The Natural OS
If you look at all the other OS's, they are all competing on how shiny and cool they are. They all rely on mimicking artificial substances. Metal, glass, and plastic. Competing with them is a losing battle because you'll just look like a copy of Mac or linux theme.
What I would like to see is something based on natural and organic materials. For example, compare reading something on white paper vs the solid white screen you are looking at right now. Paper is a lot easier on the eye and one of the reasons is that if you look real closely, you'll see that it is not pure white but it has complex texture.
I would also like to see icons that look like they were painted with real paint instead of over stylized clip art with no real soul.
Comments
Re: The Natural OS
in part i am with you, is really and good reason, and if have haiku name, there have an graphical element, the fears are other element
Re: The Natural OS
Great Idea!! Mockup??
With some leaves please
Re: The Natural OS
I think the Haiku look right now flows into my vision. It is happy and appealing. That's why people even today like to steal the Be 'look.' But it is not perfect.
Here's a nice link comparing warm vs garish
http://johnkstuff.blogspot.com/2006/10/color-theories-for-cartoons-garis...
We certainly don't want to do what Apple does: take real pictures and suck the life and character out of them to use as icons.
Re: The Natural OS
we already have leaves in the logo :)
Re: The Natural OS
I wish I could give mockups. All I can give are ideas. Imagine a GUI carved out of stone. Polished black stone for media apps. Dolomite and limestone for other apps.
Or it can be something painted in Corel Painter. It could be something out of a fractal generator (randomness btw is not the complexity we want...it is confusing to the eye. Simple repetitive patterns are mind dumbing. Chaos is what we want, hidden in everything we see)
Re: The Natural OS
I like the idea of the natural look, but I like the shiny look sometimes too. Why can't the desktop be skinned? I like the apps that I can skin. I'm very visually oriented and I change skins every so often. I'd like to see a skin application that would be easy to create or modify skins for the desktop.
Re: The Natural OS
Well, polished stones like hematite are real and shiny. They would be great for the so-called "cool" apps. Other times you just want to get your work done and you don't want the GUI to be in your face.
One problem with the idea of skins is that they are a tease. The skinnable apps and OS's are usually pretty ugly by default. You want to skin them but you have to look through 5 zillion amateurish skins and never truly happy.
I would rather have a really well done look for the UI. The mac people aren't envious of skinning because they have a really well done look and you're not going to get a better one by outsourcing the job to everyone with gimp.
Problem looking for a solution
This natural look can't be achieved by those lousy LCD or CRT screens we are all using. Take a look at RiscOS screenshots if you like something similar.
IMHO I think it is best to use a nice desktop wallpaper and let intelligent software do statistic analysis of which colours dominate and use those colours in the GUI.
I wonder however how you would deal this with when you might have different colours or wallpapers=desktop backgrounds for each workspace arielb.
Re: Problem looking for a solution
hmmm riscos is definitely cheesy...not at all what I was thinking.
so this is also a problem of hardware resolution. That sort of bothers me because while people get faster and better cpu/gpu and eventually every OS will have an opengl desktop...monitors don't change much.
The last thing I want is some half baked looking UI like windows. Do people really like that or do they switch it back to classic mode like I do after playing for a few minutes?
People do like the simplicity of google. If it's not going to look absolutely great then the ui should just get out of the way and don't bog resources with skin abstractions.
Re: The Natural OS
Yep, but RiscOS GUI was based in windows 3.1
A brand new OS will be different.
Re: Problem looking for a solution
I think you meant to say solution looking for the problem. I see 2 problems. Eyeball ergonomics and identity.
The whole point of the natural idea is to make people comfortable while they are using their computer for hours at a time. Sony recognized this problem and came up with this solution:
http://www.learningcenter.sony.us/assets/itpd/reader/reader_features.html
It only works with black and white for now. It seems that the ergonomic problem requires a hardware solution. I was also thinking that if Haiku is a really good multitasker then you wouldn't have the problem from looking at the same thing all the time.
Then there's the question of identity. They would have photoshop and translucent windows and we would have real textures. Such a UI would be very impressive and still very different.
One problem is that since most computers won't be able to support the rich textures, you wouldn't have a standard look. I think a big target market for haiku is emerging markets. They need a free OS with low maintenance and minimal use of hardware resources. Those old computers won't run the fancy stuff and that would not help the identity problem. Also, if the whole *point* of the OS is simplicity then the graphical look should also reflect that. So I guess we can forget about those ray traced 3D icons...
A simple UI is also harder for the big boys to copy. Microsoft can try to be like macos x, but if we are using rich textures and paint, they'd probably copy that too because that would also show off their stuff. But if we are simple then microsoft is stuck. Simple and rich contradict each other.
So now I am really thinking to go back to basics. Something like Macos 9 but with tabs and other Haiku features. Not an OS that screams out "look at me! look at me!"
Re: Problem looking for a solution
Hi arielb, yes I'd love to have a paper like display, fixed at work as well as portable. But I don't think there is much to improve in the BeOS R5 basic looks, colours are well done and complement each other nicely. Though there are problems, like you don't know for sure what is clickable in its GUI and what not which again makes a clean GUI (you might think there is only so much clickable because buttons/items are more or less hidden).
Digg up some posts about GUI like the mockups done lately, and Darkwyrm's posts and their comments.
Re: Problem looking for a solution
ehhh I'm not so crazy about the colors. :) But that can easily change. The general shape could be sharpened up a bit.
I've seen some mockups. For example
http://www.k23productions.com/haiku/rc/stubear/OBOS_UI_v2_3_b.gif
is one of the better ones. Some of it does look a little weird though...like there's some alien growth coming out of the tabs. I also don't think they should be curved on the right side. I think the symbols on the tab should be in a box and more distinct.
See these edges in the scrollbars and little buttons:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9f/Mac_OS_9_screenshot_2.png
I think that would help.
Re: The Natural OS
I can agree that the Mac OS 9 titlebar buttons or widgets are they called? are much more distict, I see it being a button and not just a symbol.
The most trouble graphic artists get us in is functionality vs style. The first is IMHO much more important in practice as the latter, but when the style isn't right we tend to bash it without thinking for one second.
And of course when I looked at the OBOS screenshot I immediately went "Bleh ugly colours" :-) I agree about the tabs, 1 curve is enough it's just a style thing but how doesn't look at a pretty girl eventhough you know she will be useless in real life :-)
Re: The Natural OS
hey don't be beating down the ladies :-) I know quite a few that are smarter than me .... and im no dummy but anyway
I like macos 9 gui it kinda grows on ya... except for the aplication switcher which is very outdated
imo the main menu should pop up when you right click on the desktop and have the normal left click pop up options.... very handy i must upload a screen shot of my xfce setup which i quite like.
Re: The Natural OS
http://www.k23productions.com/haiku/rc/stubear/OBOS_UI_v2_3_b.gif
Ow! I love this mockup since the first sight in 2002! We are in 2008 and looks so futurist! R2 *needs* this GUI
Of course, this color (green) was supposed. There have a yellow tab mockup too.. dig and find
Re: The Natural OS
there's a whole bunch here
http://www.k23productions.com/haiku/rc/stubear/
I think what I really like here is the font. We need that font
Stuart McCoy also designed the Haiku logo
He wrote "The name was chosen because of its link to BeOS' unique haiku error messages. I chose a simple, clean typeface which best represents a haiku poem and the three leaves carry this theme even further through the use of the number three and natural elements, both common to haiku poems."
Re: The Natural OS
I will say this much. I am really liking this. It's smooth, the font is easy on the eyes, sort of like Libreation Sans, and the green colour is a nice touch. I would laugh if I see it for R1, but most likely going to be for R2.
Re: The Natural OS
All of the back and forth in this thread just goes to prove that EVERYONE has a personal taste and one look is never going fit all users.
If this OS wants to be new and innovative it will include the ability to change the look of the windows, menus, icons, etc.
And yes there will be lots of crazy, crude, loud, amateur 'skins' or 'looks' out there. So what? I browse for skins for Firefox and I only find about 1 in 50 that I like, but those ones I like I download and use and enjoy. Presumably someone else likes the 49 others that I don't (at least the designer?).
I personally hate being put in a box. Like with OS-X and Windows. I hope Haiku won't follow that mold.
Re: The Natural OS
we still need to come up with the default look that will "seal the deal" on first impression.
I think that appreciation of aesthetic principles is universal. Everyone agrees a rose is beautiful but not everyone can come up with a rose on their own. Many will come up with something weird but once you show them that rose, both of you will say "aha! that works!"
Re: The Natural OS
Exactly!
PS: I like lilies too ;-)
Re: The Natural OS
Ow! I love this mockup since the first sight in 2002! We are in 2008 and looks so futurist! R2 *needs* this GUI
Well, I totally dislike it (looks like Zeta to me :-O), and I wouldn't like Haiku to look like this. But we all know that there is no arguing about taste. :-)
Re: The Natural OS
I don't want haiku to look like it either but there's a reason why it makes people interested. It looks like it was made by someone actually knows what he was doing and really tried. Like the gradients, curves, shadows and fonts.
Zeta is really ugly. I mean really ugly.
http://media.arstechnica.com/reviews/os/zeta-1.0.media/befs.gif
The one similarity I see is the arrow on the scrollbar. < > /\ That has to go.
Re: The Natural OS
Well, I wouldn't say it is so ugly, but I agree, as a whole it doesn't look right because it mixes 2 styles, flat R5 and gradient style.
Re: The Natural OS
All of the back and forth in this thread just goes to prove that EVERYONE has a personal taste and one look is never going fit all users.
If this OS wants to be new and innovative it will include the ability to change the look of the windows, menus, icons, etc.
[...]
I personally hate being put in a box. Like with OS-X and Windows. I hope Haiku won't follow that mold.
I feel that fundamentally skinning support goes against one of the key goals of Haiku - that of simplicity. If you don't want to be put in a box, Linux is the perfect system for you - mix and match apps/skins/desktop environments/window managers/widget sets (GTK/KDE/XMotif).
A consistent visual look helps new users (their screens will actually look like those screenshots in the manaul), will help build the Haiku identity and is a great thing for application developers as it will make it obvious what is expected of a Haiku app, both visually and practically.
I like being in a box. My box is simple, clean and responsive. If that's not the box for you then why the interest in Haiku at all?
Simon
Re: The Natural OS
The implementation will define the simplicity. If choosing a skin and color scheme is simple, then people will understand it.
Some people have different requirements than others. This is far more than simply a matter of taste. Certain disabilities change the requirements of an interface. Font size and colors of the components are both major considerations. Size of the control targets is another big concern.
I can't recall what his disability was, but one gent I met had to use large fonts with horrid colors to read his text. (Horrid=Bright green text on magenta.) According to him, black and white was hard for him to read, but that garish combination was easy. Many disabilities require folks to use large targets for input boxes and the like, since they wobble.
If skinning violates simplicity, it cannot remain, sure, but removal is only one of the valid strategies.
Re: The Natural OS
Well, in linux you can make it look like 'anything' but on the mac there is "shapeshifter" and it still is mac os x. Something like that, as a 3rd party opportunity, would be nice for those who want a visual change from time to time. Haiku would still have its sliding tabs but they would be jazzed up. You could still tell it is from the Haiku family
Re: The Natural OS
Vintage/natural kinda looking window theme:
http://img162.imageshack.us/my.php?image=natural1tg1.png
Re: The Natural OS
I think the Haiku interface looks great as it is - maybe a few tweaks here and there but I think there's definitely something to be said for being consistent.
I think anything too flashy or radically different might cause the OS to lose some of its character.
Re: The Natural OS
I would really appreciate to find an OS that would not let me tweek its layout, colors,... At max, it should let me select a different background and that's it. The remaining is geekery and waist of time.
Re: The Natural OS
As someone mentioned earlier: There is no one-size fits all when it comes to a UI. Everyone will be using the OS for different purposes; Everyone has different tastes and everyone has different expectations: simplicity, customisation, accessibility, usability, visual aesthetics, consistency;
For example, if I'm a coder and I spend the majority of my time in an IDE/vim/some other editor: I don't want the UI to get in the way: As long as the basics are covered - consistency, non-distracting, responsive, clear visual indications (e.g. active window decoration). Should we exclude all developers like this?
However, if I'm a designer, maybe I want an aesthetically pleasing UI: A polished professional look, consistency, something that as a designer I can appreciate (just like a developer might appreciate some advanced/useful functionality, like a file system); I don't necessarily want the UI to look 'homebrew'. Should we exclude all designers like this?
However, maybe I'm a teenager: I want to pimp my desktop - background images, a dark shiny theme with yellow tabs; I want the UI to fit around my personality and be expressive of me. I want to browse and use themes created by my peers; Should we exclude all young people like this?
However, maybe I'm an older person with poor vision: I want big-ass serif fonts with an inverted high contrast UI. I want the mouse pointer to be massive so I can easily follow it on screen. Should we exclude all older people or those with disabilities?
However, maybe I'm just you're 'average' computer user: I just want something that works and is easy to use. I don't want my OS to look 'crappy', 'geeky', or 'flashy'. In fact - I don't really care - I just want to use the apps to do my job, play solitaire, whatever. Should we exclude the vast majority of computer users?
Although, maybe I'm a hardcore geek: I don't even want a UI. Give me a CLI, throw away my mouse and give me a keyboard.
A common opinion I see here is 'We shouldn't make the UI look anything like OS X, Windows or KDE/Gnome'... Have you stopped to think what that means and how far do you want to take that idea?
For starters: All these UIs are based around core fundamentals of human-computer-interaction - things that are absolutely necessary. Things like use of colour/contrast, action feedback, input, etc. Next they build on this to introduce well established, accepted and pretty much user expected concepts: A windowing system, mouse pointers, primitive UI control concepts: buttons that look like physical buttons, icons, interactive scrollbars, menus, tabs, etc.
From there, each OS provider produces UI guidelines which describe how these primitive concepts should be combined to produce the applications that make up / run on the OS.
For example:
http://developer.apple.com/documentation/userexperience/Conceptual/Apple...
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa511258.aspx
http://developer.kde.org/documentation/design/ui/
(even Haiku has icon guidelines!)
Reading through these guidelines provides us with plenty of information needed to create a great Haiku UI -- without reinventing the wheel. Organisations like Apple, MS, KDE, Gnome have invested millions of hours and dollars into every aspect of what makes a good UI: A UI that caters for the widest audience possible.
I'm not saying these other OS/UIs have got it right, in fact everyday I'm annoyed by flaws in UIs everywhere: OS X's Finder, Vista's icons, KDE's inconsistencies... but you have to start somewhere; You need to build on these fundamentals. A good UI is one that evolves to remedy UI issues, responds to good innovation, user feedback and accepts that their are UI design trends (like gradients, textured widgets, etc).
It's very easy to say that 'Haiku should differentiate itself from these other UIs' - differentiation doesn't mean we should re-invent the wheel: We could differentiate by creating a strong identity (e.g. using yellow tabs on windows, iconography); But what we must not do is break these basic fundamentals and concepts that have been developed and tested for years.
Breaking these concepts would be a mistake: We would exclude so many users that have come to expect certain things in an OS/UI to look and behave in a certain way. For sure, we should bend these concepts to help differentiate Haiku and avoid looking like an OS X / Vista / KDE / Gnome clone... We must differentiate between a useful UI and the Haiku identity.
A better way to differentiate Haiku is not just at the UI level, but as a whole OS: Performance, usability/ease-of-use, features, compatibility, accessibility, developer APIs, etc.
What does the community think Haiku's target audience is: Broad or specific? Are we developing Haiku for the community of users we have now, or for the community of users we want? Do we want to focus on a niche set of users (tinkerers, hobbyists, tech freaks) or are we looking to cater for as many groups as possible (children, teenagers, students, people with disabilities, people with older/limited systems, designers/video/media, people with high performance systems, etc, etc).
The answer to this question could determine the 'success' of Haiku, although 'success' will mean different things to different people too! Some of us might be happy with the antiquated simplicity of the original BeOS; Some of us might be happy with pushing on from where the original BeOS engineers left off to continue their OS vision. Some of us might be happy putting Haiku on a modern/cutting edge path.
Sorry for the jumbled thoughts and long post! I just want to make it clear that everyone has different needs: What you value, I might not value; What I value, you might not value -- but does that mean we should exclude your values from Haiku? Or my values? No - it means the UI must strike a balance and respect the values of others. Otherwise we risk excluding people from using Haiku and the Haiku community.
Justin
Re: The Natural OS
I think you make a good point Justin, and as far I know, most of the Haiku developers would agree with you, including me.
I think the importance is striking a balance between a locked-in-stone UI, and something that is almost too configurable, like many Linux window managers and themes. Right now Haiku has configurable colors and of course a customizable desktop background (though the color stuff still needs work.)
Also I am pretty sure no one wants to go so far in "being different" to not have the basic WIMP (windows, icons, menus, pointer) interface. I think the main point in wanting to be different is just not to blatently copy the other interfaces, and to keep some of the uniqueness and cleanness of BeOS while still being up-to-date. I think the current interface with the recent updates is fulfilling that quite well.
Also there are Haiku UI guidelines, though like other aspects of Haiku they need some lovin' (they were written by one person and need some review by other Haiku developers):
http://api.haiku-os.org/HIG
As for the target audience of Haiku, I think we want it to be as broad as possible eventually. In the beginning we will target more advanced users, but frankly I'd probably feel safer leaving my Grandma with a stable Haiku than any other modern OS. But it will take time to get there.
Either way, I don't think the average Haiku developers wants it to just be for geeks. I can't say the same for Linux devs though, no matter what they might claim.
Admin Edit: updated link to HIG