h a l f b a k e r yTempus fudge-it.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
For an I/O device, the monitor is distinctly lacking user end I. It's also counterintuitive that the computer's face, anthropomorphically speaking, is one way. Computers aren't autistic, so we shouldn't have to treat them as if they are. This leads me to propose the Two Way (or Scanning) Monitor.
The
Scanning Monitor projects its output onto fine gauze, which is mounted in a pressure sensitive frame. Images are displayed by normal back projection. The difference here is that when the user wishes to scan a document, they use the more intuitive method of input of pressing the image flat against the computer's face, the monitor. The pressure sensors activate the scanning protocol: projection switches off and a small scanning arm sweeps across and behind the gauze, doing its business.
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Annotation:
|
| |
So this isn't a monitor that has two screens, one on either side? Still, + |
|
| |
This sounds ok, but scanners have a cover for a reason. |
|
| |
//Computers aren't autistic// |
|
| |
How are computers not autistic? Do computers spontaneously learn to model the feelings and intentions of others through a process of mimicry of and identification with them, while constructing a finely-tuned sense of their own location and extension in space? |
|
| |
Then, basically, they *are* autistic. |
|
| |
Oh, and next time someone would like me to scan something, I hope they don't press it against my face. :) |
|
| |
This idea has been tried/experimented with in the real world, but I can't remember who it was or what they called it. It was ages ago that I read about it, and I can't find a link (yet). |
|
| |
I think it's misleading to assume that
it's more "intuitive" to use the screen as
an input device, and even more so to
assume that this would be more
convenient. |
|
| |
If I want to look at a screen, it's most
convenient if it's facing my. If I want to
manipulate something, it's usually more
convenient if it's horizontal. This is why
we write on horizontal surfaces. It's
also why scanners are horizontal,
despite the fact that it would be easy
(and space-saving) to stand them
upright. |
|
| |
The beauty of the screen/keyboard/
mouse combination is that it gives you
the best of both worlds: you
manipulate things in a conveniently
horizontal plane, whilst receiving visual
feedback from a conveniently vertical
plane. In this sense, it is an
improvement over devices which have
both input and output in the same
plane (eg, pen and paper). I think the
same argument goes for scanners, to a
degree. |
|
| |