Is it bad that I want to browse using this bare idea? I had Ubiquity installed in FF3.6, and it was quite handy. The inline maps and other website commands were more and more useful as you got used to them. Integrating it into the browser like this would be at least a neat experiment, if not a useful fork/revamp of Firefox.
There are some nice ideas here, but the general approach has me worried, for two reasons:
(1) Web pages, and the current crop of browsers that enable them, form a hugely successful interface, one that non-technical people find very easy to learn & use, in my experience.
Ever helped a non-techie use a word processor? Personally, I find (say) MS-Word to be quite intuitive. But they don't. Questions every 30 seconds. Similarly with graphic file browsers, drawing programs, spreadsheets, etc. But I've never had to give anyone more than a very brief intro to the web, and off they go.
So: the interface we have, works. Don't break it!
(2) I want to stay in control of my experience on the web.
> For this exercise, I take as guiding principle the idea that content should be its own interface while administrative debris should be minimized or wholly eliminated.
That's a fine principle in a world in which skilled web designers are trying to make their sites easy and convenient for me. But in the real world, I need the ability to say "no" to a web page at a fine-grained level. I need Readable and Flashblock and severe limitations on what JS is allowed to do. Take away my "administrative debris", and you might be giving away my power to run my own computer, to web designers who are unscrupulous, careless, or just stupid. I realize that much of this article is all about how to re-enable the kind of functionality currently available via all the stuff framing the content in a browser window. However, he doesn't even mention the concept that the user should be in control. And that scares me.
So: redo the interface if you must. But do it with a view toward keeping the user in control.
5 comments
[ 2.5 ms ] story [ 19.7 ms ] threadLike it or not, the search box is how most users navigate the web.
(1) Web pages, and the current crop of browsers that enable them, form a hugely successful interface, one that non-technical people find very easy to learn & use, in my experience.
Ever helped a non-techie use a word processor? Personally, I find (say) MS-Word to be quite intuitive. But they don't. Questions every 30 seconds. Similarly with graphic file browsers, drawing programs, spreadsheets, etc. But I've never had to give anyone more than a very brief intro to the web, and off they go.
So: the interface we have, works. Don't break it!
(2) I want to stay in control of my experience on the web.
> For this exercise, I take as guiding principle the idea that content should be its own interface while administrative debris should be minimized or wholly eliminated.
That's a fine principle in a world in which skilled web designers are trying to make their sites easy and convenient for me. But in the real world, I need the ability to say "no" to a web page at a fine-grained level. I need Readable and Flashblock and severe limitations on what JS is allowed to do. Take away my "administrative debris", and you might be giving away my power to run my own computer, to web designers who are unscrupulous, careless, or just stupid. I realize that much of this article is all about how to re-enable the kind of functionality currently available via all the stuff framing the content in a browser window. However, he doesn't even mention the concept that the user should be in control. And that scares me.
So: redo the interface if you must. But do it with a view toward keeping the user in control.