<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: microsoft future 2019 &#8211; not so original</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.philvanallen.com/news/microsoft-future-2019-not-so-original/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.philvanallen.com/news/microsoft-future-2019-not-so-original/</link>
	<description>interactive designer, educator, photographer</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Jul 2010 17:26:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Philip van Allen &#187; new ecology of things class, anti-homogenous</title>
		<link>http://www.philvanallen.com/news/microsoft-future-2019-not-so-original/comment-page-1/#comment-459</link>
		<dc:creator>Philip van Allen &#187; new ecology of things class, anti-homogenous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2009 01:35:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.philvanallen.com/?p=102#comment-459</guid>
		<description>[...] keyboard, screen for doing everything. This continues the idea mentioned in the last post on the Microsoft Future 2019 video, where interactions should adapt to the type of activity rather than the person adapting to the [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] keyboard, screen for doing everything. This continues the idea mentioned in the last post on the Microsoft Future 2019 video, where interactions should adapt to the type of activity rather than the person adapting to the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: philip van Allen</title>
		<link>http://www.philvanallen.com/news/microsoft-future-2019-not-so-original/comment-page-1/#comment-448</link>
		<dc:creator>philip van Allen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Mar 2009 18:21:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.philvanallen.com/?p=102#comment-448</guid>
		<description>Hey Doug, this is a great point. Certainly there need to be some common ways of interacting, especially for for the kinds of situations you point out. There should be little or no learning curve in these contexts for essential interactions. My current interest though is the kinds of activities we do everyday in our work and play. These should be more customizable and optimized for the kinds of activities we&#039;re doing. And I don&#039;t mean only the &quot;interface&quot;, but the furniture, workspace, and entire interaction. For example, an architect should have a very different kind of workspace and set of interactions than a software engineer. Yet right now, they both work long hours crouched over a mouse and keyboard, staring into a computer screen. It seems to me this kind of uniformity is a bad idea.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Doug, this is a great point. Certainly there need to be some common ways of interacting, especially for for the kinds of situations you point out. There should be little or no learning curve in these contexts for essential interactions. My current interest though is the kinds of activities we do everyday in our work and play. These should be more customizable and optimized for the kinds of activities we&#8217;re doing. And I don&#8217;t mean only the &#8220;interface&#8221;, but the furniture, workspace, and entire interaction. For example, an architect should have a very different kind of workspace and set of interactions than a software engineer. Yet right now, they both work long hours crouched over a mouse and keyboard, staring into a computer screen. It seems to me this kind of uniformity is a bad idea.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Douglas Corarito</title>
		<link>http://www.philvanallen.com/news/microsoft-future-2019-not-so-original/comment-page-1/#comment-447</link>
		<dc:creator>Douglas Corarito</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Mar 2009 11:06:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.philvanallen.com/?p=102#comment-447</guid>
		<description>&quot;What we don’t need is a new ubiquitous interface and set of gestures.&quot;

By saying this, are you not then imposing some level of learning for each new activity?

One of the things that I&#039;ve found when encountering say a new cell phone, a new ATM, a new automated checkout register, a gas pump, etc. is that one is forced to learn the vocabulary of that particular device.

When/if we have ubiquitous displays offering us a variety of services at the slightest gesture, how are when to know what gesture to make (without studying the instructions)?

You&#039;ve probably covered this topic somewhere, so I&#039;d appreciate you pointing me in the direction of something I could read.  Would like to know your thoughts.

Looks like you&#039;re doing some interesting investigation!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;What we don’t need is a new ubiquitous interface and set of gestures.&#8221;</p>
<p>By saying this, are you not then imposing some level of learning for each new activity?</p>
<p>One of the things that I&#8217;ve found when encountering say a new cell phone, a new ATM, a new automated checkout register, a gas pump, etc. is that one is forced to learn the vocabulary of that particular device.</p>
<p>When/if we have ubiquitous displays offering us a variety of services at the slightest gesture, how are when to know what gesture to make (without studying the instructions)?</p>
<p>You&#8217;ve probably covered this topic somewhere, so I&#8217;d appreciate you pointing me in the direction of something I could read.  Would like to know your thoughts.</p>
<p>Looks like you&#8217;re doing some interesting investigation!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.353 seconds -->
