Did anybody here who had a bad experience with the Internet on their phone try Skweezer? It's a free service that you browse to on your phone, and then browse other sites through it, sort of a web proxy. It removes the things your phone can't view and makes the page much smaller besides. I'm surprised there aren't more services like this one out there.
I have a similar post to this one below, and this makes total sense. Wouldn't you rather describe your task to the computer than memorize which command fires it off? Isn't any GUI just a crutch until we think of something better?
I think the heart of this question really stems from the need to make computer interaction easier, not which visual metaphors are ultimately the best. Many feel that a highly customizable variation of traditional point-and-click windows and menus is a good thing, but I feel it's missing the point entirely. Is the interaction itself the goal, or isn't the goal of using any machine getting work done, and as quickly as possible?
I feel that if interface is an issue at all, it's already a failure. The machine should adapt to our natural forms of communication (such as speech, gestures, facial expressions, etc.), not the other way around. Gone are the days when computers were so woefully underpowered that we had to invent metaphors to meet each other half-way. Why do we insist on prolonging their legacy?
Rather, for the common man to use computers effectively, less is more. For example, a user should be able speak and explain to the computer the task she hopes to accomplish. The computer should request clarification where needed, since, as it has been abundantly noted, different people interact with machines (and each other) in wildly different ways. This doesn't mean she can discuss morality and philosophy with her computer (or maybe she can, but it's not a requirement); the computer should understand the concepts of its own capabilities and the user's natural references to those concepts enough to get the menial task done. (For example, "Read my mail", "Show me my new email", "What are my new messages?" all are requests to display new email.) She shouldn't have to know what specific routines are executed to arrive at that goal.
A user interface makes itself transparent. Using the perfect user interface is indistinguishable from discussing a project with your colleague at work. The more metaphorical layers you throw at the non-technical user, the bigger his resistance will be to use it.
Slashdot Mirror
What about just visiting the site on your device through skweezer.net? Then every page is mobile-friendly, or at least friendlier.
Did anybody here who had a bad experience with the Internet on their phone try Skweezer? It's a free service that you browse to on your phone, and then browse other sites through it, sort of a web proxy. It removes the things your phone can't view and makes the page much smaller besides. I'm surprised there aren't more services like this one out there.
I have a similar post to this one below, and this makes total sense. Wouldn't you rather describe your task to the computer than memorize which command fires it off? Isn't any GUI just a crutch until we think of something better?
I feel that if interface is an issue at all, it's already a failure. The machine should adapt to our natural forms of communication (such as speech, gestures, facial expressions, etc.), not the other way around. Gone are the days when computers were so woefully underpowered that we had to invent metaphors to meet each other half-way. Why do we insist on prolonging their legacy?
Rather, for the common man to use computers effectively, less is more. For example, a user should be able speak and explain to the computer the task she hopes to accomplish. The computer should request clarification where needed, since, as it has been abundantly noted, different people interact with machines (and each other) in wildly different ways. This doesn't mean she can discuss morality and philosophy with her computer (or maybe she can, but it's not a requirement); the computer should understand the concepts of its own capabilities and the user's natural references to those concepts enough to get the menial task done. (For example, "Read my mail", "Show me my new email", "What are my new messages?" all are requests to display new email.) She shouldn't have to know what specific routines are executed to arrive at that goal.
A user interface makes itself transparent. Using the perfect user interface is indistinguishable from discussing a project with your colleague at work. The more metaphorical layers you throw at the non-technical user, the bigger his resistance will be to use it.