The command line is like a primitive work interface as opposed to consumption. It's like a campfire in relation to a modern kitchen, or a basic household toolbox (screwdrivers, wrenches, hammer...) in relation to a full-scale lab. If it had evolved as a *work* interface...
-
-
Now the thing about the computer as a producer's tool is that it is so powerful and capable, it hasn't stopped evolving rapidly since Day 1, which means it's never plateaued into a zone where a tool-maker class (a producer-side UI/UX class) can take over fully.
Show this thread -
Ie, the only people who can move this forward are people who use computers for production at the edge of its evolving capabilities. One subset (the command-line purists) has decided not to try. Instead, command line prowess becomes the status thing. Is there a subset trying?
Show this thread -
It's not been entirely static. I think version control and package management have been huge conceptual and implemented leaps in production UI/UX thinking. But it's so limited...
Show this thread -
And unfortunately it's almost all limited to actual programmers. People who use the computer as a tool for other purposes, like say image manipulation or data analysis without coding... they haven't been able to design/customize/evolve/innovate their own tool environments much
Show this thread -
Actually it's worse: it's not even just programmers. Even most experienced programmers aren't deep in enough to do more than say customize emacs or their IDE. The actual evolution is driven by programmers' programmers -- systems programmers.
Show this thread -
Like Git, arguably the biggest innovation in producer-side UI/UX, is a programmer's shop tool built by the ultimate programmers' programmer, Linus Torvalds. These people use computers for one very narrow kind of production work: making better computers.
Show this thread -
We need Linus Torvalds level people trying to think up better, broader producer-side systemic UX metaphors. Like a "workshop" or "kitchen" or "lab" metaphor for the computer.
Show this thread -
And I'm thinking here mainly of full-fledged ones, like a laptop or desktop, but also for phones and tablets and voice-control devices.
Show this thread -
There is some decent sci-fi inspiration for this. Iron Man's Jarvis is probably my favorite.
Show this thread -
Jarvis is a voice assistant metaphor, but has the skills of an extremely capable lab assistant/tech or shop machinist (gender aside: he's a male voice, unlike most voice assistants, who are descended from office secretaries and have female voices)
Show this thread -
But Jarvis is not quite right, since he's a digital assistant for a primarily *physical* space, and controls robot arms and prototyping areas and stuff. We need Jarvis-grade expressivity for *digital* environments. Like think a massively more powerful Clippy that actually works
Show this thread -
This train of thought started with me organizing my home office into a sort of lab-maker space. The project crept up on me, but once I realized I was doing it, it was easy.https://twitter.com/vgr/status/1295812796664356864 …
Show this thread -
A workspace designed for writing and consulting is very simple. Just a desk, a laptop, room for some papers, maybe a whiteboard, a bookshelf with commonly referred to books within reach. Maybe a mic/video rig if you do podcasting and stuff.
Show this thread -
It's also very different in very obvious ways from a space where you can do simple repairs, mechanical/electronics projects/soldering etc. Once I realized I was headed in this direction, the decisions were obvious:
Show this thread -
1. What kind of workbench to get, 2. Where to put a 3d printer 3. How to hold work (small desk vise?) 4. How to store small parts 5. How to ventilate work area 6. Creating enough length for an optics project Then I thought... hmm what would a lab *computer* look like?
Show this thread -
And here I realized I had *no idea* ... my first thought was "maybe I should build my own computer" but though that might be a fun project, it's not actually salient to what it means to have a "lab computer."
Show this thread -
Back when I was teaching an undergrad lab course as a grad student, a "lab computer" meant a regular PC with a data acquisition/control board attached and some instrumentation software for the students to do their experiments. There were programs like LabView, LabTech etc.
Show this thread -
The "lab" part of the computer was basically some applications that talked to some extra hardware. In some cases, integrating with more ordinary software. Like dSpace boards integrated with Matlab. But this is not a "lab computer" really in the sense I mean it.
Show this thread -
I'm talking about a computer organized well for all the soft workflows made necessary by the work. For example. Astrophotography demands an image processing stack. 3d printing demands a CAD stack. What's a computer properly organized around these things like?
Show this thread -
They used to call these "engineering workstations" but that basically meant "lots of power" not a different UX paradigm. One of the first computers I got to play with was an early Silicon Graphics workstation at my dad's office in like 1990.
Show this thread -
It was *way* more powerful than the 386 PCs at my school. But the only thing I could *do* with it was admire some pretty 3d models with rendered reflective surfaces etc. It didn't have a significantly different UX paradigm to encourage immediate tinkering like a physical lab does
Show this thread -
These things evolved in Sun and DEC Alpha workstations and later model SG machines through the 90s until they kinda died out in the early 2000s. They were replaced by basic PCs with commodity hardware and OSes. They simply didn't add enough differentiated "producer UX" value.
Show this thread -
When I got my first laptop in 2000 (a Dell Inspiron) I switched from Unix to Windows for all my research work and never looked back. Unlike programmers, I only really needed Matlab and LaTeX, both of which ran fine on Windows, and the processing power was more than enough for me
Show this thread -
It's a sad story... that the computer as a producer device basically died with the Sun workstation, but it kinda deserved to, since it didn't evolve at all, except for computer scientists themselves. If you were any other kind of scientist or engineer, you were a consumer
Show this thread -
Back to today. The only people I know of who do the kind of things I think should be done are the extreme hackers building their own from-scratch home-automation hardware to Jarvis-up their workspaces.
@theartlav has one... but note he's a CS PhD :DShow this thread -
If you're say, an astronomer or a biologist, or a virologist researching Covid19 vaccines, you're out of luck. Your computer is basically a consumption tool designed for binge-watching videos and playing games. Just with some of your software loaded on.
Show this thread -
Imagine if say automobiles evolved that. ONLY automotive engineers would have anything other than a basic family sedan. If you were a construction worker or farmer, you couldn't get a pickup truck designed with your needs in mind.
Show this thread -
You'd have to either learn as much about cars as a Ford engineer, and then you could only get a forklift truck designed for working within automobile factories. Farmers having to choose between a Toyota Prius or a forklift truck. No F150s or cybertrucks around.
Show this thread -
Some of this thread assumes a false digital dualist paradigm of a space of digital workflows and a space of physical workflows. Obviously, this can be broken/pushed. I do like some aspects of Bret Victor's thinking here (the dynamicland stuff)https://twitter.com/kev_mcg/status/1298326093682946048 …
Show this thread -
This is a paradigm of the workspace as a single entity, with both physical and virtual elements embodied by a single space, like a room. This in my account would be like Jarvis getting overloaded into a non-dualist assistant computer who doesn't hide the digital world.
Show this thread - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.