agree that there are definite limitations to the 320x240 desktop... web 
browsing is absurd at 'fit to page,' although well-designed text-only 
sites can be useful...

virtual scrolling desktops (ala' Wang VS terminals) can also work, but not 
when the screen is loaded with widgets..


On Fri, 19 Apr 2002, John Utz wrote:

> Arg.
> 
> On Thu, 18 Apr 2002, Johnny C. Lam wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 05:32:32PM -0500, John Utz wrote:
> > > 
> > > right. until somebody invents a UI that operates in non-euclidean space, 
> > > it's really gonna be hard to stuff all that great desktop shit into a 
> > > pocket sized form factor....
> > 
> > The comment about a "UI that operates in non-euclidean space" sounds
> > intriguing.  Could you explain what you meant by this?
> 
> 'twas a jest.  i was implying in a non-constructive way that the pocketpc 
> ui had too many things packed into too little 2D space.
> 
> so, in order for all of the apps that are part of the pocketpc to work 
> effectively, it means that a 5inchx4inch screen has to have more that 20 
> square inches of desktop area:
> 
>   4in x 5in = 20 square inches
> 
> this is a euclidean geometry problem, aka a normal, ordinary geometry 
> problem in the geometry that was invented by Euclid, way back when.
> 
> so, non-Euclidean geometry postulates that:
> 
>   4in x 5in doesnt *have* to be equal to 20 square inches. ( dont ask me 
> why, i just read it in a science fiction story, probably heinlein. )
> 
> sorry for emitting misinformation
> 
> > 	Thanks,
> > 
> > 	-- Johnny Lam <jlam@netbsd.org>
> > 
> 
>