>>>it's easy for non-programing people to bring "visions" regarding
>>>interface design. (and i love do so :) as i know programers, it's quite
>>>hard to establish a new standard. but imho the interface standards
>>>(buttons, dropdown boxes, scrolling, menu-structure, etc.) are now a
>>>couple of years old, and there might be better solutions for specific
>>>tasks. audio seems to me like a good point to start.
>
>
> i wasn't talking about such rudimentary stuff. of course there are
> alternatives to these basic widgets and several audio applications (even
> free ones) have begun to support them.
>
> the point about a visual interface is that it acts as a "memory buffer"
> for the user: you do not have to remember much about the structure of
> the session because the structure is made visible on the screen. can't
> remember precisely where you put a certain sound? how many copies of the
> bridge riff did i put in? is the door slam before or after the creak?
> its all there on the screen, just waiting for you to look at it.
>
> as soon as you move away from a visual UI, you have to find some way to
> avoid requiring the user to remember everything about the session.
when i try to remember a poem my brain creates images and i walk trough
them, when i reproduce it. when i learn a piece of music it does other
stuff (i'm a pianist and singer) but in the end i have a very complex
thing in my mind, just think of a bach fugue. i have the fugue also in
"the fingers". different areas of the brain work together. i have the
same oppinion as you, we are very good in using a visual UI. we trained
it for a long time. but there could be other combinations that work
nearly as good as "mouse-to-eye".
> the visual interface offers another hard-to-replicate feature as well:
> trivially variable precision. if you try doing cut-n-paste based only on
> audio feedback, you will find it quite hard/laborious to be as precise
> as you might want to be. with the visual interface, its much easier to
> use visual information to get the rough location of an edit and then
> get to precisely where you want, without many steps. with audio feedback
> based approaches, i think you will find yourself needing many more
> iterations through the edit-play-edit-play cycle before you get the
> location correct.
i think it's all a matter of training. you do the
"display-keyboard-mouse-combination" for long years and you became
professional in speed and precision. watch a pro-gamer gaming with
mouse.. what's about data-gloves? whats with feet-controlers and other
"non-standard" devices?
greets,
gabriel
(sorry for my clumsy english)
Received on Tue Nov 1 20:15:04 2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Nov 01 2005 - 20:15:04 EET