumping the gun there.
thing is that if your used to windows and go to mac you run into just as many gotchas as when you go from mac to windows.
different folks, different strokes. if just we could agree on file types and let people share data effortlessly then one could use whatever one wanted. but right now thats needlessly segregated thanks to attempted lock-ins, leading to people "having" to use os whatever to work with specific kinds of data.
edit:
iirc, later versions of office have gone away from the window in window (mdi?) interface and over to one window, one file.
and you can set the explorer to open each folder in its own window, and if you try to open a folder a second time, it will just highlight the existing window.
konqueror under kde have the same option. in gnome i dont know.
still, beyond that i guess its every app for it self.
recent versions of adobe acrobat have gotten a weird behavior. it mixes mdi and spatial in the most confusing way. yes there are one button on the taskbar pr opened file. but if you dont watch out you can close them all by closing one of them...
and didnt web browsers go with tabs because people got fed up with IE having a button pr open page?
some times spatial works, sometimes it dont apparently...
Edited 2007-11-19 05:32 UTC





Member since:
2006-02-05
I didn't call anyone stupid, I was talking about how it feels to work in the windows style modal paradigm vs the mac classic spatial paradigm. It has nothing to do with intelligence of the users, and everything to do with the philosophy behind the design descisions.
but gnome and kde use a lot of windows elements as that is what most potential users are used to.
I have yet to run across a really spatial WM in linux. There isn't anything that is even equivilent to OSX, and OSX is a far cry from Mac Classic in this regard. Of course, I could be wrong.
And really, I'm not trying to be insulting or anything. Mac Classic had this approach, BeOS had it, OSX has it to a degree, and even though I have never used NeXT, from what I have read it looks like it had it.
some of those wm's on *nix seems interesting in that regard.
twm and ratpoison leap to mind.
That is again, a completely different way of approaching things. I was talking about the mac and the windows approach, and how the taskbar and the dock address the space of task switching differently.