"Leaving aside the questions of what point is there running Linux on a wristwatch since this is a "proof of concept"...the fact of the matter is that human computer interaction is woefully lacking at the moment."
From your first post. Note that you specifically left aside the topic of Linux and confined yourself to HCI issues. I responded to those and successfully refuted you.
Now your question is "why Linux"? Why not? It's got all the items in place: software memory management for devices without the hardware, (wireless) networking, relatively simple API, access to much source code, very very portable. It's the ideal OS for research projects. And despite your claims, multi-process is very nice. I don't want the watch to stop telling time while it relays my secret conversation with Mata Hari. Multi-user is (on the face of it) less useful--but there's no bloat involved--additional users are just additional processes, which is already being handled. --
"However, the physical components we use to interact with a computer are not the only problem."
True.
"...more of the problem lies with the actual interfaces (ie: GUIs)."
False.
"Most GUIs fall short or delievering a natural way of navigating, controlling and interacting with a computer."
How do we know that there ARE any natural (for humans) way to interact with a computer? A computer is totally unlike anything in evolutionary history, it wouldn't surprise me one bit to learn that most (all?) people just plain CAN'T comprehend it. --
So because it would be difficult (impossible?) to interact with the computer, the computer is useless? Let's see what you think after I remove all microchips from your home, car and workplace.
How would Linux on a watch be useful?
Telemetry: A million uses summed up in one word. Spies gathering intelligence. Scientists/Doctors gathering data (from the environment and/or from the wearer). Security officers (including police). Tracking/homing.
Data access: Sure, you can't do much general computing--but every (digital) watch has buttons. How about a "what's my current location" button with some GPS software installed? How about a modified Timex DataLink that links DIRECTLY to my PC (wirelessly)?
Communication: We laugh about Dick Tracy, but cellphone small enough to wear on your wrist would be revolutionary.
I thought of all the above while I was writing it. Surely someone who is actually involved in the field will think of many many more immediate uses. Then there is the "new platform" effect: Once everyone has a watch running Linux, what else becomes possible? No one predicted the Internet would explode once everybody had a PC... --
For about a week I was telling everyone "I don't own or run any Microsoft products AT ALL". Then as I was saying it to Person #10, I looked at my watch. D'OH! --
You still don't have a "buddha spirit"
on
Linux In A Box
·
· Score: 1
Free your Linux from the bottle. Linux has no need of earthly constraints. Think "Linux outside the box". Join our project: LITA ("Linux In The Air" or "LITA's In The Air") --
The "Linux on a Watch" from the LJ article doesn't actually run Linux. The thing on your wrist is really just an X display (and webcam) with a watch band. The processor and OS are hooked to your belt (or in another room, IIRC). The time is told using a modified version of oclock. --
Multi-tasking: "Look honey! I'm telling the hours AND the minutes simultaneously!" Journaling Filesystem: If my watch goes down, I won't lose my other timezone settings. Scriptability: No more trying to figure out what watch band hole to use. Just setup a cron job to periodically ioctl(IOTIGHTEN, "/dev/band"). Multi-user: My friend can tell the time while I'm busy using the stopwatch.
Can you just imagine having to put your command line args in RPN?
MyCalc%> mv file1 file2
error: argument missing
MyCalc%> file1 file2 mv
MyCalc%> cat/etc/passwd | grep fascdot | cut -d: -f7
cut: error: argument "|" is invalid
(I was going to re-write that in RPN, but I can't even figure out how pipelining would work--so forget it)
--
This is a monumentally stupid move. Who is taking marketshare away from MS? Linux (and probably OS X soon). And if you asked a random person to characterize Linux and OS X:
Linux: That command line thing
OS X: MacOS with a command line
All the up-and-comers have command lines--in fact, all up-and-comers are BASED ON command lines with a removable GUI. MS is apparently trying to steal from Apple's idea file again, but accidentally went into the archive vault to do it.
Ahhh, well. I'm sure there are people who are praising this idea as a "quantum leap forward". I'll be running circles around them computationally--in the Internet world that's darwinian death. --
BEGIN PERENNIAL GUI FLAMEWAR
Take the "mount manager" tool. How is this tool different than a text-editor with some shortcuts to the applicable files (/etc/fstab,/etc/smb.conf, etc)? Answer: It is only easier to use to someone who has never seen it before but it is less powerful AND not forwards compatible.
Only Easier The First Time: The GUI looks EXACTLY the same with the exception that the options are all laid out as checkboxes. But the options aren't explained, so no power is really gained here. How does it help to know I have a "password" option for/dev/hda1 if I don't know what that means?
Less Power: The tool doesn't give you any information how the file is actually laid out and there is no integrated text-processing. So the user does not advance on any path of knowledge where they can become MORE efficient (through the use of scripts, etc).
Not Forwards Compatible: If a new filesystem came along that had extra options, this tool would have to be re-written to accomodate. Whereas/etc/fstab wouldn't have to change one whit.
I am not saying GUIs are bad. I am saying that porting a text environment to GUI is not helpful and may be the reverse. Porting another GUI to Linux isn't even all that great. --
Since you use the term "Open Source" rather than "Free Software", I'm assuming your goal is NOT freedom.
So, if your goal is:
Buzzword-compliance--Announce total open-ness right now. Actual timeline does not matter.
Free testing--release beta1 (or later) as open source. (Note: do not apply incoming patches unless the bug appears in a story on Slashdot)
Venture capital--Tell the VC's that you "comply with an open source definition". Then create your own license with instructons on how to get the source ("cat/dev/zero") --
It sounds like somebody is trying to Save Money Through Confusing Statistics. The reason they originally decreased the price of each mission was to save money. So then they increase the price of each mission (through additional safety measures to keep from losing so many) to save money. Now they are decreasing the NUMBER of missions to save money.
NASA needs to stop asking Congress for money and start asking US for money. A very simple ad:
Scene: A war field, guns going off, bloody soldiers, etc.
Voiceover: The "Defense" Department got $750 billion this year.
Montage: Doctors working in labs, smiling children in hospitals, people working on computers, Mars Rover
Voiceover: Scientific research got $2 billion.
Caption and voiceover: Invest in Knowledge, Not War.
NASA is so focussed on science/engineering that they don't understand How To Make Friends and Influence People. --
Slashdot Mirror
Didn't compile. Maybe I should try that...
--
"Leaving aside the questions of what point is there running Linux on a wristwatch since this is a "proof of concept"...the fact of the matter is that human computer interaction is woefully lacking at the moment."
From your first post. Note that you specifically left aside the topic of Linux and confined yourself to HCI issues. I responded to those and successfully refuted you.
Now your question is "why Linux"? Why not? It's got all the items in place: software memory management for devices without the hardware, (wireless) networking, relatively simple API, access to much source code, very very portable. It's the ideal OS for research projects. And despite your claims, multi-process is very nice. I don't want the watch to stop telling time while it relays my secret conversation with Mata Hari. Multi-user is (on the face of it) less useful--but there's no bloat involved--additional users are just additional processes, which is already being handled.
--
"However, the physical components we use to interact with a computer are not the only problem."
True.
"...more of the problem lies with the actual interfaces (ie: GUIs)." False.
"Most GUIs fall short or delievering a natural way of navigating, controlling and interacting with a computer."
How do we know that there ARE any natural (for humans) way to interact with a computer? A computer is totally unlike anything in evolutionary history, it wouldn't surprise me one bit to learn that most (all?) people just plain CAN'T comprehend it.
--
So because it would be difficult (impossible?) to interact with the computer, the computer is useless? Let's see what you think after I remove all microchips from your home, car and workplace.
How would Linux on a watch be useful?
Telemetry: A million uses summed up in one word. Spies gathering intelligence. Scientists/Doctors gathering data (from the environment and/or from the wearer). Security officers (including police). Tracking/homing.
Data access: Sure, you can't do much general computing--but every (digital) watch has buttons. How about a "what's my current location" button with some GPS software installed? How about a modified Timex DataLink that links DIRECTLY to my PC (wirelessly)?
Communication: We laugh about Dick Tracy, but cellphone small enough to wear on your wrist would be revolutionary.
I thought of all the above while I was writing it. Surely someone who is actually involved in the field will think of many many more immediate uses. Then there is the "new platform" effect: Once everyone has a watch running Linux, what else becomes possible? No one predicted the Internet would explode once everybody had a PC...
--
For about a week I was telling everyone "I don't own or run any Microsoft products AT ALL". Then as I was saying it to Person #10, I looked at my watch. D'OH!
--
Free your Linux from the bottle. Linux has no need of earthly constraints. Think "Linux outside the box". Join our project: LITA ("Linux In The Air" or "LITA's In The Air")
--
The "Linux on a Watch" from the LJ article doesn't actually run Linux. The thing on your wrist is really just an X display (and webcam) with a watch band. The processor and OS are hooked to your belt (or in another room, IIRC). The time is told using a modified version of oclock.
--
Digital watches have never been fashionable...
Whereas everyone waits with bated breath for the unveiling of the new spring line of analog watches.
--
Smithers: What time is it?
Bart: It's ten eight-four....no, wait...what comes after twelve?
Smithers: One.
Bart: No! After twelve.
--
"My karma hasn't changed it all. According to Rob, that's on purpose."
To help you in your quest for lower karma, please post the email where Rob claimed this.
--
Multi-tasking: "Look honey! I'm telling the hours AND the minutes simultaneously!"
Journaling Filesystem: If my watch goes down, I won't lose my other timezone settings.
Scriptability: No more trying to figure out what watch band hole to use. Just setup a cron job to periodically ioctl(IOTIGHTEN, "/dev/band").
Multi-user: My friend can tell the time while I'm busy using the stopwatch.
--
Watch (ha!) out for viruses: "cat 1 /dev/poisoned-pokey-thing-on-watch-back"
--
Linux already does run on a watch. Check it out. (actually, the OS is running out of site and the display is on the watch)
--
Can you just imagine having to put your command line args in RPN?
/etc/passwd | grep fascdot | cut -d: -f7
MyCalc%> mv file1 file2
error: argument missing
MyCalc%> file1 file2 mv
MyCalc%> cat
cut: error: argument "|" is invalid
(I was going to re-write that in RPN, but I can't even figure out how pipelining would work--so forget it)
--
The chips were launched on January 19. That was 6 months and 3 weeks ago. As for "haven't seen the Crusoe in anything", I suggest you look here.
--
"...[IBM] can make copper chips, but interestingly enough, has licensing deals with Intel that should protect Transmeta from potential lawsuits..."
Lawsuits from whom? About what?
--
This is a monumentally stupid move. Who is taking marketshare away from MS? Linux (and probably OS X soon). And if you asked a random person to characterize Linux and OS X:
Linux: That command line thing
OS X: MacOS with a command line
All the up-and-comers have command lines--in fact, all up-and-comers are BASED ON command lines with a removable GUI. MS is apparently trying to steal from Apple's idea file again, but accidentally went into the archive vault to do it.
Ahhh, well. I'm sure there are people who are praising this idea as a "quantum leap forward". I'll be running circles around them computationally--in the Internet world that's darwinian death.
--
BEGIN PERENNIAL GUI FLAMEWAR /etc/smb.conf, etc)? Answer: It is only easier to use to someone who has never seen it before but it is less powerful AND not forwards compatible.
/dev/hda1 if I don't know what that means?
/etc/fstab wouldn't have to change one whit.
Take the "mount manager" tool. How is this tool different than a text-editor with some shortcuts to the applicable files (/etc/fstab,
Only Easier The First Time: The GUI looks EXACTLY the same with the exception that the options are all laid out as checkboxes. But the options aren't explained, so no power is really gained here. How does it help to know I have a "password" option for
Less Power: The tool doesn't give you any information how the file is actually laid out and there is no integrated text-processing. So the user does not advance on any path of knowledge where they can become MORE efficient (through the use of scripts, etc).
Not Forwards Compatible: If a new filesystem came along that had extra options, this tool would have to be re-written to accomodate. Whereas
I am not saying GUIs are bad. I am saying that porting a text environment to GUI is not helpful and may be the reverse. Porting another GUI to Linux isn't even all that great.
--
...I voted for Kodos!
BTW, Rob, that's "inanimate carbon rod".
--
I dunno--I only had it for a few minutes. I really really wish there was an option to change nicks because I'm sick of this one.
--
Let's just say that if karma-computing wasn't broken I'd be over 650...
--
I left 400 in the dust months ago.
--
Since you use the term "Open Source" rather than "Free Software", I'm assuming your goal is NOT freedom.
/dev/zero")
So, if your goal is:
Buzzword-compliance--Announce total open-ness right now. Actual timeline does not matter.
Free testing--release beta1 (or later) as open source. (Note: do not apply incoming patches unless the bug appears in a story on Slashdot)
Venture capital--Tell the VC's that you "comply with an open source definition". Then create your own license with instructons on how to get the source ("cat
--
I'm sure that once this gets around, some artists are going to try for odd effects that sound like a mix of heavy-metal and classical or something.
--
It sounds like somebody is trying to Save Money Through Confusing Statistics. The reason they originally decreased the price of each mission was to save money. So then they increase the price of each mission (through additional safety measures to keep from losing so many) to save money. Now they are decreasing the NUMBER of missions to save money.
NASA needs to stop asking Congress for money and start asking US for money. A very simple ad:
Scene: A war field, guns going off, bloody soldiers, etc.
Voiceover: The "Defense" Department got $750 billion this year.
Montage: Doctors working in labs, smiling children in hospitals, people working on computers, Mars Rover
Voiceover: Scientific research got $2 billion.
Caption and voiceover: Invest in Knowledge, Not War.
NASA is so focussed on science/engineering that they don't understand How To Make Friends and Influence People.
--