| ▲ | akkartik 6 days ago |
| Thanks! I'm glad I asked, because there does seem something here I can learn from. I care very much about what makes a power tool with a high ceiling gatekeepy. What were the "lot of elements" in the screenshot? Ignoring shell stuff, is it the bar at the bottom? Is it the "[0]" and the "0:bash*"? The "Macbook-pro" might seem familiar to someone familiar to the shell, who is used to seeing it in the prompt of an uncustomized shell. The date and time likewise seem obvious what they mean. Am I missing anything? I think the keybindings being non-mnemonic there's only so much you can do about. Vim's hjkl were mnemonic on the VT-100 terminal, but keybindings outlast mortal hardware. So the ability to rebind is in some ways the best you can get IMO. Zooming out, the best power UI I've been able to come up with is a combination of a Wordstar-like always-on menu showing common keybindings, and a command palette. Here are a couple of UIs I've made, I'm curious what you think of them: https://merveilles.town/@akkartik/108766067153506592 https://github.com/akkartik/mu/blob/main/html/20210624-shell... |
|
| ▲ | EPendragon 5 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| I think the first thing that stood out about tmux to me as a beginner was the unnatural use of prefix. I haven't used something like that before where you had to use prefix and then a particular command. It makes sense why it is the way it is, but feels odd in the beginning. The bottom elements were part of it. Not the host name and time, but the window information. Also, it took a while to remember the default keys to use to get to session management window where tmux displays everything, among other things. Vim's hjkl make sense as you start using the tool. tmux's Ctrl-B for a prefix doesn't make sense, so that leads to remapping. I have checked out the UI's you have made - they look great - similar to what I would expect a custom tmux configuration to look like :) |
| |
| ▲ | akkartik 5 days ago | parent [-] | | > Vim's hjkl make sense as you start using the tool. tmux's Ctrl-B for a prefix doesn't make sense, so that leads to remapping. Hmm, I'm still confused: * How do Vim's hjkl start to make sense? They've always seemed arbitrary. 'l' should stand for 'left', but it takes me right! * How is a different keyboard shortcut less confusing than ctrl-b. They all seem arbitrary. You remapped it to ctrl-a. Maybe you were used to GNU Screen? | | |
| ▲ | EPendragon 5 days ago | parent [-] | | hjkl are where your fingers land and supposed to stay on keyboard (well almost). This puts you in a position to use the rest of the keyboard fast. Ctrl-B is a mechanically more difficult key binding than Ctrl-A. | | |
| ▲ | akkartik 5 days ago | parent [-] | | Ok, I understand now. When you say "make sense" you're thinking just about the mechanical ease of acquiring a key. That's fair. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | talkingtab 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| The "what you think of them" part. I've been thinking hard about web site user interfaces, so not quite the same ballpark even. But, it struck me that we have all these 3D games where the navigation is ... well like adding another dimension. So why are we stuck in 2D so many places? Here is a codepen example https://codesandbox.io/p/sandbox/yup2o of a word cloud using @react-three/fiber for example. Imagine if I could have a little cloud floating for navigating tmux. A cloud not of words but sessions, windows, panes or whatever. If I could then I move around the 3d cloud from the keyboard .... Just an idea |
| |
| ▲ | akkartik 5 days ago | parent [-] | | I think 3D is a fine idea! Definitely worth trying in general. In the context of this thread my mind was mostly on what it takes to make some arbitrary power UI "not dreadful", i.e. easy to understand for newcomers. Since it's a power tool, assume there'll be a learning curve. But the initial experience doesn't intimidate someone to start on that journey of a hundred miles of understanding how to use it with fluency and thereby augmenting themselves. There have certainly been many intuitive 3D UIs. 3D games devote a lot of attention to being discoverable and friendly to newcomers, and they have a lot of success. However, my impression is that they achieve this success by dint of hard work. It's not clear that 3D makes the problem easier. If anything I'd be more likely to believe it makes it harder. So if you have a product and are thinking about how to make it more intuitive (as I am), "make it 3D" is probably not the best suggestion. Does that seem reasonable? Let me know if I'm missing something. I like your codepen. I wonder what it would feel like to use a whole note-taking app or digital garden with this metaphor. Rotate to a particular note until it's in front, then click on it to edit it. Perhaps you should stop moving in 3D while editing. | | |
| ▲ | talkingtab 4 days ago | parent [-] | | To give credit where it is due, the codepen is not mine, but from this page:
https://r3f.docs.pmnd.rs/getting-started/examples
from @react-three/fiber. My guess, and only a guess, is that 3D is especially (only?) useful for navigation. As in moving around documents, panes, windows, etc. As for "I wonder what it would feel like to use a whole note-taking app ..." The note taking is in some ways already done pretty well. So my current guess is that it is more the navigation that would benefit. I don't really have answers, but I often feel like I live in 'flatland' these days. | | |
| ▲ | akkartik 3 days ago | parent [-] | | I think it makes sense to go to 3D with a VR headset. But screens are fundamentally flat, and I feel like going to 3D on a screen takes an initial hit in experience. You can reclaim that hit by putting in work, of course. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | zem 6 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| don't know if you used lotus 123 back in the day, but it was one of the best keyboard-driven interfaces i've seen. everything was done by navigating hierarchical menus, but the menus were displayed horizontally in a bar on the bottom of the screen, no popups to obscure the rest of the display. so if you were a power user you would just automatically type e.g. /fs to open the file menu and then the save option thereunder, but if you were new to it you could look down, see that /f was file and when you hit that the bar would change to include s:save and you could hit that. |
| |
| ▲ | wowczarek 5 days ago | parent | next [-] | | I remember those horizontal menus; Lotus 1-2-3 really was the pinnacle of productivity. You could also create custom menus, assign shortcut keys to your macros, and of course have your macros call other shortcut keys. I was too young to use it for serious work back then, but the 123 and dBase combo really was a powerhouse. | |
| ▲ | akkartik 6 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | That's awesome. I never used Lotus, but it sounds like it might have had the same idea before Wordstar which influenced me. | | |
| ▲ | thesuperbigfrog 5 days ago | parent | next [-] | | >> I never used Lotus If anyone is curious, there is a Linux port of Lotus123: https://github.com/taviso/123elf | | | |
| ▲ | zem 6 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | yeah, it went one step beyond wordstar because the menus did not drop down and cover up your screen, the menu was all horizontal, so if you knew the keystrokes via muscle memory you never saw menus flashing on the screen. i think nano does something similar these days. | | |
| ▲ | akkartik 6 days ago | parent [-] | | Ohh, I see. It wasn't just a static menu bar at the bottom, but some hotkeys were modes and the menu bar would update when you pressed them. Pico/Pine still has something like that where ^o used to stand for "other commands" and the menu would show new hotkeys when you pressed it. I don't remember if Wordstar had some escape hatch like that. It certainly had a lot of commands. |
|
|
|
