 |
|
|
Last Modified:
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
|
|
|
Homepage / Publications & Opinion / Archive / Daily Telegraph: Harddrive Why it's better to work flat out IF I WERE to give you an arrow-head and ask you to bind it to the end of a shaft, I would be amazed if you stood bolt upright, held the shaft at eye level and proceeded to bind the head to one end. I would expect you to sit or crouch and look down on the artefacts and work in a stooped and concentrated manner. If I were to give you a sheet of paper and a pen and ask you to write a note, I would be amazed if you held it at head height and proceeded to write. I would expect you to sit down and crouch and write looking down. For various reasons locked into our distant past, we happen to be about 20 per cent more efficient when we read and write looking down on a sheet of paper than when we look straight ahead. This being so, we might then be prompted to ask ourselves a fundamental question: why is it that we have vertical computer screens? By merely lying a computer screen flat and looking straight down, we can improve our ability to read, edit and compose on average between 15 and 20 per cent. The reason we do not do this is down to two principal limiters - the television paradigm and the keyboard. We have become conditioned to screens being vertical for entertainment and for much of our information display, and the keyboard would simply get in the way and make it difficult to see over the top. The contrast ratio of print on paper is about 200, the personal computer gives us about 60, while a laptop computer with liquid crystal display is about 30, and a personal organiser with black on grey can be as low as 10. There is no doubt about it - paper is wonderful stuff; user friendly, flexible and, to some extent, reusable. It also allows us to see several pages at a time and not be restricted to the single or fractional page format of the computer screen. Spreading out a complete work over a desktop and looking down at the entire entity is a powerful means of enhancing composition and understanding. On the other hand, the screen is wonderfully flexible and a different kind of workplace, but just a metaphor of the desktop. If the two are going to merge and we are to realise the advantages of both, then it is necessary for the desktop to become completely active. It is also necessary to get rid of the keyboard and probably the mouse. Imagine for a moment a desktop that is active with the definition and contrast ratio of paper, but with the flexibility and intelligence of a computer. For such a work space the electronic desktop would no longer be a metaphor, but a step ahead of the wood veneer and paper we currently enjoy. In experiments with such technology, we not only see a 15 to 20 per cent improvement through our innate ability to focus and concentrate better when looking down than looking straight ahead, but an even higher percentage through animation and interaction with documents that are no longer passive. The next significant step for computers in the fixed office might just be large, active and high-definition desktop screens, with voice interaction and natural hand manipulation of objects. Combine this with a vertical screen for video-conferencing and telepresence, and a new environment is born that resonates with our psychology and physiology. Perhaps the next step will then be back to true objects, animation and interaction, and away from the unnatural world of text, spreadsheets and 2-D static graphics. Peter Cochrane holds the Collier Chair for the Public Understanding of Science & Technology at the University of Bristol. His home page is: |
|
||
|
|
|