AHC: No or alternate GUI.

I know we don't necro threads so instead I try to open a “sequel” thread to this question:

What if the graphical user interface (of the WIMP- "Windows, Icons, Menus, Pointers"- type at least) had either never been invented in its present form, or never been taken up by Apple for the Lisa and Macintosh machines? What if command-line interfaces, or some alternative involving the keyboard (or simple mouse driven interface for certain programs at the most) were all there was? How would computing develop, assuming that modern hardware of similar standard develops? Would DOS still be viable, and would UNIX and UNIX-like systems be preferred for networking over it? Would mice even take off?

Link to the original

There is also this surprisingly relevant article from 1996.

Link

I think the advance of touchscreens etc., but also the observations that people still cling to WIMP makes this an interesting discussion to revisit.
 
It massively slows computer adoption. I have had the misfortune of having to use software that still largely uses command lines and memorizing all the obscure commands is just brutally difficult - even after having used computers for 30 years.

The people who cling to hand strokes are usually power users. For Excel, I have seen people fly through Excel solely using keystrokes for commands. I used to be able to do the same actually for Excel 2003. But then with the upgrade and having used it just a little less, and I cant do it anymore. I rely of the mouse for commands I used to fly through.

Although I did not read the article, I would note that 1996 was when computer adoption was just hitting an inflection point, driven largely by the internet. Point being, you probably couldnt write that article in 2000.
 
What stops Digital Research from working on GEM in 1984? The guy who had been at Xerox GUI program was at DR, and knew about GKS, Graphical Kernel System for making graphics on vector based system from the late '70s. It was the first standard for graphics interchange.
 

Delta Force

Banned
Computers could have been based around using menus instead of featuring the desktop and icons. It would be a logical progression from computer architecture and would be a logical progression from the office environment too, as such an interface would be akin to having a computerized filing cabinet.
 
What stops Digital Research from working on GEM in 1984? The guy who had been at Xerox GUI program was at DR, and knew about GKS, Graphical Kernel System for making graphics on vector based system from the late '70s. It was the first standard for graphics interchange.

You beat me to it.

Even if Jobs doesn't take advantage of Xerox's stupidity, Digital Research will.

If Jobs doesn't use his potential game changer, does that mean Gates never gets a look at it (under the pretense of developing MS software for this new OS), thus, delaying MS in development of their own GUI?

In that case, when GEM is ready for IBM and the PC cloners, and it quickly becomes the industry standard (GEM was, from my experience, nowhere near crashtacular as Windows- up to and including 3.5 -and would have easily kicked MS DOS out of the market), does DR devote everything to refining their world beater OS, or do they do what Gates did and develop a boatload of apps of their own, with rudimentary versions pre-loaded as part of the GEM suite?

If DR focuses completely on their OS and leaves the apps to Lotus, Microsoft, Corel, etc..., how does Microsoft fare in a wide open market?

I remember the stuff that was out there before Microsoft ran damn near everybody else out of the market. Microsoft's stuff was, by and large, inferior to their competition (Corel's WordPerfect had Word beat by a mile and was one of the original killer apps and Lotus had the world by the ass with 1-2-3, THE spreadsheet of the 1980's) and, had they not been the gate keeper (so to speak) by being the guys who had the OS on everybody's (okay, not everybody, just most people's) PC, they either had to make better apps or die.

If DR stays out of apps and focuses totally on being the industry standard OS, I think we end up with a much larger and competitive software market, which is good for the consumer, as the 'App Makers' (we'll call them) jockey for position in the field with 'more for your money' strategies.
 
Top