Innovation
I was thinking about how pervasive computers are in my life. I started writing code on a TI994A back around 1982-83 and have had access to one almost continuously since. Now I have no less than 5 at home. I used to watch the evening news, but gradually the net provided more news, more inline with when I wanted it. I used to own a dictionary (well I still do) but now when I want to spell something I’m more likely to Google it and see if Google returns me the correct spelling if that fails there is always Websters.com.
All this got me thinking about how unfriendly computers are. Basically, the human interface to the computer hasn’t changed since my TI994A. There is a keyboard, a mouse ( okay no mouse back then ) and a display. Applications, though far less complex, were written much like they are today. You have some sort of input screen, some menus and maybe an option to aggregate some data. Where is the innovation?
Why is it that we are still tethered to the same old paradigm that was first introduced way back in the late seventies? Our processing power has increased by orders of magnitude, but we still force ourselves to work with these machines on the same level as we did back then. For example, why do we really need a separate mouse? How come the keyboard isn’t customizable such that I could arrange my keys anyway I wanted. Why is it that I have to “map” keystrokes to physical keys instead of to an arbitrary position. That isn’t how I work best. I would much rather not have the concept of a key at all, but rather have an input device that as an end user I could make be anything I wanted. If I need a mouse like interface then that is what it is. If I want to type so be it. If I want voice recognition, it works with that as well. I don’t want to have twelve different devices for input of information to the computer. It’s silly and clutters up my desktop.
Some would argue that voice technology is coming, but that isn’t innovation. That’s been around for years, it just doesn’t work all that well. I can type far faster than I can talk–at least to a computer such that it would understand. Speech technology wouldn’t help someone who has a speech impediment. Likewise today’s input devices aren’t well suited for people with physical disabilities.
Where is the innovation? Where is the new way to work with a computer? I happened to overhear a developer who had just come from a meeting where the business side of the house requested that he build functionality into the site that would be “just like X” where X is a well known desktop application.
I’ve heard this type of request before and it always astonishes me. If you wanted X then go buy it. If the end user has X why would anything I write at some fraction of the budget and time that it took to create X be more compelling for them? Why is it that the business side of the house continue to drive us to the same old thing? Look at the OpenOffice vs. MS Office. On the surface what is the difference? Very little. They look alike, they do the same operations, they interact with the user the same way. Why? Because someone (MS) put out a product that tons of people use so everything decided that is the best way to do things. How about the Linux KDE desktop. It works just like Windows. In fact some of the push to get Linux to the desktop is about making it look like Windows. Well, news flash, I’m tired of the endless parade of apps that look almost alike and operate almost alike. Why don’t people open their eyes and recognize that the chance to change the world isn’t by recreating what is already available, it’s by creating something new. Windows vs DOS is a perfect example. Windows was compelling, it brought ease of use to the masses. It’s time for a new paradigm in both software and hardware.
The Longhorn concept videos definitely look promising. Longhorn seems to provide a new level of interaction, but there is still a lot of the same old stuff there. Why, for example, if I click on the Start button and select explore to I end up n levels down under Documents and Settings\UserName\Start? I’ve never once wanted to be at this local. Why can’t I easily (keyword easily) change this so that when I right click I end up in a more logical place in my file structure. Why are we still using the concept of folders to store files? Can’t someone come up with a more logical solution so that I don’t have to traverse up and down the tree structure each time I want to find something. Many might argue that I should be putting my files under My Documents. The problem with My Documents is that each time I open an application it makes me go through the directory tree to find My Documents, which is a pain. Yes, most apps today remember the last few things opened, but that doesn’t help if it isn’t new. Also, how about saving something. Why do I have to constantly reset where I’m saving. Can’t there be a system level ‘save my crap here’ setting so I don’t have to do it each time?
Mark Cuban recently posted part 4 of his Success and Motivation thoughts. A comment added by a reader was that he looks at over 1500 RSS feeds a day. Mark says he reads 3 hours a day. Now I don’t have anywhere near 1500 feeds, but I can tell you there is no way I could possibly find time to look at all those feeds. How come there isn’t an easy way to manage the feeds such that only those posts that have something interesting to me appear or at least appear on top? [I’m not the first to mention this. Someone posted about having a Tivo like option in the aggregator]. To me that is innovation. With that I could subscribe many thousands of feeds and rate those that had content I’m interested in. As time goes on I would get only those postings that I wanted. The end result is that I would be more productive. Hell I would pay for something like that and ultimately that is what it is all about. Create compelling applications for the users, not recreate what already exists so you can re-brand it. So I ask again, where is the innovation in today’s technology.