Was a GUI for computers inevitable?

[magnusfalkirk]

As was suggested in another thread I thought I'd start a topic on the Graphical User Interface (GUI). Was it inevitable that a GUI would be added to our computers or did it only happen because Steve Jobs (he of the Reality Distortion Field) thought it was something good when he saw it at Xerox/PARC? If the Lisa/Macintosh had never come about with the GUI would someone else have invented it first or would we still be using a command line interface (CLI) to deal with our computing today?

 

For myself I'm not sure it would have happened if Jobs hadn't swiped/bought the idea from PARC. There is no evidence that Microsoft was even thinking along the lines of a GUI until after the Lisa/Macintosh debuted. In fact I'll go so far as to say that it wasn't really the Mac that popularized GUI but Microsnot. IMHO Microsnot has always been famous for stealing/copying other companies ideas for computers. Yes Digital Research came out with GEM, which became Atari TOS and there was the Amiga OS, which was even more of a niche computer than the Mac or Atari ST's (IMHO). But if Microsnot had ignored the Mac GUI I don't believe we'd be using it today, and there are some good things to be said for a CLI depending on what computer system you're using.

 

So, having said that, let the discussion begin!

[Rex Dart]

Seems as natural a progession as color TV. By the way, you've mispelled Microsoft several times.

[magnusfalkirk]

I deliberately misspelled Microsoft as Microsnot. I take it you've never seen or heard that variation on their name before?

[Arkhan]

Someone would have made a GUI eventually if it didn't go down like it did.

 

There was that motivation to let non-techies use a computer. Little kids and old people don't like typing when they can click big pictures and shit.

 

Microsoft cared about GUIs when they needed to. Not when acid tripping said they needed to, lol.

 

Their GUI was better than Apples anyway. Mac's GUI is still dumb.

 

Also, all that Microsnot nonsense is dumb.

 

Its like those people that make fun of PC by calling it PeeCee

 

and "Windoze"

Edited March 30, 2012 by Arkhan

[Rex Dart]

I deliberately misspelled Microsoft as Microsnot. I take it you've never seen or heard that variation on their name before?

 

Sure. Back in junior high.

[doctorclu]

Don't hate Microsoft because they won. I mean technically that is what it all comes down to.

 

Graphical interface, a GUI... I remember thinking it was interesting but thought it also hogged a lot of resources. I remember hearing about and seeing GUI interfaces. Even played with a light pen interface that I got from a Atari user group. But in the end I just went back to Dos 2.

 

When I went from a Atari 400 to a Macintosh (128K) I don't remember too much angst. I was 18 at the time. To matter the fact, I remember liking the transition of SpeedScript on the Atari 8 bit to MacWrite and loving how what I had on the screen was what would be printed rather than setting codes, printing a paper, changing codes, printing again till you got it right.

 

What you saw is what you got. I liked that.

 

There have been a lot of ideas of how to get around a graphical environment. I think I am surprised in a way that the mouse/trackpad was what would get us around in the end rather than the light pen, wands, and other devices that were being knocked around for a while.

[Arkhan]

lol all we did in Jr. high was make fun of people who didn't have Diablo 2.

[Uzumaki]

I was sort of hooked to GUI when I found GEOS for Commodore 64. Much easier to do things without having to remember all the command line (OPEN1,8,15,”N0:”DISKNAME,ID”:CLOSE 1 make a mistake with number and you could erase the wrong disk or worse)

[Arkhan]

GEOS was neat, but I never had a use for it, since the first time I used it was in like 2005, lol.

 

 

My first GUI was Win 3.1

 

I still think it's a great GUI. Kinda wish they hadn't strayed from that sort of layout to be honest.

[akator]

Jobs and Apple were first to market with a consumer GUI OS (and computer), however they were not first to market with a GUI. There were at least several specialized workstations that used a GUI for CAD and other professional applications. It was inevitable that the GUI would "trickle down" to the consumer level sooner or later.

 

Digital Research was playing with GUI development before the Lisa or Mac were released. They were counting on it to be their rebuttal to DOS, many parts of which were "borrowed" from DR's CP/M. That GUI work eventually became GEM and ST TOS. Incorrectly, public perception is that these were created in response to the Lisa/Mac because DR was not first to release their products.

 

Would Tramiel's Atari have used TOS on the ST if the Mac hadn't gotten to market first, thus influencing the ST decision of using a GUI? I don't know. The Mac GUI undoubtedly increased consumer interest and hastened GUI development and industry acceptance -- but the GUI was already commercially available before the Mac, and it would have been on consumer desktops sooner or later even if the Mac never existed.

[Keatah]

Once desktop hardware became powerful enough, and software optimized enough, that's when the GUI became a worthy contender to the command line.

 

It's that way with a lot of things, like the emergency runway seeker, for example. This little pocket-sized linux box constantly plays devil's advocate to the pilot, running flight simulator over and over and considering the worst-case scenario of complete engine failure. When the pilot presses the red button it connects the auto-pilot to the simulation and flies the plane to the runway. Imagine trying to do that with a command line and steam gauges?!?!!? Instead, the device works like a touch screen setup with icons.

 

We may ask, is the gesture interface on IOS devices inevitable? Same answer of yes. Untested and "unknown" user interfaces will always be outlandish concepts till the hardware provides for reality. When that happens, you have a bunch of companies getting on the bandwagon, and if their implementation is "right" then you have a success.

 

And consider one more thing, the virtual reality craze of the 90's was doomed to failure from the outset. Why? Because of fidelity and practicality of the i/o hardware. Low resolution goggles, annoying gloves and immersion suits. There's more.. Perhaps this will work someday, but not for some time to come. Shit, even Star Trek never really explored VR until the early 90's with the Holodeck. And even then it was a reactive action. Whereas with the iPad and cellphone, Star Trek seemed to almost pioneer those devices in the form of PADDS and communicators.

 

Have it be known that the GUI done right is like a memory map of activities and controls and buttons and knobs. I don't remember the exact precise command needed to power-up an mp3 converter and have it do something. But I do visually remember buttons and sliders and how they all work.

Edited March 31, 2012 by Keatah

[desiv]

Don't hate Microsoft because they won. I mean technically that is what it all comes down to.

No, I disliked them long before they won..

But the misspellings are silly....

 

And a GUI was going to happen eventually. People were working on GUIs before PARC. (Sketchpad and earlier)

PARC was just the first group to apply it to a full OS (rather than specific applications), that I'm aware of anyway..

 

Before Apple was the Apollo Computer systems "Display Manager."

 

You could see steps towards the GUI all throughout computer history.

 

If Apple hadn't seen the PARC stuff, the PARC guys would have left and done it themselves or someone else would have picked it up.

The Apollo stuff would have continued or inspired something...

 

It was going to happen...

 

And whoever would have established it, Microsoft would have stepped in and sold their version to more people.

 

desiv

Edited March 31, 2012 by desiv

[Seob]

GUI was going to happen, with or without Apple. But they show for the first time how powerful a computer with GUI could be when everything was designed for this principal. The fist PC's where designed for the CLI.

So when Microsoft introduced Windows it wasn't as streamlined because the most people still used CLI and programs where running faster in CLI. I think i switched to Windows after 95 came on the market, since games before this time ran better in Dos then in Windows, because Windows is using a lot of computer power.

Windows95 was the first Windows designed to run without the CLI, and because the introduction of DirectX programmers had it easier to write programs for Windows, because they hadn't have to write a gazllion of driver to get programs running in CLI.

[SoulBlazer]

I think also a GUI was inevitable. It just needed a powerfull enough computer to run it, as the software takes up a lot of resources.

 

I recall using DOS as a kid, and I also used BASIC on my C-64. Difficult to learn, tedious, and annoying sometimes. MemMaker was a godsend when it ame out, but even then it was frustrating -- having to run it to change my memory settings when I wanted to play a certain game and so on.

 

Even when I got my new PC in 1995 with Windows 3.1 I still used DOS half the time. I didn't finally give up DOS until I got another PC in 98 with Windows 98 on it.

 

GUI has many advantages -- the biggest being it's easiest for a non computer user to use. I can't tell you how many folks I saw who finally warmed up to PC's thanks to Windows and finally got confertable to them. It opened PC's to the masses. We can debate the bad points about this (of which I am aware there are some) but Windows finally did what Apple's computers could not -- opened them up to the public at large, and at a more affordable price.

[JamesD]

The GUI was inevitable but it needed some of the capabilities of the 16/32 CPUs to become a reality.

A large flat memory model, excellent compiler support, efficient register model, etc...

Designing everything, implementing all those new algorithms, etc... in assembly on an 8 bit was just far too daunting a task at that time.

 

Now that the algorithms are worked out and cross development tools have advanced a lot, recreating everything in assembly is slightly easier than it would have been back then. Given the amount of work that has gone into the new Atari GUI with modern tools and the level of GUI knowledge available today, imagine how much longer it would have taken back then without all that.

Edited April 1, 2012 by JamesD

[almightytodd]

I haven't seen anyone comment on the mouse in particular as the pointing device. I will grant that the Menu concept and the idea of putting everything you need to know somewhere up on the screen (...whether or not it is immediately visible, or contained in a drop-down or dialog box) is a much more user-friendly approach than, "Read this manual and memorize all of the commands". But there were many CLI programs that did that without a mouse by using the directional keys or supporting tab-key advancing through various fields or screens.

 

For years there have been many ways to push a cursor or screen pointer around a screen other than with a mouse, including touch pads, light pens, track-balls, and even joy sticks. Remember all of the excitement when laptops first started showing up with that little "nub" pointer device? Was the mouse inevitable? Or was it a spark of genius to turn a track-ball upside down and slide the entire unit around on the desktop?

 

I've often wondered if any studies were done regarding the loss in efficiency when one half of your "typing hands" resources has to lift up off of the keyboard and reach for the mouse. How about a touch-typing keyboard that could be operated with just your left hand, leaving your right hand free to stay on the mouse? I do recall some experimentation that was done to put more and more buttons on the mouse. I wonder if anyone ever thought to put the entire keyboard on sliders and have the optical sensor on the bottom in the center so you could keep both hands on the keyboard while sliding it around like a Ouija board pointer?

 

My son had some great stories about PC tech support phone calls when he worked in a call center one summer in the late 90's. There was one woman who complained that her mouse wasn't working when she'd tried so hard to protect it by leaving it inside it's plastic "dust cover". Another caller said that the mouse didn't seem to work right when she put her elbow on the elbow-pad, and then pressed the mouse up against the screen... ...It just goes to show that sometimes things that are designed to be "intuitively obvious" may not be...

 

Once the mechanical mice started being replaced with optical designs, new problems cropped up. Ever try to use an optical mouse on a glossy white surface? We used to have a lenticular 3D Star Wars mouse pad that was fine for a mechanical mouse, but the light from an optical mouse was scattered all over the place causing the screen pointer to jump around.

 

Hey magnusfalkirk, thanks for taking up the suggestion to turn this into a new thread...

[Seob]

We'll the mouse is part of the gui experience. It's key for a good gui to have a precision input device. A digital joystick or cursor keys just aren't fast and precise enough to get around the screen.

There where a lot more people having problems using a pc without the mouse then there are using the mouse in the wrong way. Sure they are not the right tool for everybody, but the majority of people haven't got issues using the mouse.

I personally dislike a touch-pad and the mouse knob in the keyboard.But it's good to have a choice.

[Keatah]

I use a touchpad and mouse simultaneously. Two cursors and two monitors = 2x productivity.

For anybody that gives a shit, my first exposure to GUI was the Mountain Music System's lightpen. Then shortly thereafter the Gibson Lightpen. Next was Pinball construction set. And soon enough in the early 80's, a Koala Touchpad. I learned the basics of Photoshop with the pad. All on the venerable Apple 2 series. Later on came Mousetext and Appleworks.

 

Then I got into that monstrosity of the Amiga. ughhh. And finally relief with Windows 3.1 Yes!

Edited April 1, 2012 by Keatah

[high voltage]

And now with W8 we get touch screens, wow touch screens (with a pen) been around for like what, 40 years.

[Seob]

Touchscreen for a desktop pc is the most stupid development. It's impossible to have a ergonomic setup. Either the screen is mounted correct for viewing, causing you're arms having to reach to high. Or the screen is to low for viewing, but correct for touching the screen. And it's never going to be precise when using you're finger.

[Arkhan]

I hate typing with on screen crap.

 

I get cheezit crumbs and shit everywhere.

[Keatah]

When I vacuum my kybd this is what comes out.

 

hair

white flakes

dust mites

french fry salt

paper dust

other stuff

fabric dust

[BydoEmpire]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfIgzSoTMOs