
Desktop Neo – rethinking the desktop interface for productivity - iBelieve
https://desktopneo.com/
======
pavpanchekha
This is a design exercise, not a product. And as a design exercise, I think it
really nicely demonstrates the author's ability to think of radically new
designs, even if I'm not convinced by many of them.

In grad school, my advisor told me: I can't teach you to have interesting
ideas, I can only teach you which ones to pursue. It's ok to have lots of bad
ideas, because that's the first step to having a few good ones. As for the
author, I am impressed.

~~~
progval
While the design is new and cool, I wouldn't call "radically new". It puts
together designs that exist in different contexts.

Panels are already used by tiling WM (and I believe recent versions of Android
as well). Scrolling though apps with a three-finger swipe already exists too
(I have an extension for Firefox for Android that does this to change tabs,
it's a nice feature)

Sorting documents by hashtag was done by gmail since its beginning

~~~
dubcanada
Would you call the ipad and iphone "radically new" they are just existing
products combined.

~~~
wuliwong
I think you are setting up a bit of a straw man argument. The parent comment
said "existing designs." While you apparently refuting their statement, you
are saying something different by jumping to "existing products." Products and
designs are not the same thing.

~~~
dubcanada
They are both designs lol, an ipod, iphone, toaster what ever is a design. It
is then changed from a design into a physical product. It's the exact same
thing as a UX design of a OS, you can turn it into a OS. It's just not fully
done yet.

Come on now.

------
smacktoward
The bit about replacing folder hierarchies with tags and search reminds me of
some ideas that are actually pretty old now. Back in the '80s and '90s, there
was a wave of interest in replacing the traditional filesystem with a
relational database, for most of the same reasons as outlined here (we can
store more files than we can meaningfully organize, hierarchical organization
doesn't really fit lots of use cases, searching is easier than clicking up and
down a hierarchy, etc.).

This led to a bunch of different products and almost-products, like Apple's
"Soups" for the Newton (see
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soup_(Apple)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soup_\(Apple\)))
and Microsoft's WinFS (see
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WinFS](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WinFS)),
and the original file system for BeOS (see
[https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2008/03/past-present-
future-...](https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2008/03/past-present-future-file-
systems/7/)).

None of these ever really took off, though. Mostly this was because they ran
into unsolvable performance problems. Hardware has come a long way since the
mid-'90s, though, so it'd be interesting to see if those ideas that were
impractical then are practical today.

~~~
horsawlarway
I think those ideas don't take off because tags don't really solve the problem
adequately for normal people.

A folder structure is a self-contained map that will help guide me to the
correct document. Each step has hints about where I can go next (sub-directory
names), starting from most broad going to most specific. It takes advantage of
both locality (similar topics are usually next to each other) and logical,
hierarchical grouping.

A tag is a random thought or property stuck onto a file that I now have to
remember every time I want to find that file again. I have no way to specify
that tags may have a useful hierarchy of other similar but distinct items
without manually coming up with a tagging system to give me that. Folders do
it by default.

Basically - Folders are a good enough default. Tags might be better in some
cases, but you have to be excruciatingly disciplined about using it and I find
most people just end up recreating a structure that looks suspiciously like
folders.

~~~
yoodenvranx
I want to have both options because traditional folders and a tag based file
system solve different problems.

Let's say I go on vacation with my dog and make pictures. After I am home
again I want to sort the pictures but then I have a problem: the pictures in
which you can see my dog in belong into the '2019 vacation to Bavaria'
collection _and_ also in the 'Best pictures of my dog' collection.

I'd love to have some sort of universal file-database where I can store all my
"final" images and then create collections by adding tags.

~~~
blunte
In macOS (for some number of years now) you store files in a standard folder
hierarchy, and you can add tags to files. With or without tags, you can use
Spotlight (cmd-space) to quickly find files.

~~~
yoodenvranx
Yes, I know that there are approaches which use the normal file system.

But what I want is different:

I want a universial "DB for binary files" where I can store binary data and
all its metadata.

Then I can use this DB to build a app for picture galleries, music collections
and tons of other things.

This DB should also support:

* automatic checksumming so that I can detect data corruption

* Some sort of version history so that I can store multiple versions of a file

* there could be built-in replication which I can use to see the same data (or parts of it) on all my devices

~~~
ViViDboarder
Is this common enough a use case that it ought to be a file system feature?

Plenty of applications do just this today by using the file system plus an
index in SQLite. Is that method insufficient?

~~~
sfopdxnonstop
You asked: "Is this common enough a use case?"

Then you answered your own question: "Plenty of applications do just this
today".

So yes, it is a common enough case that it could/should be built into the OS.

~~~
theamk
Well, OS could certainly offer some support, like file change detection, but
the main indexing is often too application specific.

Photo albums wants to do face recognition. Music player wants BPM detection.
Should those be done by OS? I do not think so.

------
jorams
This is interesting, though a lot of the claims are highly debatable, but one
really stood out to me:

> the tasks you do are more complex. That’s where voice input shines.

I don't know how far into the future this is supposed to be implemented, but I
still have yet to find a form of voice input that's remotely accurate enough
for anything "more complex". Current voice input seems to rely heavily on the
scope for commands being limited, and even then it breaks down often with
names and such.

~~~
sbuttgereit
I can only imagine the joy of an open office floor plan where employees also
depend on a voice based interface for their computers.

~~~
bdcravens
To say nothing of accessibility.

~~~
tyre
This ad ran last night during The Finals and really hit home how audio can
improve accessibility

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqoXFCCTfm4&feature=youtu.be](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqoXFCCTfm4&feature=youtu.be)

------
crazygringo
This is a fun design exercise, but a couple things really _do_ stand out to me
as useful.

First, panels instead of windows -- a thousand times yes, please. Overlapping
windows doesn't provide any benefit. Making everything either full-screen or
splitting the screen is so much better. There's a reason so much software has
moved to tabs and side panels instead of separate windows within the app.

Second:

> _The desktop metaphor as the basis of computer interfaces is inefficient and
> outdated. Today, most of our data exists outsides of files and folders. The
> desktop worked great to get us started 40 years ago, but it was never built
> for the complexity and amount of work today._

I don't like the author's particular solution... but yes the idea of an actual
"desktop" folder seems silly and antiquated now.

 _And_ it's about time that cloud content (whether file-based like Google
Drive or content-based like Google Photos) got treated as a first-class
citizen in the OS.

If the iOS Files app lets me treat my Google Drive as just another folder...
why doesn't Finder? Why do I have to install third-party software for that?

~~~
cesarb
> Overlapping windows doesn't provide any benefit.

Just yesterday, I overlapped a tiny terminal window (resized to be very small
and set to "always on top") showing the current disk space ("watch df") over
the corner of a larger window which was doing a file transfer. While I agree
that non-overlapping panels are better most of the time, sometimes overlapping
can be useful.

> treat my Google Drive as just another folder

That illusion would fail quickly as soon as your network connection dropped.
Non-local folders have fundamental differences to local folders and should be
treated differently. (Local folders can be assumed to always be present unless
manually removed, be fast, and unmetered; non-local folders can disappear
and/or change at any time, can be slow and/or vary in speed, and might have a
per-megabyte cost.)

~~~
falcolas
> Overlapping windows doesn't provide any benefit.

Another example: Overlapping my work windows over the Slack window. The red
"you have new mention" indicator is a poor indicator for determining the
importance of the mention; being able to see the channel it occurs in at a
glance is very nice for prioritization. There's no real need to see the whole
slack window.

~~~
mhink
I think this is one application of the “minimized pane” example the article
showed: applications still have a way to show more data than just an
indicator.

Alternatively, you could let panes be resized smaller than their “native
width”, and get the same effect as overlapping.

------
peteyPete
Based on the previous post of this in 2016, this is a university student's
portfolio piece while hoping to find an internship. It's not a product, just a
concept.

I'd say amazing job in terms of design and concept. That being said, if this
were an actual product, it wouldn't count me as a user. It looks cool, nice,
etc. It may appeal to a specific type of user who's fine with relinquishing
control over how things are done on their computer, but as a dev, if I chose
to change things about my work flow, I want additive changes to my existing
flow. Not a full end to end replacement. Lots of things already exist which
brings my current flow close to this. This doesn't make multitasking easier
for me, it just drops a fat anchor on my normal flow. 3 finger swipe up, cmd-
tab, cmd-` to switch between apps, tabs.. Divvy to setup zones in a grid to
global shortcuts so you can place windows where ever you want in a key stroke.
All those things are natural and happen without me thinking about it. I can
manage 30 open apps and 100 tabs in multiple browser windows if I wish and its
not slow or confusing.

I very much liked the fact that it knows where you're looking and makes many
actions instantaneous, like looking at a link and clicking or pressing a key
or whatever it was. That's cool, and if it works well and can be integrated
everywhere it makes sense, I think its a great shortcut, saves you having to
mouse around. But thats additive to an existing flow. Not replacing the entire
thing.

The built in voice assistant does cool things too and I can see many use cases
for that too. Not that it can't already be done though. Things like, make a
directory called X, open this app, build project, run automation, or run smoke
tests on X project, etc...

Still great work though. As a concept it appears usable and neat. Just think
its too far a departure from regular work flows to work for most people.

------
neves
This is the place Linux could shine. High productivity desktops. Windows and
Apple computers are mass production items. Even semi-illiterate people must be
able to use it. We need a desktop for highly skilled technical workers. One we
that allows us to quickly switch context, to have a lot of info in the screen,
one that works well with very big screens. A jet pilot has a specialized
interface, why not programmers could have one?

Hey, I always wanted a desktop that tracks my gaze!!!

~~~
nickjj
It's already there on Linux with tiled window managers. You can quickly switch
between different contexts with work spaces, almost no pixels are wasted and
it scales beautifully with high resolution screens.

~~~
olejorgenb
Our gnome-shell plugin
[https://github.com/paperwm/PaperWM](https://github.com/paperwm/PaperWM)
actually implements the tiling aspect of this mockup. Although we allow
partially visible windows and mixing tiled and floating windows.

~~~
auraham
This project seems interesting. I usually use a 4x4 grid on i3. I wonder if
your pluggin can handle this kind of grid. From the pictures, it seems like
new windows are arranged vertically only, as columns.

~~~
olejorgenb
Yes, new windows is added as columns, but it's possible to manually tile two
(or more) columns into rows after.

Adding some sort of toggle that opens new windows as a new row is certainly
possible. Interesting idea to open in new row if the current column only has X
windows and new column otherwise :)

This rule could also be window type specific. Eg. if the current window is a
browser open in new column. If its a terminal, new row.

EDIT: Vertical tiling screenshot:
[https://imgur.com/g7CRfgR](https://imgur.com/g7CRfgR)

------
Phenix88be
I don't know who they are targeting with this concept, but, as a developer, a
lot of thing are wrong :

\- Anything that require the mouse make me slower.

\- Trackpad gesture require a ... trackpad, and trackpad are worst than a
mouse.

\- Speaking of the trackpad, anyone can put 6 fingers on it ? look painfull to
me.

\- Animation are nice, but useless, they make the computer slower and takes
time to complete.

To me, this look anything but productive.

~~~
rco8786
> Trackpad gesture require a ... trackpad, and trackpad are worst than a
> mouse.

Interesting, as an engineer I prefer my trackpad 100x over a normal
mouse...almost solely because of the gesture abilities.

Agreed on the rest of your points.

~~~
llao
Honest curiosity: How many gestures do you _regularly_ use? How many buttons
does your mouse have?

~~~
fwip
Not the person you're asking, but on my macbook I frequently use:

two-finger swipe right (go back) four-finger swipe up (overview) four-finger
swipe down (change between multiple windows of the same program) four-finger
swipe left-right (change virtual desktops) pinch to zoom in/out

The first four would be easy to bind to a mouse button, but the pinch zooming
is really handy.

~~~
sjy
I got sick of not having a pinch to zoom gesture on my Windows desktop, so I
bound Ctrl to a mouse button and hold it while using the scroll wheel. It's
pretty handy, I wish I could do it on all mice.

~~~
Jaruzel
In a lot of Windows applications, and in the mainstream browsers, holding down
the CTRL key and spinning the mousewheel gives you a zoom functionality. It's
built in by default.

------
joeblubaugh
This is nice and all, but it's mostly putting a "mac-looking" coat of paint on
the tiling window managers that we already have.

I _do_ like the left-side menu concept better than the "top menu".

It would have been nice to see more examples on a laptop-sized screen.

~~~
andrelaszlo
It's nice that people don't have to learn Haskell just to use a decent window
manager :D I get frustrated just watching others work - it seems like they
spend half their days looking for, resizing or moving windows around. Hope it
catches on.

Edit: Getting some downvotes and I realized I sound like an xmonad snob. I
really don't judge, I just think people deserve something more efficient. If
you like your window manager and workflow, then that's great! :)

~~~
zapzupnz
I appreciate a combination of the two approaches, tiles _and_ overlapping
windows, so that I don't feel limited by constraints imposed upon me _nor_
need to manage minutiae like this through endless configuration.

> I really don't judge, I just think people deserve something more efficient

I suppose that depends on your idea of efficiency. Mine is that I'm not
fighting the window manager, playing Tetris with all the other tiles, to get
things displayed how I want. I find that far less efficient that Mission
Control and App Exposé, though I'm as aware as you that others have their own
workflow.

------
nocman
I think this is a good example of how bad wording in an opening paragraph can
turn readers off. Here's what I took from that paragraph:

* destop computer interfaces haven't changed much in 30 years -- that is bad

* people use smartphones and tablets more than desktop computers -- because they are better

* desktop computers should work more like phones/tablets

I don't have a problem with conceptual designs, and I would encourage
exploration of different types of user interfaces (both on desktop and
mobile). However, after reading that first paragraph on the web site (and
watching the video), it was my perception that the author seems to believe the
above three points are absolute, and they show nothing that convinces me that
any of them are true (and in fact, some of what was shown had the opposite
effect).

IMHO a better approach would be to be less dismissive of "older" technology,
and rather simply state that you are exploring an alternative interface, and
explain specifically why you think it is better.

In other words, make your case for why your interface is better, then let the
reader decide whether they are convinced (rather than just stating that a
particular kind of interface is better as a matter of fact).

~~~
SmellyGeekBoy
Indeed. It was this line of thinking that got us Windows 8.

------
japanoise
>We now use smartphones and tablets most of the time, since they are much
easier to use. ... With people switching to mobile devices for mundane
tasks...

Who are these people and for what tasks? Afaict, except for email and
Facebook, the promised death of the PC is extremely overblown. In a
professional setting, even major phone addicts still use PCs or laptops.

------
tomxor
> Overlapping windows as an interface metaphor were invented over 40 years ago
> with the Xerox Star. Since then, the amount and complexity of how we use
> computers has increased dramatically. Windows are now inefficient and
> incompatible with modern productivity interfaces. For more, read my blog
> post "Window Management is Outdated".

Uuhm [1]:

> The first Xerox Star system (released in 1981) tiled application windows,
> but allowed dialogs and property windows to overlap.[1] Later, Xerox PARC
> also developed CEDAR[2] (released in 1982), the first windowing system using
> a tiled window manager.

Tiling window managers were first, and I think I prefer the less bloated
offerings already available compared to this.

What does this do for productivity that existing tiling managers do not? or is
this a mac/windows specific thing.

[edit]

Yeah this sounds horrible:

> Click and hold on the touchpad with one finger to open the context menu
> wherever you are looking. Then swipe to select an action.

How is this better than a right click context menu? it's not, it's a
physically slower event, and a UI that is less capable of adapting to it's
context due to geometric limitations just cos "CIRCLES". This is integrating
phone HID into desktops for the sake of it, this is unification at the cost of
productivity not for the benefit of productivity.

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiling_window_manager#History](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiling_window_manager#History)

------
egypturnash
"For more, read my blog post 'Window Management is Outdated'".

 _clicks on link to blog post_

Oh hey that blog post doesn't seem to exist. Nice job.

I think I'll stick to the existing windowed interface, thanks. It's designed
for a keyboard and a mouse. Which is what I have. Well actually a keyboard and
a Wacom tablet, I'm an artist.

Looking at his redesign of application menus and thinking about trying to make
that work for the vast array of menu items in Adobe Illustrator (my main art
tool) gives me the heebie-jeebies.

Also oh _god_ he wants to banish folders in favor of tags, too. Everyone who
has a sweeping reinvention of How The Desktop Works wants to do that and they
never really have an answer for how the end result would be different for
managing large projects made up of hundreds of files in nested folders, and
how saving something with seven tags that reproduce that sort of arrangement
isn't gonna be more hassle than just saving it into the appropriate folder.

And then he wants to make it work via gaze tracking and you know I think I'm
just done here.

------
gloflo
Previously in 2016:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10932378](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10932378)

------
GordonS
"Windows are now inefficient and incompatible with modern productivity
interfaces"

 _What?!_

I have to agree with some of the other comments here - this is change for the
sake of it, and the arguments against current-day desktop UIs seem weak at
best, comprising mainly of opinion stated as fact.

~~~
crazygringo
I think that quote is badly put, but still true.

Arbitrarily sizing all four edges of windows and having them overlap
(partially visible, partially hidden) is a waste of time.

Almost always, you either want to look at a window completely or not at all.
And you either want to look at 1 window, or maybe 2 or 3 or 4 and so have them
either full-screen or tiled.

You generally don't need them overlapping and don't need to show desktop space
behind them either.

Modern productivity interfaces are mostly all full-sized windows with _tabs_
and _sidebars_ now, not child windows and floating palettes like in 1995 or
2000. (Modal dialog boxes are still needed of course, but I don't think the
author means those.)

~~~
GordonS
Many people are using high-res monitors now, which invariably come with
software to allow quickly snapping windows to a portion of the screen,
creating a grid layout where there is no overlapping, and no desktop space
either.

This already exists, right now. And I'd say that solutions like the one I
describe are _better_ , because they are completely customisable, and I can
make windows full screen or minimise them as needed.

~~~
crazygringo
What do hi-res monitors have to do with anything...?

Of course there's been third-party software to do that forever.

But my Mac didn't come with it. It's so basic it should be integrated fully
into the OS.

------
SquareWheel
I think it's pretty cool. I see no reason why the current desktop paradigm -
as used to it as I am - is the pinnacle of efficiency.

It's not so different than a tiling window manager, but introduces some unique
input methods and a hybrid touch control system that I'd like to try before I
judge.

I also feel that voice can and will play a larger role in input in the coming
years. If it works well enough, it can be faster and easier for many.
Especially those with disabilities, or prone to RSI as many in the tech sector
are.

Tagging to replace folders isn't a new idea, and was introduces by Gmail a
decade ago. It works well. I do think that in the days of machine learning, a
system for automatically generating tags would make this process even more
fluid.

Is it perfect? Probably not. But I find these alternate interface projects
wonderful to play with. It takes imaginative and bold ideas to make them real,
and I applaud the author for that alone.

------
fredley
This is not software, this is a design concept, for anyone else who didn't
find that immediately obvious.

~~~
magnamerc
I kept looking for the download link..

------
ilmiont
This seems to be very much change for the sake of it.

"The traditional desktop computer is struggling to adapt the simple interfaces
of mobile devices while also keeping its focus on productivity."

No, no, it isn't. Desktop is far more productive than mobile ever will be or
can be.

"The desktop computer hasn’t changed much in the last 30 years. It’s still
built on windows, folders and mouse input. But we have changed. We now use
smartphones and tablets most of the time, since they are much easier to use."

No, they're not. The reason _why_ the desktop hasn't changed much in 30 years
is because _it works_.

It may not be the prettiest or the most modern or even the easiest for a new
computer user to navigate, but it works damned well for _getting work done._
That's why windows and mice are still around... they _just work_. This
project... doesn't look like it does that.

~~~
lioeters
> Desktop is far more productive than mobile ever will be or can be.

Hear, hear! The desktop computer (and the metephor of "desktop") works. People
have learned and adapted to be very productive with it.

I do not want a desktop computer with "the simple interfaces of mobile
devices". I don't want to remember three-finger gestures on a trackpad, and
certainly don't need voice-activated commands (it's faster and more accurate
to type).

Like you, I'd also argue against the statement that "we now use smartphones
and tablets most of the time", or that "they are much easier to use". This
completely depends on what the user is doing with the device.

For certain kinds of communication, application or media consumption, sure
mobile devices are easier to use. They're not that great for long-form writing
(email, articles, books, programs), or as a personal information management
system (file system, database).

All that said, the designs in this project are beautiful, and there are some
useful-looking interface ideas. I found this statement at the bottom:

"Neo was designed to inspire and provoke discussions about the future of
productive computing."

It has definitely succeeded in this goal.

~~~
farisjarrah
They really lost me at the whole 3 finger gesture thing. That's a very
unnattural thing to do when you are only ever using 1 finger at a time for 90%
of the interactions with the touchpad. Furthermore they have like 2 handed 3
finger gestures to do things like zoom in and out.... I feel like pinch to
zoom is a lot more effective and natural.

~~~
mhink
I completely disagree. I occasionally use 3-finger swipe to switch between
desktops on OS X and the "gentle brushing" motion actually feels more natural
than trying to "point and click" with one finger.

Now, to be perfectly fair, I also have CapsLock+Shift+H/L keymapped to do the
same thing, as well as two-finger swipe on my mouse. The point is, one doesn't
necessarily preclude the other.

~~~
nwalker85
Yeah I think this mindset is going to be prevalent with Windows users because
these kinds of gestures are not native, while Mac users are comfortable with
it since it's integrated in the OS.

~~~
kennywinker
It’s also a trackpad vs mouse thing. Three finger gestures work a lot better
with the kind of high quality trackpads that the majority of macs come with.

~~~
spatley
And that is the rub. On my macbook pro, which has what I consider to be a
significantly better trackpad, I three-swipe without even thinking about it.
but that comes from very tight hardware/software integration.

------
santafe
Please do not make my desktop as unusable as my phone. Thanks.

~~~
jasonvorhe
Yeah, because introducing new stuff always completely replaces the old stuff
and doing things the way we did x years ago because we're used to it is such a
great recipe for progress.

~~~
Dirlewanger
A desktop is not a mobile device. Design practices on one don't always
translate well to the other. Learning how to use the keyboard well (i.e. touch
typing) and learning one's OS's shortcuts allows one to be pretty damn
efficient with whatever they're doing on a desktop. I'd posit that any near-
term productivity gains are going to come from refining personal habits (e.g.
minimizing external distractions and actually doing work).

~~~
neop1x
No need for keyboard nor mouse anymore. You can tap on the screen with multi-
finger gestures instead and write code by using speech-to-text. (jk)

------
52-6F-62
Just personally speaking, I find macOS already has a version of many of these
features implemented (using their touchpad/gestures) in a more polished
way—and I retain the mutability of the underlying system. It also has tagging,
and the new 'stacks' on the desktop add another level of categorization.

I can even full screen any application and line them up as workspaces and
navigate between them in a "carousel"-like fashion by swiping with four
fingers.

------
Aelius
I was interested until I saw the gestures.

I don't have a left hand, I don't have six fingers, guess I'll stick with my
mouse.

I'm sure this could be adapted for one-hand use, but- and maybe I'm slightly
biased, but I think even if I still had two hands I'd prefer interfaces that
don't require me to use both to do simple actions.

~~~
Jaruzel
In the modern design world, there are a lot of assumptions that everyone is
able-bodied, and it's getting worse.

Whereas, I _am_ able bodied, I'm also left-handed, which is annoying on a
daily basis. Ignoring all the real-world issues, touch interfaces are
optimised for right-handers. A 'flick' gesture for a right hand, is a 'push'
gesture for a left hand, the amount of times a touch screen or touch-pad based
OS mis-interprets my badly-done 'flicks' for 'push' and the screen scrolls
instead of going back or forward. There are endless issues just like this, all
because my finger-profile is mirrored compared to right-handers.

If Google enforce the 'pill' navigation on newer Android versions (right now
it's an option), I'm going to have to seriously consider switching to iOS, as
the 'pill' depends on right-handed 'flicks' to the left to 'Go Back'. Which
for left-handers is a 'push' action, and won't be properly recognised.

~~~
Aelius
Yeah, right now my biggest challenge is VR. I have been able to work around
everything else, but VR is increasingly becoming the domain of those with 10
fingers and two wrists. I can play beatsaper by taping the controller to my
arm, but the scoring system punishes me for not having a wrist. /sigh

Re: pill navigation- I find the navigation bar to be an outdated concept and I
don't know why we even still have it at all. I use an app called "edge
gestures" to navigate with swipes, and I disabe the system navigation bar. I
suggest you try that.

------
jedberg
Six finger gestures feel like a huge step backwards to me. It's bad enough I
have to move _one_ hand off the keyboard, but now I have to move _both_ hands?
Clearly this was designed by someone who exclusivly uses a laptop with a
trackpad in the middle.

------
TheRealPomax
What are these tasks that people "switch to mobile devices for" while using
their desktop? When I'm working on a desktop, there is literally nothing a
mobile device does faster, or more conveniently O_o

------
mariusmg
Some productivity tips from me :

\- get a ultrawide monitor

\- learn some keyboard shortcuts

\- profit

~~~
simlevesque
\- use a tiling window manager (i3 or sway)

------
robto
This actually seems like it would be pretty good on something like the Librem
5! I like the idea of a tiling-esque window manager with this level of
flexibility, especially on a phone. The
launcher/sidebar/fitting/pinning/minimization features seem like an
improvement over existing touch interfaces, especially on linux.

I don't think I would abandon my i3 setup for something like this for work,
but I could see myself happily using something like this in a more casual
setting. I hope that some of these ideas see the light of day with an actual
implementation.

~~~
olejorgenb
Our gnome-shell plugin
[https://github.com/paperwm/PaperWM](https://github.com/paperwm/PaperWM)
implements a similar tiling mechanism. Although we allow mixing tiled and
floating windows.

Things like "minimize" and "pin" are on the road map.

------
uhhhhhhh
Moving to gestures on a desktop is a productivity nightmare.

There is certainly room for improvement, I like the panels window management,
with very large/super wide monitors third party solutions are often used to
provide similar functionality.

Tagging/multi-patch hierarchies over folders could be really really useful,
but potentially more of a nightmare if not done really well.

The lack of leveraging keyboard commands is the biggest failure here. Its
basically designing a mobile interface for a desktop, ignoring the actual
usefulness and reality of desktop interfaces having functional keyboards and
mice.

------
pavlov
Six-finger gestures on a desktop...? How does that work in practice? Do you
need a giant touchpad?

~~~
hobofan
Have you seen current gen Macbooks? Their touchpads are huge.

~~~
pavlov
Sure. It just seems like an odd emphasis for a system that's equally likely to
be used with a mouse.

------
tambourine_man
I may change my mind in a decade or so, but I don’t understand the appeal of
voice interfaces.

I love silence and hate screaming. If there’s something that I want to listen
to is good music, not my own voice or synthesized answers.

If you think you hate the clicking of your colleague’s mechanical keyboard,
imagine how an office would sound in a voice driven computing world.

Besides, it seems a lot more tiresome to speak for extended periods than to
just type. I’d probably need a bottle of water every hour.

------
lisnake
Gnome Shell with PaperWM extension looks a lot like this. I used to use
PaperWM and enjoyed it a lot. They have some interesting ideas

------
v-yadli
The "Alan Kay" references in the video is a good cue of what's on the author's
mind -- I guess the goal is to create an environment for contents, not
something like a general-purpose desktop.

Quite ambitious I'd say! But I would also suggest that this goal (if I guess
it right) could be better explained than just claiming this to be a "desktop
reimagined", considering that a commodity desktop has neither a trackpad or
eye-tracking device.

The discussion here has already made it clear -- hashtags for file
organization is anything but new. It can be even simulated with a filesystem
pretty easily. Just post everything into a big content folder, and then create
a folder for each tag, then `ln -s`.

It'd be more awesome if a miner extracts semantic tags and metadata from the
files. Not a new idea either, there were google desktop, gnome-tracker etc.
macOS spotlight seems to be the most popular descendant these days. Microsoft
is making another push with Cortana/MS Graph/Windows Search or whatever they
call it.

The relationship between the contents is also an interesting aspect. Hashtags
just throw things into hash buckets but do not help to relate in a broader
sense. Even wiki links/hyperlinks are more effective. Project Xanadu also has
interesting ideas that a reference link addresses by content so that you can
reference a portion of the source (without the source defining them, unlike
html anchors).

But again, this was the vision of the pioneers, but did not take off smoothly.
IMHO partly because this idea is too big and involves a lot of smaller (yet
still challenging) pieces (natural language understanding, resource
description, app interop, and also, including the UX problem that the op is
trying to solve) and none of the previous trials have both the depth and
breadth to cover enough aspect of a user's everyday routine with a desktop
environment.

~~~
fwip
> could be better explained than just claiming this to be a "desktop
> reimagined", considering that a commodity desktop has neither a trackpad or
> eye-tracking device.

s/desktop/laptop/ and you're golden.

~~~
v-yadli
Not a deal breaker though I think. We can simply bind the menus to some key
chords/combos.

------
iamleppert
I enjoy dragging my windows around, resizing them and arranging them in
arbitrarily complex ways. I don’t like being constrained to work in a way that
someone else came up with. I even like the act of dragging windows and such,
I’ll even do it when I’m thinking as something to play with and it makes me
feel more connected to my work.

------
olejorgenb
The tiling mechanics[1] looks very similar to our gnome-shell plugin:
[https://github.com/paperwm/PaperWM](https://github.com/paperwm/PaperWM) (we
also allow vertical tiling and mixing floating windows)

To my knowledge there's no any other tiling window manager that implements
this mechanic(?) Ie. traditional tiling WMs force all windows in a workspace
to fit within the monitor.

This mockup (and paperwm) organize the windows in a non-overlapping strip that
is allowed to extend beyond the left and right monitor edges. This allows for
a nice spatial map.

Say my monitor has room for two windows but I need to use 3 windows. With a
tiled strip this workflow is quite nice: (| indicates the monitor edges, AA
window content of window A, etc. ^ marks the active window)

    
    
        C|AAB|
          ^^
         <switch to prev window>
         |CAA|B
          ^
    

A tabbed tiling achieve something similar: eg. put A and C in a tabbed frame,
but then it's not simple to view A and C at the same time.

It's also possible to define more specialized operations: When one window is
primarily used for input and two mostly for viewing (eg. editor,
documentation, code-artifact) I use the following setup:

    
    
       |AAB|C
        ^^
       <swap right neighbours>
       |AAC|B
        ^^
    

A workspace grid (a couple windows per workspace) also gives a spatial map,
but does not allow to look at windows from different workspace at the same
time.

In addition we have a floating layer that can easily be toggled. Useful for
windows I need access to from a large number of places (across workspaces,
etc.)

We also implement touch-pad gestures to switch workspace and scroll the tiling
left/right (only on wayland)

[1] [https://desktopneo.com/#panels](https://desktopneo.com/#panels)

------
jstewartmobile
The dimensionality on these things is so high. The only way to tell if this
idea is any good or not is to make it and use it for a while.

Linking out to a bunch of other people's opinions and tossing-in some Alan Kay
quotes doesn't add much. IETF also designs on-paper instead of in-code, and it
is always a hot mess.

------
OptionX
This "project" isn't even vaporware, its bellow that. I don't thinks there's
even a word for it. And even in concept its seems, to be nice, lackluster. Its
a smorgasbord of random concept from mobile, things already available in
desktop os (panels? snap to edge?) and frankly absurd thoughts like organizing
files by tags or voice/eye tracking based interfaces at this point in
technology. There's a reason people with large motor disabilities still use
those stupid rods versus eye tracking or voice recognition. Based on the
projects from the author on the page it seems like hes run-of-the-mill idea
man who jots down whatever brain blast he has before bed and spends the rest
of the 99.9% of the time in the project designing the website instead of
thinking the idea trough.

------
ganonm
I feel like the best desktop interface I have used is Ubuntu's workspace
implementation. Typically you have one app, e.g. your browser, per workspace
and seamlessly transition between them using ctrl + alt + arrows. The
animation is very snappy and doesn't get in your way.

The workspaces are laid out in a grid (e.g. 4x4) so you naturally adopt a
convention for where you place applications. For me, I have browsers and
desktop apps along the bottom, terminals and IDEs along 2nd row and then GVim
instances in the remaining top two rows. I can almost instantaneously switch
between any window I like.

I like this setup so much that when I was using MacOS for a brief period, I
installed TotalSpaces2 which emulates Ubuntu style workspaces.

------
Ajedi32
Looks really cool. I especially like the ideas around eye tracking and gesture
input.

There are some things that might not work out as well as the author is
envisioning, but that's what usability testing is for. I'd love to give this a
try if it ever became a thing.

------
kamfc
Kind of like QWERTY vs DVORAK keyboard. Qwerty just works; but technically,
Dvorak IS faster. The design presented is definitely a well-thought mash up of
what I've come across through multiple projects with creative and cutting-edge
UI/UX.

------
tarikjn
There is a lot going on, and it definitely feels more like an experiment than
design informed by all the relevant human disciplines.

I am not sold on panels and snap in place. I would much prefer to see
something like a zooming user interface. Mess is a necessary step to go from
broad to clear thinking.

Also, trackpads are not necessarily ergonomic and may hurt your fingers in
prolonged use, though the sub-menus designed for swiping are interesting. The
gaze tracking is a really interesting idea, and I wonder if there are anything
out there that pushes this idea. Anything that can improve ergonomics is good
in my book, that's the most pressing pain point of modern user interfaces and
hardware.

------
liquidise
Experimenting with interfacing and desktop technologies is a massive,
thankless and risky job. Anyone who tackles it is a braver person than i am.

I've been using comps since the early 90s and as far as Desktop interfaces are
concerned, there have been 2: Full CLI and Windows/Mac/Gnone/Other Clone.
Touchscreen mobile has had a similarly homogeneous "evolution". Current OS
frontends are fiscally optimal, not operationally so. That is to say: as soon
as a company had a reasonably usable interface, everyone copied it instead of
opting to fundamentally rethink the landscape.

Hats off to hackers and designers taking on this challenge.

~~~
anthk
Those were already invented with custom FVWM scripts in the 2000's. They are
nothing new in the end.

------
Longhanks
Replace the menu bar with one giant hamburger menu? Thanks, but no, thanks.

------
kbenson
How do you add security context easily using tags for file access? Tags seem
pretty broad, but I guess you could have an ACL that excludes access unless
you have access to the tag of that application name. But you also want to
ability to allow specific user/group access, so it seems like you'll have a
complex interaction of tags that exclude access and allow access.

I imagine there's some good prior work out there regarding this, but the
complete lack of any mention of how this affects the security of the system
isn't promising.

------
tlackemann
It's a nice idea but you don't need to reinvent an OS to achieve most of these
concepts. In fact, you can do almost all of these things today on Linux using
i3 + rofi.

~~~
auraham
Actually, i3 is one of the main reasons I use Ubuntu on my daily basis (the
other one is apt). As far as known there are other applications similiar to i3
for MacOS, but they are not as good as i3. So sad.

------
dustfinger
exwm [1] is the best change I have made to my desktop experience in terms of
improving productivity. For a tutorial on how to set exwm up see Uncle Dave
Emacs Tutorial 14 - EXWM aka managing X windows with emacs [2].

[1][https://github.com/ch11ng/exwm](https://github.com/ch11ng/exwm)

[2]
[https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Gk9-q8tXbMs](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Gk9-q8tXbMs)

------
pard68
So it is a tiling wm with eye tracking and a database for a file system? Seems
a lot less sexy when you put it that way. I also see this being very
frustrating to use!

------
izzydata
I don't like any aspect of this. It's good to revisit this problem every now
and then, but I'll stick to my keyboard and mouse with multiple monitors.

------
bitwize
All it needs is a "reloaded" or "evolved" and it'll be just like every other
design-wank "reimagining" of a desktop UI I've seen for the past 20 years.
Show me -- with data to back it up -- how this makes _me_ more productive and
I'll give it a closer look.

Best stick with "reloaded" for now, you've already got the word "Neo" in there
and "evolved" is Microsoft's thing.

------
Manfred
> The desktop computer hasn’t changed much in the last 30 years. It’s still
> built on windows, folders and mouse input. But we have changed. We now use
> smartphones and tablets most of the time, since they are much easier to use.

The wheel hasn't changed much in the last 1000 years. It's still built round,
with spokes or other structs. But we have changed. We now use planes and boats
most of the time, since they are much easier to use.

~~~
zcid
That's a horrible analogy. And factually wrong. We use boats because wheels
don't work very well on water. We use planes because they're faster. We don't
use either anywhere near as much as we use trucks, cars, rail, and
wheelbarrows.

------
Wowfunhappy
When I was a teenager, I used to really hate overlapping windows. If I'd known
what a tiling window manager was at that time, I probably would have switched.

As I've gotten older, I've come to appreciate overlapping windows much more. I
find them a really good use of screen real-estate—even on relatively large
screens where I have room to spare—and wouldn't ever want to lose that
functionality.

I'm not sure what changed.

~~~
egypturnash
Seeing other things around the edges of your main window reminds you they
exist. Reminds you there are other things you need to pay attention to as part
of whatever you're busy doing.

Maybe teenage you just never did anything complicated enough to _need_ that
ambient awareness of other parts of a project.

------
kryogen1c
My solution to the screenspace problem is, as many good things are, from
sysinternals.

[https://docs.microsoft.com/en-
us/sysinternals/downloads/desk...](https://docs.microsoft.com/en-
us/sysinternals/downloads/desktops)

Works with flux and most other apps. Webbrowsers dont work well, but that
doesn't bother me much

------
RHSeeger
> Panels use screen space more efficiently and are a more elegant way to
> multitask than normal windows.

This is flat out false for me. I generally have 3-6 windows open on my main
monitor that I am actively using. Some of them are only partially visible, but
still very useful. One takes up 75% of my screen, but I still want to see
information in the others while I'm using it.

------
anigbrowl
Looks like the happy marriage of DesqView and Markdown. I'm very here for
this, I am sick to the back teeth of having 16:9 monitor and a 4:3 desktop
paradigm. It grinds my gears that most of the games on my Playstation have
vastly superior UIs to my workstation. Add graph extraction as a core UI
function and this would be the best thing since Netscape.

------
TuringTest
Now, where have I seen this before...

[https://vimeo.com/6712657](https://vimeo.com/6712657)

------
bsmith
> We now use smartphones and tablets most of the time, since they are much
> easier to use.

* since we carry them around with us everywhere.

------
nautilus12
No desktop productivity OS with a linear mission control style desktop
switcher is going to be taken seriously by me. I have fought for total spaces
for so long just because the idea of a grid makes so much more sense than a
line of apps. Think about it, if you have 9 spaces do you really want to
scroll 4 spaces in or 1?

------
vondur
While I don't like the emphasis on gestures for navigation, the whole central
info panel bringing different info into once screen is nice. I also appreciate
the use of tagging for file info, but I can't' see it replacing file names
anytime soon. The Mac has file tagging and I rarely see people using it.

------
kn100
This looks a lot like an old concept piece called 10/GUI - I thought it was a
cool concept then which is what made me remember. Possible plagiarism? Link:
[https://youtu.be/tf03YBxCyGI](https://youtu.be/tf03YBxCyGI)

------
mises
Can any one explain how this is more than a tiling window manager? It seems
like i3 with touch-gestures and a fancy skin. I don't say that to disparaging,
and quite like tiling window managers, but don't see this as "rethinking"
anything.

~~~
olejorgenb
Traditional tiling WMs constrain all windows to be visible at the same time,
preferring reduced window sizes over window overlap.

This mockup also avoids window overlap, but allow window content to overflow
the left/right monitor edges.

The display becomes a viewport into a much wider tiling.

------
totaldude87
Looks like a combination of MacOS married with Windows and bedding with iPadOS
:) .. What about over populating data on one screen? How does it affect the
concentration levels?

Also, the website took just under a year to load its images, can you please
optimize that first :)

------
enriquto
Does everybody here use a "desktop" ?

My only visible interface is a borderless xterm on a plain background, and a
few full-screen apps an ALT-TAB away. My colleagues treat me like the last
member of an endangered species.

------
pcunite
_hastags instead of folders_

I understand that a designer might like that, but I don't.

------
m0zg
Productivity is a highly individual thing. By far the most productive
environment _for me_ is Vim. Which basically looks nothing whatsoever like
this.

You're not going to find some silver bullet which will work for everyone.

------
modzu
much of this seems to boil down to window management, which ive used to great
effect in blackbox for 20 years (pinning, rolling, always on top,
transparency, tiling, etc)

while i dont want a mobile ui on my desktop (do you sit at a keyboard and only
use your thumbs??), it is true MS and Apple have been content with their
duopoly and are not innovating in this space at all (for each useful feature
in either I can think of a regression).

The only reason I have windows over linux is gaming, and the only reason I
have mac (book) is the hardware. Neither reason to use either OS is the OS
itself!

------
king_magic
"...we have the opportunity to rethink the desktop computer with a focus on
getting professional work done."

This smacks of someone who is clueless about what real professional work
actually entails.

------
ashton314
I do most of my work in full-screen. (Usually a full-screen terminal.) I feel
like it helps me focus.

Have there been any studies showing correlation between windowing habits and
productivity?

------
sk221
This looks amazing. I would use this in a heart beat. More specifically, I
love:

\- Full screen for apps \- The way panels are sized on a screen

The rest seems like it could reasonably work.

------
eadmund
Cutting the screen up into panes, searching for things by name, tagging, even
the single-stop menu (in a way) — these things all remind me of Emacs!

------
jaredklewis
Reminds me a lot of 10/GUI [http://10gui.com/video/](http://10gui.com/video/)

------
baalimago
I envy those who's primary issue with productivity is making text in a
document bold.

Getting the stuff done is easy, finding motivation to do so is hard.

------
crote
It's an interesting combination of incredible ideas with unusable ones.

First, there's an interesting disconnect between app panes and what I actually
do in practice. This concept seems to organise windows as a stack. In
practice, I use them more tree-like. I already notice an annoyance with
Android's stack-like app switching, which basically seems to implement what is
proposed here, and I expect it to be worse on desktop. Furthermore, it seems
like a poor fit for larger monitors. On my 32" 4K monitor, I rarely want full-
height windows: having half-height is more than enough, which enables me to
easily have 4 or 6 windows open at the same time. With full-height panes, this
is not possible.

Second, app control, app menu, and context menu: great ideas, and have been
tried by various window managers.

But the real trouble is in the other ideas. The finder is nice at first glance
- it would be a great addition to file managers, and a large portion of it
already exists. But it proposes replacing them, which seems like a really bad
idea to me. It is unclear to me how this is supposed to work with large
amounts of content: how is this supposed to work with tens or hundreds of
thousands of files? Either you end up adding dozens of tags to every file, or
the tags devolve into a path-like structure, defeating the purpose.
Additionally, it seems lacking in discoverability. It might work to discover a
project folder, or a file within a project, but I'm doubtful that full-
filesystem would work. It does solve a real problem, though: I often try to
put files in a logical directory structure, but there's often more than one
possibility. I'd like pictures to be stored by date, but also accessible by
subject and context. The same goes for a lot of other documents. Being able to
tag a single file or a directory would be great, but it doesn't replace
folders. The same applies to email, bookmarks, contacts, books, and all the
other stuff mentioned.

Eye tracking is a bit similar. It might feel magical the few times it actually
works, but seems quite useless when we still need a mouse for precision stuff.
Furthermore, as I'm typing this, I'm reading text in another window as a
reference. Eye tracking would completely break that. Focus Mode sounds
incredibly distracting to me, Just Type is actually harmful, dismissing
notifications after a single look sounds great at first, but is actually
harmful for those notifications which require action at a point in the near
future. It's a fun concept, but it sounds more like a solution looking for a
problem. A mouse is always going to be vastly superior.

And voice control? Seriously? In my experience, every single voice interface
is absolutely horrible and incredibly distracting. Unless someone manages to
get Artificial General Intelligence working, it's probably going to remain
nothing more than a very nice gimmick, not a core concept of a productive UI.
Furthermore, how's this going to work in office spaces or libraries? Calls are
already bad enough, forcing everyone to talk non-stop to their computer is
going to make it impossible to actually do anything productive.

To conclude: it seems like all the good stuff has already been (mostly)
implemented!

~~~
angleofrepose
> It's an interesting combination of incredible ideas with unusable ones

haha yes, I agree.

> It is unclear to me how this is supposed to work with large amounts of
> content: how is this supposed to work with tens or hundreds of thousands of
> files? Either you end up adding dozens of tags to every file, or the tags
> devolve into a path-like structure, defeating the purpose.

This project, and other real tagging systems take this into account. It is not
defeating the purpose if you end up with something like a hierarchy for
certain things in your file system, and that is allowed for by nesting tags.
The best system is not one or the other, it is both. A quick example: A lot of
projects have a large number of files, but only a small number you care about
or are actively editing/reading whatever. Imagine a hierarchical style system
for containing the large mess of files, and a tagging system for having each
of the ones you care about at hand. This is of course possible with symlinks,
but this project attempts to allow for this kind of organization effortlessly.

> but seems quite useless when we still need a mouse for precision stuff.

again, why not both? I prefer to not use the mouse whenever I can, but I enjoy
using it when precision with a pointer becomes required.

> The same applies to email, bookmarks, contacts, books, and all the other
> stuff mentioned.

he does scare you off a bit in that demo video when it says: "and everything
is there!" I agree. There is work to be done with tagging systems, best
practices and getting mind share, but it is a system that has been in the
works for decades, and I believe will eventually become widespread standard
alongside the falling of walled gardens. But that's besides the point.

There are cool ideas here, and while they may have mostly been implemented I
look forward to the day where all these desktop innovations can be easily
brought together or disabled on an individual level with great ease. I think
there are orders of magnitude easier and more efficient solutions waiting for
us to put them together on modern hardware.

------
BonesJustice
_> No, no, it isn't. Desktop is far more productive than mobile ever will be
or can be._

Desktop is usually more productive when you're sitting down to work.

Desktop is probably _not_ more productive if you're walking down the street or
riding a crowded bus or subway.

It all comes down to your environment. The mobile UX is optimized for when
you're _mobile_ and can't provide the kind of higher-precision input typically
required to interact with a desktop UX.

------
hashkb
Panels aren't innovative. On Linux we've had tiling window management with
advanced organization for many years.

~~~
yourapostasy
I've been looking for a UI/environment that lets me persist the state of my
applications and documents across reboots, and organize them into an
indefinite number of workspaces. Each workspace can be named and tagged, and
accessed through scrolling through them, by name, by tag, or by URI (I'd drop
the URI's into my Emacs Org mode todo). A workspace supports a contextual
state of some effort I'm working upon/researching, and views a set of
documents, and can branch into a hierarchy of sub-workspaces, and the
workspaces are movable in a mind-map display (or an outline form if you want a
less-complex mind-map).

I want specific locations/views within documents available as hyperlinks, and
the state/arrangement of a workspace snapshot point-in-time available as a
name, tag, or URI. Lots of this is probably doable under Linux in one of the
programmable tiling window managers, with the exception of capturing any
arbitrary location/view within a document as a labeled entity, I haven't run
across one yet, but I can't believe I'm the only person out here that wants
more sophisticated handling of complex workspaces. Right now, I'm using a
clumsy, time-consuming Emacs Org mode document to keep track of what I'm
doing.

------
jsilence
Really wish someone would write a tiling window manager based rice to
accomplish most of this design study.

------
55555
I suddenly really want panels instead of windows and menus on the left side
instead of menus on top.

------
RenRav
I hate touchscreens and mobile interfaces, all the changes seem built around
these things.

------
rj5
This looks really good! I’m curious how good the eye tracking works in
practice though.

------
anotheryou
Touch on the desktop is just too much hassle.

------
Kaiyou
GUI was a mistake. CLI is the way to go.

------
hansdieter1337
I'm still happy with awesome wm :)

------
cabernal
This reminds of the GNOME 3 debacle.

------
beshrkayali
Nothing beats tiling wm.

~~~
gcoda
Yeah kinda, after years on tiling WMs i feel almost comfortable with
gnome+paperwm

------
ilayn
so basically a smartphone streaming to a TV?

------
MentallyRetired
Um. Yes, please.

------
nerd7473
I don't think this is a good idea.

------
angleofrepose
Well, hn seems to have collectively shit on this project in this comment
thread. I agree with some of the negatives, but I don't understand why those
would be the facets that stick out in this conversation. Yes, his site text
explaining motivations are pretty bad. App control is nothing new. And many
gestures are similar to other systems. But criticisms based on security, or
the originality of his ideas or his general use of swipe gestures are just
bullshit.

It is backwards and naive to think that desktops are just fine, and computer
programmers are historically the last to understand and embrace change (now
here is where we could put some Alan Kay quotes, I'll start with his
exasperation at our lack of a real CAD system for programming)

> "we would have something like what other engineering disciplines have in
> serious cad system, a serious simulation of the cad designs and a serious
> fab facility, to deal with the real problems of doing programming. Ivan
> [Sutherland] just jumped there [with sketchpad]." [1]

So lets talk about the interesting features he presented, and do ourselves the
service of learning from this work.

Panels: Top to bottom for content is DIFFERENT THAN ALL MAINSTREAM OSes. He is
lamenting permanent status bars, the windows ribbon, the chrome tab bar and
more with this feature. And he goes on to explain alternate features to
replace that functionality he moved for this goal of more vertical space. He
also displayed a number of situations regarding navigation through panels
which seem well designed. He factors in pinning an active window and the
ability to scroll among others, and minimizing windows to reinforce spatial
memory and leave breadcrumbs. He also accounts for resizing windows.

See the new c2 federated wiki for interesting uses of vertical space and
breadcrumbs [2].

Tags: As another user mentioned in the comments, a lot of work has gone into
the study of PIM, and tagging is quite effective. Of the three (search,
hierarchy, tag) none is found to be best, but the availability of all three is
important. This project does us the service of reminding us that we are
generally missing that third option. This system offers all 3 options. (I'm
sorry I can't find my source right now).

Search: Across all elements of personal computing (email to tabs to
applications to files) is an interesting idea. Yes omniboxes have been around
forever and will be, but this project pushes the idea that there are even more
hooks to toss into that system.

Gaze: This is fantastic, and there are limitless opportunities. Of course its
not a silver bullet, you wont be taking my tiling wm keyboard controls away
from me (see that Onion video on the keyboardless apple) and obviously I don't
think that way. But there are cool interactions that very few people if any
have had the ability to come up with on gaze augmented PC systems.

Touch: Everyone is saying that tiling wm controls are way better. Of course
they are. What percentage of PC users have tiling wms? Lets just round down to
0%. This brings that kind of efficiency to users which would otherwise never
have it.

I appreciate the commentors who have looked at this project and reflected on
it. I learn a lot from and really enjoy reading hn especially for the comment
threads, I hope I can pay it back some with this.

[1]:
[https://youtu.be/fhOHn9TClXY?t=1962](https://youtu.be/fhOHn9TClXY?t=1962)

[2]: [http://fed.wiki.org/view/welcome-
visitors](http://fed.wiki.org/view/welcome-visitors)

E: This thread got a LOT better since I posted and refreshed the page. Thank
you all.

~~~
anthk
>(now here is where we could put some Alan Kay quotes, I'll start with his
exasperation at our lack of a real CAD system for programming)

CAD is the worst example, maybe. It requires precision in order to not crush
down a bridge and typing commands with numbers gives you that in a much better
way than a pure GUI.

~~~
angleofrepose
Good point, but I think he uses the CAD example more in the context of
simulation than as defending the GUI.

I spent a few years in Architectural CAD software and afterwards went to
Computer Science and I was surprised in retrospect how often I was already
doing commandline-like things before I knew the first thing about a shell or
repl. It seems you have that experience too, I have not heard or read too many
people making that observation before.

------
cat199
windowmaker.org

------
keymone
So, um, ipados?

------
epynonymous
i like a lot of the concepts in this article, if someone were to build this
then i'd be very happy to use it, but they seem more incremental as opposed to
game changing, very tactical or utilitarian, it's like taking patterns from
modern websites and applying them to the desktop, drawers, tags, cards,
filters, notifications. there were some more advanced things like the eye
sensor, touch, and audio, but i was expecting some groundbreaking stuff since
your original premise was about desktops not changing over the last 30 years.

a lot of sci-fi movies stretch the imagination, they tend to think outside the
box, i was expecting something like that, like ghost in the shell hologram
displays, or displays embbeded directly in the retina.

ultimately, it comes down to convenience, finding ways to meld the computer
and physical worlds such that the lines are blurred. letting the computer be
an extension of oneself, kind of like cars to humans. so for example, typing
is a very unnatural thing, and to some degree there's a lot of churn
translating from one's brain to the keyboard and then to the computer, voice
would be a more natural way of input, but imagine trying to write code using
voice only or this article (gasp), my throat would be dry after the first
function. so voice isnt a full supplement, but i think having to tap things in
a context sensitive way would be good, borrowing from web design, less clicks
the better, imagine writing code by tapping, choosing functions instead of
having to write a for loop every single time, checking for errors, etc.

my feedback would be to take several steps backwards, look wholistically at
the computer, and dream of how humans could better, more efficiently, and more
naturally interact with them, that to me is the crux of a what a desktop
represents, it's the interface between man and comouter/machine some of the
solutions that you dream up could very much be based on patterns found on
mobile phones or web pages, but dont let that limit you, ultimate goal is make
a computer an extension of one's hand, brain, etc, just like a well built car
is an extension if one's foot and hand.

kind of what i'm thinking is that we could be walking around with supplemented
displays that could be toggled on/off, dont really like the smart glasses,
they're bulky, cumbersome, and generally stupid looking, but almost like ar,
layered on top of reality, i can see certain statistics, or necessary things
followed by actions, absorbing different things from multiple sensors to
supplement my view.

to me, that's where innovation needs to take place, quite honestly mac os x
and windows both have voice assistants, amazon echo as well, but i dont rely
on these things as much, they are not as usuable at the moment, it's more of a
toy. i think visual technology is not as usable either, ar glasses,
holographic displays, we have a long way to go.

and ultimately the computer needs to get smarter about understanding our
needs, machine learning is a general step in the right direction, but i'm
talking about being able to learn, adapt, and tie lots of things together to
make decisions or recommendations without having to massage data, create data
models, or choose certain algorithms.

------
LifeLiverTransp
Its a good thing, as designer you dont have to proof your concept by merit-
aka, make a linux-distro and see wether it ships. No, you convince and preach
to the higher ups, build up hype and then drop you creation on all those lowly
creatures like a 500 pound bomb and needed that much.

Win8 - i remember, how good it looks, and how little choice it left you to use
its disgusting MetroUI. If people do not use your UI, when they have a choice,
maybe its bad, maybe you have thrown away years and years of learning and
experience.

