3D File Manager on Linux Wins NSF Prize
MadFarmAnimalz writes "Science Magazine's reporting on the results of the NSF's Science and Engineering Visualisation Challenge and the first prize in the Illustrations category has been claimed by the Innolab 3D File Manager, which was developed on linux. Apparently this involves arranging data in a ferris wheel type structure." The data is arranged by its relationship with its content, rather than by its physical position on a hard drive or its file system.
No, I didn't RTFA, and I'm sure I'll get modded Offtopic, but the thought occurs to me:
Why are we, the free software community, busting ass to integrate pseudo-3d technologies to the desktop (AA-fonts, SVG-icons, real alpha blending), while it seems obvious that the next step is going to be a fully 3d-enabled desktop, with 3d icons placed in the current 2d-metaphor? Already new computers with new accellerators can push so many polys that the overhead is not measurable by users.
This looks really cool. Anyone know if it can be downloaded so we can take it for a test drive? Please post a download link if you have one. The article doesn't provide any links except to a static image of how the program visually organizes the files.
Rather than having a software layer which groups files by content rather than tree structure, why not impliment a SQL type of system to access ReiserFS after all it is a database underneeth.
Doing this through the filesystem strikes me as alot more efficient than a quick hack of a filemanager.
Even Microsoft are working on a file system based
There is no god
Some people have wondered in the past "What happened to the 3-D GUIs that were promised to us in the past from movies like 'Jurassic Park'?" Well, here it is. But really, what are the advantages of this system that cannot be offered by a 2-D GUI? It's really cool and all, but don't you think this would be a slight waste of CPU or GPU power?
10 Bits= $.25
100 Bits= $.50
110 Bits= $.75
1000 Bits= 1 byte
If you are on OS X and would like to sample 3D navigation of disk drive content, there is a nice free project that does this, aptly named 3DOSX.
It uses Open GL to make the file system into 3D rotatable platters, and the platters are linked together. Can swim around the platters looking at the different documents.
Some screenshots are here:
3DOSX Screenshots
The project homepage is here:
3DOSX Homepage
It is an interesting look into alternative ways of doing things.
-----
Cast a Cold Eye
On Life, on Death
Horseman, pass by
--W.B. Yeats' gravestone
This is more pretty-printing than real innovation. They claim to arrange data by relation but the thing still knows active folders, parent folders and subfolders. And the color scheme (subfolders are blue) focuses on the hierarchical structure of the folders and not the relation of the data. So they took one way of organizing and presenting files that works for most people most of the time but has a few big shortcomings, pretty-printed it in a somewhat confusing way and added relational sugar that can only add to the confusion.
Pretty, but not impressive.
One problem with this type of arrangement is that it requires thoughtful meta-description of all content (which scientists do but PHBs don't). What you have an interesting way of representing "degrees of separation", not a "triumph of Linux on the Desktop." The challenge ( http://www.nsf.gov/od/lpa/events/sevc/overview.htm ) was:
"This new international contest is designed to recognize outstanding achievements by scientists and engineers in the use of visual media to promote understanding of research results."
So for the visual representation of linked data structure, sure this looks great. As a GUI, heck no. "File Manager" seems like a misnomer here.
sarchasm: The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person who doesn't get it.
i want to give this a go, can i download it , no links to official site or anything
Does this look like a souped up ring interface from the classic Secret of Mana published by Square-Enix (nee Square)?
It does to me...
And just to get my daily flamebait rating: Who modded the parent offtopic? It's a valid questioning of the usefulness of the program mentioned in the article
Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
3Dwm is the most promising to really alterate our human-computer interaction.
Less is more !
-kgj
Sorry, my bad.
After reading my post again I realised where the trouble is.
What I ment was:
With or without magnification this approach to file system is still stupid. I just can't imagine troubles people would have with 3D fs layout, when there's a lot of users that have problems with 2D, which is far more simpler to imagine than 3D.
This representation is feasssible in some movie to produce high tech feeling, but in real life is unusable
Signature Pro version 1.13.2-3 release 83.5 beta3try7 after-breakfast edition
Okay, okay... I entered and didn't win with xcore. Not quite as flashy, but I thought I'd have a good chance.
Congrats to all the winners. Those finalist projects are pretty amazing.
One of the few 3d interfaces I love to use is the Homeworld / Homeworld2 interface for rotating and zooming in space.
The build & research manager in Homeworld is 2d though.
For most types of data representations the 2d tree interface is ideal. Maybe we are far too used to it; we don't now really see what we can do with a 3d interface that we can't do just as efficiently as in 2d. Even in a lot of movies 3d is just an enhanced use of 2d displays.
What we do most is deal with text. Text is very typically a 2d thing because its on paper or a representation of paper (slashdot textarea box). Text in 3d space... doesnt make sense. We'd have to learn a language of 3d space to understand references. Once we learn such a language it might be extremely efficient though, I guess time will tell.
Of those to whom much is given, much is required.
1) Providing reinforcement
Yes, it gives reinforcement. But there are other ways to do that- color change, make it bounce or vibrate, etc. But any change which alters the size of their area sensitive to mouse-clicks should be a big no-no.
2) Fitt's law - the button you're trying to click on gets bigger when you get near it, so it's easier to hit.
That doesn't really work... it's circular reasoning. After all, the computer doesn't know which button you want to hit. Some button gets bigger and easier, but not necessarily the right one. If it knew which button you wanted, it could be large all the time.
Changing the size or position of GUI elements in response to mouse motion should generally be avoided (unless you've moved to a whole other paradigm than the regular "windows, buttons, and scrollbars" layout. OSX has made no drastic transition like that. Besides the Dock and Apple menu, it's all the same).
The user should feel assured that moving the mouse doesn't do anything- only clicking (or drilling) it has an effect. The GUI should partially emulate a consistent, physical world- predictable cause/effect, etc.
How is this easier to use than this?
The picture you reference (the white and yellow boxes in a big circle) is a classic example of a computer algorithm mistake: naive connectivity graph generation.
What happens is a programmer notices that some set of data has relationships between the elements, so he decides to draw them onscreen for the user as boxes connected by lines.
But it turns out it can be quite tricky to construct a graph layout that'll be easy for a human to understand. You'd want to minimize both the length of connecting lines, and the times they cross each other, which is a tough problem. So programmers tend to skip working on it and just space the boxes around the edge of a circle, completely ignoring linkage for purposes of placement.
Here is another bad example of this lazy graph-layout in action. At least using a circle is better than putting the nodes on a 2d grid!
fsv.sourceforge.net Almost identical program, but open-source and for Linux. Now if only there was a way to run apps with it...
My Systems
Really interesting stuff there. I remember reading about the GNU "Storage" filesystem and something like that would be quite useful.
What I'd like is something like a CVS based filesystem; i.e., one that can automatically track changes to my documents/files/etc.. If I perform some upgrade and everything breaks, I could then retrieve a 'tagged' version of the OS. The same would apply to individual files; per-document versioning systems would be obsolete as the filesystem itself would take care of everything.
One of my biggest data problems is that I have about a dozen systems throughout my house. All of them have different data in different states. Yes, I use a file server and CVS to track, but it's still unwieldy, especially since there are some large files on each system that would quickly fill up about 150G.
It's funny, but some sort of P2P file sharing system -- something that's being tarred as a piracy tool -- would actually be very useful for my situation. I could run the p2p server on each machine and the client could transparently query each one for the file I require. Yup, more useful technology that may get banned.
Here's a demo.