to write (what were you thinking?)
I've been in a really odd mood lately and feel the urge to do a lot of things but don't actually feel like doing them. All those summer projects that I really want to get done, but it's the doing that is the problem. And the finishing. I have a painting started, the Manticore half-read, two webpage designs still in test phase, a crochet blanket part done, a bunch of clients waiting for their designs, a roll of film that needs to be finished so I can do some copywork, grad school research barely started, a DSL character that needs to be leveled, and the list goes on.
Stupid summer. It's not even like I can blame the lack of productivity on the heat because it's bloody cold this summer. I wear a sweater most of the time. To be fair, I have done a lot this summer. As a result of previous summers where I only got one or two things done from the monstrous to do list, this summer, I started almost all of the things on the list but don't think any will get finished except a book or two.
I do feel like writing, however. At Bubble Tea the other night, Mekki, Ben, Josh, Tara and I were talking about writing, mainly about handwriting versus typing. I'm enjoying this blog but do miss the tactility of writing in a journal. I have very expressive handwriting which changes depending on the tone or content of what is being written. I probably have about seven distinct styles, each one adapting slightly to the mood. The choice of pen and the choice of paper also add to expressing something of the tone. This can be somewhat included in typing but sometimes font switching is just ridiculous. I recently changed my template because the old one didn't suit my current mood. I wanted something cleaner and less frilly. One of my summer projects was to make a font set of my handwriting, probably the architecture style one. I still have to do the research for how to do that.
There is a certain tactility that I am used to that makes working on a computer hard for me. My typing skills have greatly improved (I only look at the keyboard out of habit not because I need to find the lettres). I'm quite certain that I type faster than I write now. That comes in handy when taking notes, though it's not easy to set up in class, even with a laptop. Mekki's point that that helps you keep up with your thoughts, is a valid comment but sometimes falling behind creates new thoughts. My two major problems with working on a computer are the noise and mental organization.
I am extremely sensitive to noise and repetition, so computer fans drive me bonkers, especially when there are more than one that aren't in synch.
But, the bigger issue is the way my mind organizes and remembers things does not translate well to computers. This is where my interest in the
Project Looking Glass comes from. Come tax time, Mekki thinks I'm a masochist for doing the paper forms but I am very good at organizing and flipping through pages and can keep a mental inventory of where what information is. I can't do that as well with links and windows. I keep better track of information by turning a page than scrolling down.
A bit off topic here
It's an interesting question. Should the computer environment try to mimic the physical environment? Really, it shouldn't. There are likely much better ways to do things than the way we are forced to do them when dealing with the limitations of gravity, only having two hands, only being so tall, having to depend on five senses, etc. The problem is breaking the habit and taking things for granted. Not only that, but even trying to think of something that isn't limited to one of those earthly limitations. I'm always amused when watching video games. There will be this absolutely ridiculous staircase and as my profs would say "And what? Does G-d hold that up for you?" Obviously, you don't have to worry about gravity in a video game. But, if you don't have to worry about gravity, why do you need stairs? The no gravity thing is very attractive to architecture students which explains why so many go into game environment design. Others argue the challenge is the impetus of good design. It's a bit more of an accomplishment to make something that seemingly disobeys gravity, such as Le Corbusier's
Rochamps. (Look at the roof on that thing. It doesn't even look like it is resting on the walls)
Anyways, the point is that there are certain archetypes that you expect to be there and always use as the base without thinking about it. It is not an easy thing to recognize what those things are or when they are no longer necessary.
So what is the solution? Desktops don't have to be literally organized like an office, you don't need booklike graphics so people feel like they're reading a book. We need a bit more abstraction to the metaphors (or similes). Figure out what it is about a book that people prefer or makes it easier to follow and go with that.
Gmail did a good example of this. Hotmail uses folders to organize emails. Files and folders are used in an office to organize material so it can be easily retrieved. So the point is to easily retrieve information. Well, why do you need to organize into categorized folders to flip through to later find a document when you can use a search engine to retrieve it?
It's not easy. It's actually far to easy to go the wrong way and stop doing something that is always done just for the sake of doing something new. Most of the time you just end up going backwards and realize that there is a reason something is always done a certain way.
