Edit History

4 hours ago, ekket said:

It can easily be used to justify some of Ross's ideas, such as pie menus and hot corners.

My issue here is not with the ideas themselves as much as Ross' contradictory positions pertaining to these ideas when criticizing the Windows GUI.  Which gives me the strong impression he's really just looking to validate existing Microsoft prejudices without attempting any kind of objective analysis here (e.g. desktop icons). For example, he complained in the video about most Windows GUI elements being too small, but here he complains that the new Windows 10 GUI elements are too big. The former because they require too much precision and are therefore inefficient, the latter because they require extra travel distance and are therefore inefficient.

Now from what I understand, Fitts's law demonstrates that the relationship between size AND travel distance is what determines efficiency.  So calming size OR travel distance alone is a sign of efficiency is wrong. Ironically in the case of Windows 10, Ross complained that the elements where both too big  and too far away, but according to Fitts's law such a combination is actually just as efficient or more efficient than smaller and closer elements. And being near the edge of the screen only improves things.

4 hours ago, ekket said:

An interesting result of Fitts's law is that the edges of computer monitors can be considered to have infinite width. So effectively, the dock shortcuts are infinitely tall because they do not require a deceleration phase.  This means that one can be very efficient with orienting their mouse to the given application and opening it. The edges, along with the corners, are your most valuable real estate.

But doesn't this also mean that the default Windows taskbar and start menu are "infinitely" tall and are therefore more or equally efficient to Ross' custom anywhere menu? Also, the distance to the element is an important factor and like I said before, the cursor is more likely to be closer to the center of the screen than the edges. So it seems you could argue that the dock/taskbar and alt-tab screen are efficient in different ways.

Also, the biggest advantage I was trying to highlight with alt-tab vs dock method was the fact you can see all open apps at the same time without even moving the cursor.

3 hours ago, ekket said:

It can easily be used to justify some of Ross's ideas, such as pie menus and hot corners.

My issue here is not with the ideas themselves as much as Ross' contradictory positions pertaining to these ideas when criticizing the Windows GUI.  Which gives me the strong impression he's really just looking to validate existing Microsoft prejudices without attempting any kind of objective analysis here (e.g. desktop icons). For example, he complained in the video about most Windows GUI elements being too small, but here he complains that the new Windows 10 GUI elements are too big. The former because they require too much precision and are therefore inefficient, the latter because they require extra travel distance and are therefore inefficient.

Now from what I understand, Fitts's law demonstrates that the relationship between size AND travel distance is what determines efficiency.  So calming size OR travel distance alone is a sign of efficiency is wrong. Ironically in the case of Windows 10, Ross complained that the elements where both too big  and too far away, but according to Fitts's law such a combination is actually just as efficient or more efficient than smaller and closer elements. And being near the edge of the screen only improves things.

3 hours ago, ekket said:

An interesting result of Fitts's law is that the edges of computer monitors can be considered to have infinite width. So effectively, the dock shortcuts are infinitely tall because they do not require a deceleration phase.  This means that one can be very efficient with orienting their mouse to the given application and opening it. The edges, along with the corners, are your most valuable real estate.

But doesn't this also mean that the default Windows taskbar and start menu are "infinitely" tall and are therefore more or equally efficient to Ross' custom anywhere menu? Also, the distance to the element is an important factor and like I said before, the cursor is more likely to be closer to the center of the screen than the edges. So it seems you could argue that the dock/taskbar and alt-tab screen are efficient in different ways.