The idea of
using information bubbles as interfaces
emerged in 2002 from two apparently unrelated groups of
researchers virtually simultaneously. Groxis and
Cloudmark, both in San Francisco, base their data
navigation interfaces on the concept that information is
really a kind of node, or bubble, and that related
bubbles can be nested one inside another. These
interfaces also rely on color cues based on the
category, importance, or urgency of information to make
navigation easier.
Groxis's version of the bubble interface, Grokker,
has been available as stand-alone software for several
years and was used only by a small community, before its
recent release as a Java plug-in [see photo, "Grokking It"].
Give Grokker a hierarchical database and the software
carves it into a series of colored balls, with each ball
representing one topic. In the P&G search, these
balls include news, market research, and brands. Look at
a topic and you can zoom in on its contents, which are
represented as smaller and smaller balls. For example, a
search for P&G products turns up balls for "new
products," "paper products," "care products," and
"boycotted products." Go up in the hierarchy and you can
view many balls and their relative relationships. Search
for another topic and the information rearranges itself
accordingly. Grokker can represent Web searches,
corporate databases, or mixed data collections.
Cloudmark's bubble interface is called Information
DNA. This interface grew out of the company's efforts to
improve its e-mail antispam software. Cloudmark's
engineers discovered that they could find patterns in
large e-mail collections that are like DNA—that is,
certain patterns represent various kinds of spam, such
as fraudulent mortgage offers or pornography, that can
be consistently identified. To help with the
identification, the engineers created mathematical
algorithms, which are applied to e-mail to produce a
screen filled with bubbles whose sizes and colors
indicate collections of safe information and of spam.
The third problem being tackled by new interfaces is
organizing the information you create or collect. This
includes photos, videos, and audio files along with
traditional text documents—a much more complex task
than the designers of the documents, folders, and menus
interface tackled back in the 1970s.
The first product to address this challenge directly
is EverNote, from EverNote Corp., Sunnyvale, Calif. The
company made the PC version of the software available
for free download in June and promises a Macintosh
version soon. EverNote plans to charge a fee for an
expanded version that will synchronize data from PDAs
and smart phones along with computers.
The idea behind EverNote is simple: it keeps all your
computer files—no matter what type or how they were
created—in a single, chronological manuscript holding
everything [see photo, "Time
Traveler"]. You can search this manuscript
by keywords, categories, or other designations. Or,
probably most useful, you can look at graphical
representations of your files on a timeline, based on
when each item was obtained or created.
The graphics on the timeline are small versions of
each document in its original format. That is, it is not
represented by an icon. A document looks like a note or
a letter, a handwritten note looks like handwriting, and
a Web site looks like the actual Web site in miniature.
People tend to remember more or less when they created
or obtained a document—not the exact date, perhaps, but
often the month or season. Because users also have a
visual memory of that document, the graphical timeline
enables them to select the right document quickly even
though they can't read the text.
The basic idea behind EverNote is not new: David
Gelernter of Yale University, in New Haven, Conn.,
implemented such a system in Lifestreams in the late
1990s; a version was released for the Apple Newton
handheld computer in 1993. Lifestreams was a research
project that kept all of an individual's data—notes,
photos, manuscripts, Web-collected information—in a
single permanent, chronological file. But Lifestreams
converted the documents into a standard format, so they
lost their visual uniqueness.
As the
information being navigated and collected by
computers becomes increasingly complex, it may turn out
that two dimensions are not enough in which to represent
it.
A number of companies have been working on 3-D
interfaces for a long time. Such interfaces allow more
flexibility in displaying information, permitting the
images that represent information to look more natural,
letting them rotate in space or overlap with
transparency and dimension as clues to their position in
space and size (and, therefore, their relationships or
importance).
The first of these interfaces are 3-D representations
translated to a 2-D display. A good example of this type
of interface is Project Looking Glass, from Sun
Microsystems Inc., in Santa Clara, Calif. [see photo,
"Through the Looking
Glass"]. It permits multiple documents to be
viewed simultaneously, but instead of placing them as if
they are standing straight up on the screen, as is
typical in most interfaces today, Project Looking Glass
tips the documents back, as if they are lying on a
slanted drawing table. As a result, many more documents
are visible at the same time than is possible in a
traditional presentation. Project Looking Glass's
display has perspective: documents toward the bottom of
the screen are considered foreground and are larger; the
user can push documents back, making them appear farther
away and smaller but still visible. Documents can be
"turned over," and the user can add notes on the back.
This interface has been placed under an open-source
license by Sun, and a development community is now
gathering around it.
True 3-D interfaces are still very expensive, but
they do exist. One example is the Perspecta Spatial 3D
System, from Actuality Systems Inc., in Bedford, Mass.
The system includes a 51-centimeter dome, which displays
full-color and full-motion images that occupy a volume
in space. This means the user can look at a 3-D image in
3-D space without special glasses and can interact
naturally with the image in real time.
People who use special applications for medical
research, radiation oncology, and petroleum exploration
are the only ones who currently benefit from such true
3-D interfaces, but these devices may eventually migrate
for use by ordinary computer users. Ravin Balakrishnan,
a professor of computer science at the University of
Toronto, is working on appropriate interfaces for such a
world, perhaps based on the mapping of users' hand
gestures and their interaction with virtual 3-D volumes.
In the future, user interfaces may go beyond the
visual to the tactile. SensAble Technologies Inc., in
Woburn, Mass., offers a device that looks like a pen
attached to a robotic arm. It allows users to touch and
manipulate virtual objects with varying degrees of
precision, suiting the application and the user's
budget. The idea is for the user to experience the
object exactly as if he or she were touching it in the
physical world. Force feedback via the haptic interface
allows the user to explore virtual objects as if they
were physically present and being explored by actual
touch. SensAble has research projects with a number of
commercial and university laboratories.
Although SensAble's interface is designed for
high-end business users, haptic interfaces will quickly
enter the consumer realm. In February, at Demo@15, an
industry conference in Scottsdale, Ariz., Novint
Technologies Inc., of Albuquerque, N.M., showed Falcon,
a consumer haptic interface. Novint expects its
interface to be used with games soon, at prices as low
as US $99.
Such
revolutionary new interfaces are steadily
moving into users' hands. Some will catch on; most will
fade away.
But none of the more exotic ideas discussed are
mainstream yet: they are all experiments. The prize may
go to the style of interface that gets adopted by a
mainstream vendor, like Microsoft, Apple, or Google, and
then proliferated to everyone's device. Or a tiny vendor
that no one has ever heard of before may introduce an
interface so seductive that no one can live without it.
The evolution of the computer user interface is mainly
still ahead of us.