The invisible vs the visible computer

Bolter & Gromala (2003) describe in Windows and Mirrors why the view or vision of Norman, Nilsen et al. is too narrow and why it is not always preferable to have an invisible computer. Designers and especially digital artists often need a visible computer.

Bolter & Gromala (2003) argue for a dichotomy of Structuralists (like Berners-Lee, Norman, Nielsen) are and Designers.

Structuralists

• are separatists: content and form is separated
• Nielsen (2001): we want to discuss the play and not the costumes of the actors of a theater play (I [mck] don’t think this is a reasonable statement)

Designers

• are untiarians: content and form can’t be separated
• a webpage is an experience
• Siegel (1997, Creating Killer WebSites): images etc. are not window dressing but essential to the communicative experience
• Computers don’t feel like toasters (an argument against Normans (1999) idea of information appliances, mck). They feel more like book, photo albums and tv sets (computers as media)

Bolter & Gromala (2003, p. 6): “Every digital artifact oscillated between beeing transparent and reflective”. Beeing invisible is not appropriate in all circumstances: what is needed is a rythm between being transparent and reflective.

flash demo animating a webpage

I was pointed to a nice flash demo showing people playing cops and robbers on a webpage of a danish economy newspaper leben erwecken

Separate Programs & Data

Goal

• Windows system on D:\win
• all Data on D:\data\userhome

HowTo:

1. use a newly installed windows
2. create a dummy user MrX with admin rights (will be deleted later)
3. login as MrX and start regedit
4. change entry HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\ProfileList
   to D:\data\userhome
5. Next steps are different for XP and vista

• xp

1. 1. copy folders “All Users” and “Default User” from C:\Documents and Settings to D:\data\userhome (”Default User” might be hidden!)

• vista

1. 1. change value Public in HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\ProfileList from %System-Drive%\Users to D:\data\userhome
   2. copy folder Public from C:\Users to D:\data\userhome
2. Reboot Windows and start creating users
3. you can now delete dummy user MrX and the old folders at C:\Documents and Settings (xp) or C:\Users (vista)

Tags: howto, windows

A thought about simplicity

“I like a thing simple but it must be simple througt complication. Everything must come into your scheme otherwise you cannot achieve real simplicity.” – Gertrude Stein

technorati tags:simplicity

Heidegger & Intuitive Use

I don’t want to question any of W&Fs’ seminal ideas, but I’m not that sure if they’ve interpreted Heidegger right in the particular question of Zuhandenheit (readiness-to-hand) and Vorhandenheit (existence).Here is Heideggers own early definition of Zuhandenheit (readiness-to-hand):

“The less we just stare at the hammer thing, the more we grab hold of it and use it, the more original is our relationship to it, the more unveiledly is it encountered as what it is, as a tool. Hammering itself uncovers the specific ‘handiness’ of the hammer. Readiness-to-hand is our term for the mode of being of the tool in which it reveals itself from itself.” [cited from Martin Heidegger (1962), Being and Time, p. 65.]

”Je weniger das Hammerding nur begafft wird, je zugreifender es gebraucht wird, um so ursprünglicher wird das Verhältnis zu ihm, um so unverhüllter begegnet es all das was es ist, als Zeug. Das Hämmern selbst endeckt die spezifische ‘Handlichkeit’ des Hammers. Die Seinsart von Zeug, in der es sich von ihm selbst her offenbart; nennen wir die Zuhandenheit.” [cited from Martin Heidegger (1927), Sein und Zeit p. 69]

“Für Heidegger ist die praktische Umgangsweise des Menschen mit seiner Umgebung ursprünglicher und wesentlicher als die theoretische Umgangsweise. Die Theorie ist Heidegger zufolge ein abgeleiteter Modus der Praxis. Diese Ansicht entspricht der Analyse seiner bizarren Bezeichnung von Vorhandenheit und Zuhandenheit. Diese beziehen sich auf den jeweiligen Seinsmodus des Menschen. In der Vorhandenheit, also in der theoretischen Umgangsweise des Menschen mit dem Ding, fokussiert man — meistens anschauend — das gegebene Ding und vernachlässigt dessen Umkreis. Das so anvisierte Ding wird nach Heidegger aus seinem natürlichen und zweckmäßigen Zusammenhang gerissen und als das Objekt der reinen Theorie betrachtet. Unter diesen Umständen kann das Wesen des Dings versteckt oder verzerrt sein. Auf diesem Grund kritisiert Heidegger die theoretischen Wissenschaften und die moderne Technik. Das Vorhandene tritt aber Heidegger zufolge als ein Gegenstand der Aussage auf, und beruht auf der sinnlichen Wahrnehmung.”
[cited from: http://edoc.hu-berlin.de/dissertationen/sun-yun-ping-2004-06-21/PDF/Sun.pdf; page 10f.]

Heidegger stated his position towards technology in: Heidegger, Martin: Die Frage nach der Technik (1953). In: Vorträge und Aufsätze. Tübingen 1954. The first public available english translation appeared 1977: Martin Heidegger. “The Question Concerning Technology.” In The Question Concerning Technology and other essays. Translated by William Lovitt. Harper & Row, New York, 1977. This might explain where Windograd & Flores and others might have picked up their ideas.

But according Mahon O’Brienn (2004) Heideggers “The Question Concerning Technology” is widely missunderstood: “Heidegger’s essay is easily one of the most influential pieces of work concerning the subject of technology (and related issues) but is also the victim of a myriad of misappropriations and misreadings. It is hoped that this essay will help ameliorate the current situation where so many non-philosophers view Heidegger’s essay as anothervariant on the prevalent themes of cultural pessimism and anti-modernism which dominatedthe European intellectual scene during the early and middle parts of the twentieth century.“
[cited from O’Brienn, M. (2004). Commentary on Heidegger’s “The Question Concerning Technology”: http://www.iwm.at/publ-jvc/jc-16-01.pdf; p.1]