Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 18th Nov 2007 15:46 UTC
Graphics, User Interfaces This is the sixth article in a series on common usability and graphical user interface related terms [part I | part II | part III | part IV | part V]. On the internet, and especially in forum discussions like we all have here on OSNews, it is almost certain that in any given discussion, someone will most likely bring up usability and GUI related terms - things like spatial memory, widgets, consistency, Fitts' Law, and more. The aim of this series is to explain these terms, learn something about their origins, and finally rate their importance in the field of usability and (graphical) user interface design. In part VI, we focus on the dock.
Thread beginning with comment 285080
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
tupp
Member since:
2006-11-12

I was talking about how it feels to work in the windows style modal paradigm vs the mac classic spatial paradigm.

I have yet to run across a really spatial WM in linux.


What do you mean by "spatial?"

Reply Parent Score: 1

google_ninja Member since:
2006-02-05

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.

Reply Parent Score: 3

tupp Member since:
2006-11-12

I see. You mean "spatial" in the limited, Mac-centric "spatial memory" sense.

Well, I am glad that Thom's article on spatial memory was mercifully shorter than the John Siracusa article (on a subject that can probably be covered in a few sentences). However, I disagree with Siracusa's point that path models are slower and less efficient than spatial models, but that contention is grounds for a whole other discussion.

Spatial memory comes under the broader usability topic of conditioning, and both topics are integral to most design and art disciplines (industrial design, interior design, graphics design, photographic design, gui design, etc). Conditioning also applies to many activities and processes and to certain non-spatial mental models (such as command-line command-option-argument protocol). It doesn't take a genius to realize that keeping things in their expected place, time and order can make a task more speedy and efficient.

I think you will find that many Linux WMs/Desktops do a good job of maintaining spatial conditions (and smart placement), and the same probably applies to most Windows versions.

I haven't noticed anything "spatially special" in OSX. Perhaps you could be a little more specific on what you mean by objects and modes, because, as I mentioned in an earlier post, I can't discern the models you describe, and I use all three OSs.

Edited 2007-11-19 06:20

Reply Parent Score: 2