In search of a truly innovative Desktop

Question

Hi, I'd like to bring this topic up on this forum, because I know there are many (former ) distro-hoppers and that's why I'd like to raise my question here.
After reading an article about Linux desktop environments mimicking other OS (let's face it, in some ways KDE resembles Vista and Gnome 2.30 resembles OSX a bit) and thus reducing the computing speed and uniqueness that Linux offers, I looked for alternatives. E17 looks promising, lightweight WMs are attractive too, but they all have one thing in common:
They all use windows as the main entity of the GUI:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Window_%28computing%29 wrote: window is a visual area containing some kind of user interface. It usually has a rectangular shape that can overlap with the area of other windows. It displays the output of and may allow input to one or more processes.
And they display them flat:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphical_user_interface wrote: The term GUI is historically restricted to the scope of two-dimensional display screens with display resolutions capable of describing generic information, in the tradition of the computer science research at the Palo Alto Research Center (PARC). The term GUI earlier might have been applicable to other high-resolution types of interfaces that are non-generic, such as videogames, or not restricted to flat screens, like volumetric displays.
So I'm asking you people here, have you on your Linux/GNU journey discovered a completely different GUI concept for which you don't need a volumetric screen?
Yes, CLI could be seen as the answer, but doesn't count this time (maybe except for ncurses or similar), because it has a rather restricted support for graphics output
For example this is what I found: http://s3d.berlios.de/ Still uses windows, but as a WM, it is very different.
Last edited by smartass (2011-03-06 13:02:48)

Answer 1

smartass wrote: Well I'm afraid that this is still sci-fi, or at least not fully usable yet.
I think you just hit on the crux of the argument against what you're looking for.  I think the closest thing to what you're asking for I've ever come across is Project Wonderland, and it isn't hard to figure out why that didn't catch on.  When it comes to information and communication technology, efficiency is tantamount to progress and innovation.  Having to click-and-drag a 3D virtual desktop around to find an open application, or walk an avatar over to a virtual water cooler to chat with someone online, or flip through a "shelf" of open containers clogging up screen space (see Project Looking Glass), might look cool. However, in the end it's just a waste of screen space, resources and time, and a massive amount of superfluous code to be written and maintained.  The appeal of say, a holographic 3D interface (a la the Jarvis interface in the Iron Man movie) is that it would be quicker to physically move application containers out of view than to use a mouse to minimize them.  Until that tech becomes available flat windows on the flat screens available to us are the most feasible option, and in the case of 3D holographic projection, flat containers for different projects/activities/apps would still be the most reasonable way to manage most tasks.
I'd also add that the uptick in touchscreen software development has more to do with the "cool" factor than true innovation, as present touchscreen technology lacks the precision and speed of buttons and keys, and sacrifices the speed of hardware-based calculation for the software-only approach.  This same "coolness" accounts for the use of MS Kinect on home computers, as well as the hideous "coffee table pc" that recently debuted.  Look at videos of these latter two technologies in action.  What are these folks doing?  In one case I found, motion capture video in the living room (totally improving our lives somehow ); in most every other case, quick-and-dirty resizing of digital images, with no real precision.  Not exactly useful, if you ask me.  Of course if you're curious, Looking Glass and Wonderland are still available to play with, though neither is actively developed.