Session Start: Wed Sep 19 18:34:05 2001
*** associate has joined #TLC331
*** Tonya has joined #TLC331
*** TLC-331 changes topic to 'TLC 331 - RASKIN - Chapter 3 Reading for 9/19/01'
*** associate is now known as MarkW
*** DamianNgu has joined #TLC331
*** imjustinc is now known as justin
*** DamianNgu is now known as damian
!Tonya> History has significant connotations for Raskin. Based on his article and Craig's, do you think what you know about the origin of the Mac interface to be false?
!TLC-331> agreed... there's a saying that 90% brilliance is just undiscovered plagiarism.
!MarkW> As with anything associated with Steve Jobs, there's a significant Reality Distortion Field. It's hard to figure out what's true and not.
!Robby> I think that Chris Espinosa, the longest running Apple employee who still works there (and has less opportunity to be bitter) tells it differently
I think it could have happened either way.....when it comes to the industry of innovation, everything is at least partially stolen
!Robby> Jobs himself is supposed to have inspired the Mac design team by writing the famous Picasso quote on a chalkboard: "Good artists copy, great artists steal"
*** NestorH has joined #TLC331
[18:35] !Robby> Justin, I think you're right. What I object to is not the sharing of ideas but the claim that some people's theft is less noble than others. (Ex. Why is it okay for Xerox to steal from Englebart, for Apple to steal from Xerox, but not Microsoft from Apple?)
[18:35] *** Lok has joined #TLC331
[18:35] !MarkW> It also seemed that Raskin was in part bitter or jealous.
[18:35] !JoshH> Things have to be "Borrowed" for us to progress otherwise people would have to reinvent the wheel every time they wanted to create something complex...ie a user interface.
[18:35] !justin> because microsoft is the devil
[18:35] *** Guest6691 has joined #tlc331
[18:35] *** Walwal has joined #tlc331
[18:35] *** Stephen has joined #tlc331
[18:36] !Robby> In "Insanely Great", a book about the rise and fall of the Mac, Steven Levy writes that Raskin got angry with Apple, left to start Information Appliances, and became largely irrelevant
[18:36] !Lok> I think raskin's article is hard to read.
[18:36] *** maryram has joined #TLC331
[18:37] !damian> i think everyone had a part in the Mac's design. Raskin argues he had the biggest part and people should realize this.
[18:37] !Robby> Actual line from a person who wants computers to be more friendly: "Though since Copernicus the motions of our planet are no longer seen as heliocentric, our individual worlds egocentrically revolve around ourselves. "
[18:37] *** Guest6622 has joined #TLC331
[18:37] !Walwal> Failed to see what politics of these organizations has to do with subject matter of this course
[18:37] *** hurtboy has joined #TLC331
[18:37] *** IanB has joined #TLC331
[18:38] *** BDavid has joined #TLC331
[18:38] *** Guest6691 has left #TLC331
[18:38] !TLC-331> Did raskin ever admit to having designed the Cat earlier?
[18:38] !TLC-331> in Chp 1 or 2? If he did I missed it...
[18:38] !Robby> Walwal---I would say that most of the bigwigs in the User Interface community are ex-Apple---people like Raskin, Bruce Togazinni, Don Norman, Brenda Laurel, etc.
[18:39] !Walwal> OK
[18:39] *** biggin6 has joined #TLC331
[18:39] !Stephen> I don't think he did though you would've thought he would've mentioned that before discussing the Cat
[18:39] !Robby> so maybe the culture of Apple is important to the world of HCI? That's my guess
[18:40] !justin> its on the back cover
[18:40] !maryram> the website said raskin was one of the "key engineers" in CAT
[18:40] !Lok> i think he said he's one of th designer of CAT
[18:40] !Robby> He does mention the Page 29, in Chapter 2, but it's written in third person
[18:40] *** Jayql has joined #tlc331
[18:40] !Jayql> testing, anyone out there?
[18:40] !Walwal> Anybody frightened by the story of Raskin taking over the airliner?
[18:40] *** Guest6622 is now known as ArchM
[18:41] !TLC-331> it was eerie timing.
[18:41] !TLC-331> but I did have to laugh about the backwards compatibility thing.
[18:41] !biggin6> eerie timing is right!!!
[18:42] !MarkW> Robby: I think Apple, like Xerox PARC was a incubator of sorts for many creative people that were in the right place at the right time.
[18:42] *** damian is now known as DaMiAn
[18:42] *** bdub has joined #TLC331
[18:43] !JoshH> I missed him saying weather he designed it or not earlier in the book too.
[18:43] !Robby> MarkW - I agree.
[18:43] *** TLC-331 sets mode: +o Tonya
[18:43] !TLC-331> (no begging for ops)
[18:43] !NestorH> please?
[18:43] !Tonya> What did you think of Craig's article? I can't believe he wrote it without ever seeing a Cat.
[18:44] !Robby> Yes. I found that to be a little disturbing actually. Doesn't good journalism mean you talk to or at least look at the subject in question?
[18:44] !Tonya> I guess I asked that question about "history" because of Raskin's apparent concern that he hasn't been properly credited.
[18:44] !IanB> It's strange to read a technical specification and history lesson on something he admitted to knowing next to nothing about...
[18:44] !Tonya> So, Craig didn't appear to have complete legitimacy?
[18:44] !bdub> i agree with Ianb
[18:44] !hurtboy> he seems to write about the cat as if it is an underdog
[18:45] !Tonya> Mark has a point about Xerox P, there were a number of people involved in those design.
[18:45] !Robby> Yes, Tonya, but nobody else is running out trying to correct it. You'd think Jobs and Wozniak would be upset that "everybody knows" they got the ideas from Xerox
[18:45] !JoshH> Yeah, but for someone who knows next to nothing he sure had a lot of info about the cat.
[18:46] !hurtboy> sympathetic for it because he says it was a really good product, just the marketing/target audience sucked
[18:46] !IanB> He says he gathered the information from other people--also, look at the publication... it's a journal of computerish history.
[18:46] !Tonya> Josh, it shows how much information you can get off the web and position yourself as an authority.
[18:46] !Robby> Well, he may have had some articles, advertisements from old magazines, and certainly about two dozen books on the story of Apple to reference
[18:46] !IanB> If only he hadn't admitted his ignorance--we might all be praising him right now.
[18:47] !TLC-331> Marketing - The ability convince people to buy something they don't need with money they don't have.
[18:47] !JoshH> True, true can't believe everything you read...
[18:47] !Tonya> I'm curious about these type of historical questions in the context of UI as well. Who owns a look and feel?
[18:47] !MarkW> Craig is definitely not Steve Jobs.
[18:48] !IanB> That's for Gray Cary to hash out, Tonya ;)
[18:48] !Tonya> I'm sure the lawyers haven't suffered too much, but don't tell Ronnetta I said that.
[18:48] !hurtboy> why was he writing the article in the first place, if he never even touched one
[18:48] !TLC-331> Yes, you can tell by his website. Jobs would've made the site translucent.
[18:48] !Robby> An operator may kill this thread as being way off topic, but Ian I think that there is a relationship between the volume of content and the flashiness of your design that combine to create the apperance of credibility on the web
[18:48] !TLC-331> Inversely proportional.
[18:49] !Tonya> I think Craig was trying to point out that there was a product that espoused a different type of interface design at one time. It's interesting on those terms.
[18:49] !TLC-331> Flash being a big indicator of "trying to look cool".
[18:49] !IanB> Yeah.. inverse square, in some cases.
[18:49] !Robby> Tonya: The "look and feel" lawsuits of the early 80's settled this. (Brief review: Lotus to Microsoft: "Excel has the look and feel of 1-2-3". Microsoft to lotus: Our lawyers say no. Microsoft wins.)
[18:49] !TLC-331> My last class referred to Flash as "Skip Intros"
[18:49] !TLC-331> Since everyone seems to lunge for the Skip intro button
[18:49] !Robby> TLC-331 (who is this) that's funny
[18:49] !DaMiAn> No one person owns a "feel and look" of a program unless they worked on the UI in their basement away from other peoples eye. I believe credit should be given to all those that give input into the design.
[18:50] !Tonya> Yes and if Steve Jobs hadn't signed that one page doc w/Gates, MS Windows might not exist (legally, anyway)
[18:50] !IanB> But--when look and feel contributes to the value of a product, it becomes a sort of property.
[18:50] !Robby> I don't know if I by that. How can WalMart and KMart and HyperMart exist at the same time?
[18:50] !IanB> And somebody's got to own it.. that's just how our legal system sees the world.
[18:50] !TLC-331> But what is a "look and feel" and what is a standard?
[18:50] !Tonya> There are definitely constraints to look and feel, mainly because of the apps developers use.
[18:50] !justin> Ian, you mean a sort of vitual trademark?
[18:51] !Tonya> Good question. What do you think "look and feel" means?
[18:51] !TLC-331> Robby, yes.. is the wobby wheel shopping cart part of the HEB "look and feel"???
[18:51] !hurtboy> not really, how many different fridges(brands) have the same look and feel. example, 2 verticle doors with and ice and water dispencer on the freezer side
[18:51] !MarkW> Is it any easier to own the design of say, a cd player?
[18:51] !IanB> Well, sort of. It's flimsier than that. Trademark implies a logo, or signature that's distinct to a company. look-n-feel is broader, like round buttons or something.
[18:51] !Robby> There are lots of aspects of interface designs that people have tried to copyright. The Klennex patent, for example, isn't for tissue for your nose, it's for the clever way the paper is folded so that pulling one out automatically readies the next at the same time
[18:52] !TLC-331> and is that being copied by the Albertsons "Wobbly squeaky wheel"??
[18:52] !Tonya> Can look and feel have physical properties then? Like Raskin's quasimode?
[18:52] !IanB> I'll argue that some of that can be considered intellectual property, but it's a slippery slope, and when Amazon patents "One-click" as a phrase/concept, then it's getting ridiculous.
[18:52] !Robby> I was more referring to the names and the layout of the operation, TLC-331. Doesn't it seem like they are trying to capitalize on the "look and feel" of Mart? And don't they all have aisles and checkers and sackers?
[18:53] !Tonya> Don't get me started on that one click garbage. I agree, it can get ridiculous.
[18:53] !NestorH> How about all the circular flash designs that permeated the web at the height of its popularity. It was way used by everyone, giving many sites the same look and feel.
[18:53] !Jayql> or cellphones, for that matter.
[18:53] !Tonya> So when is imitation flattery and when is it thievery?
[18:53] !IanB> When profit's to be made--the latter.
[18:53] !TLC-331> When it costs a big corporation with lawyers.
[18:53] !maryram> But was that integral to its function? The way it looked and felt, respectively.
[18:53] !hurtboy> when the source code is the same
[18:54] !MarkW> When it's made in Korea.
[18:54] !Tonya> Do you think that something small like the Canon Cat could have been pushed out because of lack of marketing?
[18:54] !NestorH> when the expensive lawyers convince the judge it is so...
[18:54] !bdub> Imitation is thievery if what you are imitating is a person's tool of the trade
[18:54] !Robby> Jakob Nielsen has a rule that most users spend their time on other sites, so you should try to design to what they are used to seeing
[18:54] !Tonya> So why don't people imitate just the good? Why is the bad imitated as well? On-line anyway.
[18:54] !JoshH> I think that the internet in general has a look and feel to it. The way information is given is basically the same as it always has been(i.e. paragraphs and pages). Granted with a few exceptions.
[18:54] !justin> I meant trademark as in this: When you see someone drinking a fast food drink with blue straw, you can assume they may have come from Jack in the Box. Maybe i shouldnt have used the term trademark. maybe calling card instead? i meant. something that is distinct to the company, but not officially owned by them.
[18:55] !IanB> What we think of as "computer marketing" is a whole different beast than what was pervasive when Canon Cat bit it. Maybe it's not fair for us to guess about a lack of marketing..
[18:55] !Robby> Imitation is flattery when you're trying to get a date. It's theviery when he/she works for the competition.
[18:55] !Robby> Imitation is easier than creativity.
[18:55] !Jayql> It seems like all the current design trends, from cellphones to CD players, to hand-held video games all follow the same design trends. Just look at the Game Boy Advance--it definitely took a nod from the NEO GEO Pocket Color.
[18:55] !justin> robby: and faster
[18:55] !Tonya> Imitation works for Microsoft, but it doesn't always result in good products. I have to agree w/Robby, sometimes imitation is just easier.
[18:55] !MarkW> Bad gets imitated because people don't really think about it. Get it out as fast as possible. At least sometimes.
[18:56] !TLC-331> but to a certain degree, everyone is subtly influenced as to what you consider normal from everyday viewing.
[18:56] !hurtboy> imitaton is also the fastest way to learn
[18:56] !Robby> look at the canon cat behind us all. doesn't it look just like every apple ii variant you ever saw?
[18:56] !Tonya> So familiarity excuses bad?
[18:56] !TLC-331> Making something similar to other products helps with market acceptance...
[18:56] !NestorH> But if it ain't broke, why fix it?
[18:56] !bdub> imitation may also be what sells
[18:56] !DaMiAn> When someone imitates your design ideas, its hard to claim it your own. Everyone jumps on the bandwagon and soon the original creator gets lost. I guess you need to patent ideas before releasing them.
[18:56] !Jayql> It makes you wonder if better designs are getting passed over in favor of current industry design trends.
[18:56] !JoshH> But without using things that people have already made to build upon we would still be in the stone age. Even when writing code for a program we reuse other peoples code for a specific algorithm because it is just not feesable to rewrite all that code over and over...
[18:56] !BDavid> Imitate, release product and profit
[18:57] !Robby> That's true---build a Tucker automobile with seat belts and a third headlight and the world will react with---confusion
[18:57] !TLC-331> and lawsuits.....
[18:57] !Tonya> So what is truly groundbreaking? There were handhelds before the Palm made a splash. What changed?
[18:57] !hurtboy> i agree josh
[18:57] !justin> marketing
[18:57] !NestorH> exactly
[18:57] !Robby> DaMiAn -- I don't know if you have to patent your idea if it's just a good one. After all, is imitation so bad if the original is well done?
[18:57] !Tonya> Or ease of use?
[18:58] !bdub> it was also just timing
[18:58] !MarkW> Palm listened to the users, something many others didn't.
[18:58] !IanB> Good point josh.. would it be fair to say that theft is the *degree* of imitation, not the existence of it?
[18:58] !Tonya> Handwriting recognition certainly improved (though it still leaves a lot be desired)
[18:58] !DaMiAn> Groundbreaking is when a product can make your life easier. The only catch is you bette have a sleek design.
[18:58] !hurtboy> flashy designs, PR and lots of hype
[18:58] !justin> marketing creates profit. profit translates to genius
[18:58] !Tonya> What about compatibility? Is that a factor?
[18:58] !TLC-331> and it offered a simpler interface, most other handhelds had the microscopic keyboard.
[18:58] !Robby> Technology for it's own sake will only sell to the few hackers and hobbyists. The rest of the story is just like anything else, pretty packages, good marketing, and lots of coupons
[18:58] !MarkW> It's interesting, Palm bought graffiti which was originally a fix for the handwriting recognition on the Newton.
[18:58] !JoshH> Copying is not bad, if Intel hadn't released it's archatecture so clone systems could exist, then x86 might not be that popular and MAC might rule the market.
[18:59] !Jayql> now, what if you could leave the end design to the user entirely, would people inevitably come to something that pro designers couldn't? or would you just have another confusing design?
[18:59] !TLC-331> Tonya yes - part of market acceptance. It's easier to get people to accept your product if it works with existing ones.
[18:59] !IanB> Doesn't the Mac have better basic architecture?
[18:59] !Tonya> So groundbreaking is about ease? Can you think of anything groundbreaking that's not easy to use? Raskin compared oscilliscopes as you recall (& I misspelled)
[18:59] !Robby> Jayql this is something I STRONGLY believe in. I think novices ought to design everything. Kick the "experts" out. They are poisoned by their expertise of the internals
[18:59] !bdub> yes, my boss loves the fact that his palm is compatible with the calendar on his desktop
[18:59] !JoshH> Yes, but their achatechture is copyrighted...
[19:00] !TLC-331> and contacts w/ Outlook
[19:00] !MarkW> And Windows isn't?
[19:00] !NestorH> I agree about the hype. Microsoft is going to enter the video game industry with the X-Box, an industry owned by Sony, Nintendo, and Sega (alas). They are making a lot of hype, even though they are completely new to the industry. Maybe it has somehting to do with their $500,000,000 marketing budget....
[19:00] !Robby> The Newton synchronized beautifully. I understand it's desktop software is still comptabile with contact management API's in OS X
[19:00] !IanB> Yeah, but is copyrighted architecture worse than a copyrighted operating system? ;)
[19:00] !Tonya> I often wonder what makes someone an "expert". This factors into Raskin's notion of modes. SHould there be an expert and novice mode?
[19:00] !DaMiAn> Compatibility isn't an issue. Sony releases proprietary technology all the time. Example: (memory stick) while everyone uses compact or flash card and they are still successful.
[19:00] !IanB> They should blend together..
[19:00] !bdub> the X-box will be a success
[19:00] !JoshH> If I wanted and X-Box I would by a better video card for my personal computer...:-)
[19:01] !TLC-331> Damian - but they often crash
[19:01] !MarkW> Not really, there just should be "my" mode, but that's hard to program.
[19:01] !bdub> they have the games this time
[19:01] !hurtboy> or maybe their system is going to blow the crap out of sonys ps2/nintendo game cube
[19:01] !TLC-331> and Sony has a big name, the marketing to push alot of these items.
[19:01] !Tonya> So customization Mark?
[19:01] !Robby> In an ideal world, the interface of a given technology is totally unique to the user. Two modes is a rough approximation, but really technologies need about 6 billion
[19:01] !IanB> Quote from my friend who worked at M$ about the X-box: "Microsoft honestly believes that there isn't a sector out there that they can't dominate.."
[19:01] !TLC-331> Smaller firms would have never been able to get MiniDisc to the point of acceptance.
[19:01] !Tonya> So are you arguing for consistency of range, Robby?
[19:01] !Robby> Is MiniDisc at the point of acceptance, or obselence?
[19:01] !MarkW> Sure, always if you can, but it's getting some good place to start from so people can just walk up and use something.
[19:01] !Robby> Can you elucidate, Tonya?
[19:02] !NestorH> of course, but not because of their reputation of creating memorable games, it's because they're able to put ads in every electronics store and bombard us with info about its superiority until our eyes bleed.
[19:02] !hurtboy> mini disc= beta cd= video
[19:02] !Jayql> Should the suggestions of novices be thrown out? It seems to me that some of the more original ideas for software have come from interested individuals. The BeOS, for example, has many applications that were not officially designed by any one company, but, rather, by a group of coders who passed the app around.
[19:02] !MarkW> Minidisc: it depends on who you ask, go to Japan and it's HUGE
[19:02] !Robby> This is related to what I was saying last week about privacy; the more devices "know" about us, the more they can adapt their interfaces accordingly
[19:02] !IanB> So, the CD was bolstered by the porn industry?
[19:03] !Stephen> I love my minidisc, it's just they pushed the idea of being able to buy your favorite artists on minidisc which never materialized, what i love is that i can record practically anything with it
[19:03] !Tonya> If range cuts across apps, would consistency of range be important?
[19:03] !Robby> Ian I think you're on your own on this thread. See you
[19:03] !Tonya> porn was bolster by video, but let's not go there
[19:03] !TLC-331> IanB - yes - was easier to get back to your "favorite scene" to watch over and over....
[19:03] !DaMiAn> I agree with MarkW. It depends on the market and users. Sony technology is accepted in japan.
[19:03] !Robby> Range of what? I am still confused.
[19:03] !justin> (On the subject of Imitation) Sometimes you have to imitate. You cant sit back and lose "credibility" with the consumer. Take Adobe and Macromedia. Macromedia's Flash is the standard, hands down. It is so widespread and so advanced in its capabilities that Adobe could do nothing to top it. So what are they doing? Building a flash type player of their own. Adobe knows it will always have to deal with updating to stay compatible, but to them its worth i
[19:04] !JoshH> Plus if you imitate then people already know basically how your product works...
[19:04] !justin> Adobe knows it will always have to deal with updating to stay compatible, but to them its worth it. Its hard to just sit back and watch your competition blow you away (got cut off)
[19:04] !Tonya> Raskin uses the command x as an example of a range that cuts across applications.
[19:04] !Robby> Can anyone say web browser?
[19:04] !TLC-331> yes, less training of the public....
[19:04] !bdub> speaking of Adobe, who was in here that said Photoshop 6.0 is polite and user friendly?
[19:04] !justin> haha
[19:04] !justin> i was biased. i have seen the light
[19:04] !bdub> thank you
[19:04] !Tonya> Be kind to the photoshop powerusers. You'll need their help later this semester
[19:05] !justin> i like the term expert-friendly a lot however
[19:05] !JoshH> Giving people something they already know how to use is a lot easier than training them to use something that is new and different...
[19:05] !Robby> right
[19:05] !IanB> yep
[19:05] !biggin6> people don't like change so if a product is imitated and made better then more people accept it.
[19:05] !bdub> Oh, i know photoshop. I just didn't agree.
[19:05] !Tonya> that's why web apps have taken off
[19:05] !Robby> i see what you're saying now Tonya. I agree with Raskin: "A fully humane interface would consist of exactly one range"
[19:05] !Jayql> I know that many Unix OS's did not come from one company that made a "standard" mode. Since the code for Unix was open source, many people modified it over the years. I guess the more "standard" type of servers are running a version that was developed at Berkeley in California.
[19:05] !Robby> However---everyone will have their OWN range
[19:05] !Tonya> I also think that's why web apps suck, because developers want people to relearn navigation in an interface that supports it
[19:05] !bdub> When is adobe releasing their version of flash?
[19:06] !JoshH> Nah, most people run LINUX not UNIX now...
[19:06] !TLC-331> the main thing I can't stand about web applications is how my back button doesn't work.
[19:06] !Robby> justin is on the case on that one---report in twenty
[19:06] !Jayql> I'll be honest, however, Unix is not the most user-friendly OS, although it is very stable and quite functional.
[19:06] !Tonya> But finding that ideal range is the kicker. And I don't necessarily mean standards.
[19:06] !MarkW> Maybe it's too easy to create a web page so people create whatever they want.
[19:06] !Jayql> that's right, I forgot about Linux.
[19:06] !bdub> are you going to be able to give motion to individual layers of an image on adobes new product?
[19:06] !TLC-331> half the web apps out there just dump on themselves if you dare to try to go BACK.
[19:07] !IanB> Seems like the biggest help to find a good range is to limit the scope of your application...
[19:07] !Robby> I think that MOST of the ranges of operations are already standardized. 99% of the time the letter Q on the keyboard does what I expect, in many applications. Q Q Q Q Q !
[19:07] !NestorH> Anyone remember Homer Simpsons dancing Jesus page?
[19:07] !Tonya> People caGood point about scope. Why is that important?
[19:07] !TLC-331> MarkW - which is why we have 8000000 pages of "Picutres of Me and MY DOG"
[19:07] !hurtboy> web app. like campusi's email checker
[19:07] !hurtboy> ?
[19:07] !Robby> It's only when we need to change modes or do something that isn't well supported by the physical input mechanisms that we have trouble
[19:08] !Robby> No--web pages aren't too easy to create, they just live too long. The web needs a spring cleaning
[19:08] !Tonya> We're still tied to the physical components of the apparatus, right?
[19:08] !Tonya> What is the apparatus? We have a keyboard . . .
[19:08] !IanB> Robby, what are you thinking of which isn't supported by physical input? Speech recognition? Mind meld?
[19:08] !MarkW> a mouse...
[19:08] !TLC-331> Yes, like it or not voice recognition is going to require alot of training..
[19:08] !Tonya> Training for humans or machines?
[19:08] !TLC-331> both
[19:09] !Robby> the weird thing is, TLC-331, that the self-organzing nature of the web seems to imply that a startup called picturesOfMeandmydog.com is on the way, with fanastic tools to simplfy canine promotion for you and your pet
[19:09] !Robby> Like changing applications. This "alt-tab" isn't natural at all.
[19:09] !IanB> ... only to go bankrupt 3 months later....
[19:09] !MarkW> We have our first company idea
[19:09] !Tonya> I still think that organization is going to be key. How do we map models that make sense and reinforce human perception?
[19:09] !hurtboy> anyone ever seen toothbrushPron.com?
[19:09] !JoshH> I think more for the machines, it would be more natural to tell a computer what to do than to have to learn a bunch of keys to make it do it(for a new user)
[19:09] !justin> appearently Adobe LiveMotion ("the flash-killer") is out. http://www.adobe.com/products/livemotion/lvmvsflash.html
[19:09] !Robby> no thank you, hurtboy
[19:10] !bdub> Robby can say that again, and the sad thing is the academic instiutions only add to the mass amout of junk on the web. Who really needs to see UT's academic calendar of 1908
[19:10] !Robby> JoshH -- Ever see star trek four? "Helllloooooooooooooo computer?"
[19:10] !Tonya> What do we use as examples? What did you think of Raskin's model airplane example?
[19:10] !TLC-331> the problem with writing say, a document with speech recognition is that personally, I don't compose a document the way I speak.
[19:10] !Robby> Well, I'm sure that those early web users back in 08 really appreciated the online calendar
[19:10] !Jayql> do we need to take development far enough where we meld humans and machines? I remember an article from a few years back,"The Cyborg Manifesto."
[19:10] !TLC-331> I don't think in entire paragraphs...
[19:10] !hurtboy> i disagree, the web is used heavily for research and data collecting
[19:10] !Tonya> Donna Haraway made some great points in that Manifesto.
[19:11] !BDavid> Live Motion is out and no one uses it, so it seems
[19:11] !MarkW> Depends on who owns the machines. I don
[19:11] !Robby> Maybe that would become "acceptable"---writing as we spoke instead of as we wanted to write. You know? (I'm trying to do it right now.)
[19:11] !justin> If i composed documents in the same why i speak, id still be in 9th grade english
[19:11] !TLC-331> much less, I don't want Word having 85000 instances of "Ummmm...."
[19:11] !MarkW> 't want to be melded with citicorp
[19:11] !justin> like like like
[19:11] !IanB> you could just search and replace 'umm' with ''
[19:25] !TLC-331> Everybody out of the POOL!
Session Close: Wed Sep 19 19:25:50 2001
Policy Statement | Syllabus | Student Projects | Assignments | Home