jtn@potomac.ads.com (John T. Nelson) (02/03/90)
Some ideas concerning the Macintosh 2D or 3D interface debate... The fundemental problem as I see it is that 2D interfaces make no distinction betwen text and display regions, buttons, controls and typein regions. The flat, planar layout of a 2D interface provides no cues regarding control of the display. For example, look at an alert box. A button in an alert box looks for all the world like an ordinary displayed peice of text. Other than the fact that it's shaped like a button it could be anything. Now give that button a raised 3D look and it becomes rather clear that it is a metaphorical object (a button) which is sitting ON TOP of a metaphorical piece of paper (the laert box). As such it is also something that you can click on (depress). So raised objects are typically controls like scrollbars and buttons. By putting text and graphics inside a lowered "window" of a panel you are basically telling the user that this is a special part of the panel which is used to display things. Thus lowered regions are displayable regions and typin regions. 3D look and feel is more than superficial glitz. It serves a psychological function.
thomas@eleazar.dartmouth.edu (Thomas Summerall) (02/03/90)
One problem beginning users seem to have with the macintoh interfacte is identifying and differentiating between things that can be chosen, dragged, activated, edited, or any combination of the above. Nothing intuitively informs users that a desktop icon is more "dragable" than, say, a chooser icon. Perhaps mobile objects (icons, windows, tear off menus, etc.) should look three dimensional, as John T. Nelson suggests. But then there should be a distinction made between things which are selectable only and things which can be selected and dragged. It is a complex set of combinations and symbology which is too carved in stone. I am sure that the Mac/Presentation Manager/Windows/GEM/Workbench interface will eventually be replaced by a simpler, more actively and animatedly graphic system that makes the Mac look like MS-DOS. Thomas Summerall thomas@eleazar.dartmouth.edu
Justin_Randall_Padawer@cup.portal.com (02/06/90)
The first two messages in this thread are elegant and powerful arguments for the Mac interface going 3d! I just hope someone at Apple sees these postings (as folks at XXX@apple.com sometimes do). I was dead-set against a change, but now you've sold me. -- Justin_Randall_Padawer@cup.portal.com