Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

>Any interface that requires full body movement is going to be too draining to use all day

I didn't say the ideal solution should take more effort than a touch screen. In fact, it will take less. Touching and dragging glass takes enormous effort compared to holding a stress ball and twitching your fingers in certain ways to control a computer. The ideal physical interface converts muscle power to "information control" with maximum efficiency.

>people are able to use them one handed for hours on end

Yes, to produce work they could have done in 10 minutes with a keyboard/mouse.




Most people aren't 'producing work' when they are on their phone... they are consuming work.


That may simply be the result of an interface that doesn't let them be efficient or productive.


Exactly. I actually do a lot of work on my phone. I have a pen model, and I sometimes break my bluetooth keyboard pointer rig.

Few people will bother. The UX takes real work to make productive.


In that case, I'm not interested in that use case. I'm interested in increasing efficiency and control of "producing work" on a computing device.


But what percentage of the time spent on computers is producing versus consuming? I spend a lot of time producing (writing code), but I only do that on a desktop computer. My wife, on the other hand, spends almost no time producing and pretty much only consumes. In my experience, the vast amount of people are more like my wife (consumers) than like me (producers). Even my coworkers who are business people spend a magnitude more time consuming than they do producing. In my opinion, computer devices should be optimized to the most usual use case - consuming.


In my opinion, computer devices should be optimized for the world we want to have not the one we do have. Optimizing for consumption does not sound like a moral good to me.


When you say "the world we want to have" I think you mean "the world I want to have" since most people seem to want a world where they primarily consume media. I think most people would say that the moral good is optimizing for consuming media, because that is what they want to do.


> since most people seem to want a world where they primarily consume media.

553,000 people in the US are homeless, but I don't think most would say they "don't want a home". 2.3 million people are in prisons, but I don't think that's the place they "want to live". 15.1 million have an alcohol abuse disorder, but I don't think they would all characterize it as "wanting to drink". 12 million people in the US experience rape, violence, or stalking from a partner every year but I wouldn't characterize them as "wanting to be in that relationship".

Behavior reflects all sorts of things outside of the person's intentions and aspirations. One of the goals of a just society is to give people a framework that helps them reach their goals.


Most people do a whole lot of things other than consuming media during their day, and computer technology is woefully underoptimized for all those other use cases.


Unless of course, the reason most people spend so much time consuming rather than producing is precisely because their devices are so hard to produce on?


Most of the time spent with computer interfaces is consuming rather than producing, though... doesn't it make sense to optimize for that use case for general purpose electronics?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: