Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
GUI Software

3D Sphere Interface for XP 388

Posted by CmdrTaco from the not-often-you-envy-windows dept.
Brian Brian writes "I found this super cool 3D, inside a sphere, desktop interface. The videos really demonstrate it. I would love this built into OS X but it is just for Windows right now. And if nothing else, the paradigm is the coolest way to handle multiple screens." Here are a collection of screenshots & videos. I'm skeptical that it wouldn't be very practical, but it sure looks fun.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

3D Sphere Interface for XP More

3D Sphere Interface for XP

Comments Filter:

  • What does this really do for me? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Agent Green ( 231202 ) * on Tuesday February 01, 2005 @10:08AM (#11539488)
    XP is slow enough as it is...and now we want to do all kinds of useless fancy junk with this kind of window manager?

    It looks like someone saw Minority Report one time too many.

    • Re:What does this really do for me? (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      XP is slow? On what machine? Granted it drags ass on a 400Mhz laptop but otherwise I've never notice it to be slow. Now for other issues I can start a long list...

    • Right (Score:3, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      As slashbots we can only like fancy GUIs if they are for Macs.
    • well..
      I'd use it if it was useful and if done well it wouldn't be that heavy on the system.

      i got free cpu most of the time, and when i don't want to spare it (compiling, starting up emulators) there's nothing moving on the screen anyhow...

  • I've tried this (Score:4, Insightful)

    by FullMetalAlchemist ( 811118 ) on Tuesday February 01, 2005 @10:09AM (#11539506)
    I've tried SphereXP, even implemented my own 3D desktop before that.
    The problem with it is that it's not about function, but flair.

    In short, try something else, preferably something which doesn't include the ability to rotate windos around their own axels.

    • Re:I've tried this (Score:4, Interesting)

      by FullMetalAlchemist ( 811118 ) on Tuesday February 01, 2005 @10:16AM (#11539586)
      Oh, and you might want to check this thumbnail [javiersanchez.es] for a glance or this screenshot [pank.org] to see the horror in all its' might.

    • Re:I've tried this (Score:3, Interesting)

      by krymsin01 ( 700838 )
      The best way, imoh, to implement a 3D interface to an OS is to make everything 3D models that you can interact with, rather than 2d planes that you can rotate/resize/etc in 3d space. It would just be really hard to get people to move away from the 2d way of thinking about interacting with a computer, but when the brain-jacks become mainstream more people will use this method of interface.
      • They should make a total conversion for e.g. Doom 3 that generates a level representing your hard drive and the larger executable apps there is, the nastier monsters they are. Beware entering Borg Space (the Windows folder)! :-o

        Antivirus integration with such a game would let it represent trojans as... hmm... mimics? :-)

        That's interaction I'd like to see. Blow up Internet Explorer once and for all with a BFG.

        • Re:I've tried this (Score:5, Informative)

          by WillAdams ( 45638 ) on Tuesday February 01, 2005 @10:32AM (#11539727) Homepage
          You mean ``Doom as a tool for system administration''?

          It's been done (as a research project!) on Linux though.

          http://www.cs.unm.edu/~dlchao/flake/doom/

          William
        • Actually, what you describe is not entirely unlike Inner Space [sdispace.com], a classic action game which was developed in the days of Windows 3.1 and still runs on Windows XP systems. It's a slightly different genre: you fly around in a small spaceship through several 'waves' set in various directories on your hard disk, collecting icons (extracted from the executables on your hard drive) for their 'resources'. These can then be used in the 'Ambulance' for ship repairs, upgrades, and shiny new weapons.

          Nominally, the gam

  • Mirror (Score:3, Informative)

    by phoxix ( 161744 ) * on Tuesday February 01, 2005 @10:11AM (#11539524)
    http://li3-33.members.linode.com/~sunny/slashdot-m irror/www.hamar.sk/sphere/screenshots.htm [linode.com]

    if the bandwidth gets out of hand, I'll shut this mirror down

    Sunny Dubey

  • Old news (Score:5, Insightful)

    by FLAGGR ( 800770 ) on Tuesday February 01, 2005 @10:11AM (#11539529)
    Saw this a lonnnnng time ago. Installed XP just to try it. What I found :
    -Extreme resource hog
    -The designer knows nothing about UI design (so many different actions, even if you can customize the controls. Needs to be simplified)
    -It's ugly.
    -You can't even use the windows while they're in "3D " mode

    Just a poor windows developer trying to make some competition to Looking Glass. It's too bad, because it'll never work, unless MS does it and integrates it into their OS. (It would probably be really buggy coming from them though. I hate to say it, but I'm looking to Sun for the first 3D desktop)

    • Re:Old news (Score:3, Informative)

      by Laurentiu ( 830504 )
      Looking Glass [sun.com]
    • "Just a poor windows developer trying to make some competition to Looking Glass. It's too bad, because it'll never work, unless MS does it and integrates it into their OS. (It would probably be really buggy coming from them though. I hate to say it, but I'm looking to Sun for the first 3D desktop)"

      That was exactly Microsoft's mentality (and mine at the time) when it came to IE. Now look at Firefox.
      • Firefox/IE are applications. Compare that to trying to make/extend a window manager. Sure, IE runs faster sometimes because of so much of it being built into the kernel, but the window manager (Explorer) in Windows is completly built into the OS (it basically is the OS in Windows's case). All this guy is doing is throwing up an openGL window that takes screenshots of windows, and uses them as textures for the inside of a sphere. Looking Glass, as one example on *nix, is in a much better posistion because it

    • Re:Old news (Score:2, Informative)

      by Council ( 514577 )
      I can corroberate. Saw this a lonnnng, said "hey cool", installed, it runs like shit.

      And it's a terrible UI.

      And I'm easily impressed by bells and whistles. I could get nothing done using it. It vanished from my computer roughly 5 minutes after I installed it.

      And this is ME. I would've been one of the ones insisting that we should just give Microsoft Bob a little time to flesh itself out.
    • Perhaps you should have looked to SGI [google.com].

      ~Lake
    • The question that keeps popping up in my mind whenever I read about these 3D Desktops is "WHY???". I have yet to see any real advantage from the 3D effects and IMO at the moment it is just a big ressource hog that makes working with the GUI even more ineffective.

  • Oh No! (Score:5, Funny)

    by sandstorming ( 850026 ) <<moc.gnimrotsdnas> <ta> <eesnhoj>> on Tuesday February 01, 2005 @10:12AM (#11539534)
    Clippy the office paper clip... NOW IN 3D!

  • So now XP can ... (Score:3, Funny)

    by Chris Daniel ( 807289 ) on Tuesday February 01, 2005 @10:12AM (#11539539) Homepage

    ... suck spheres.

    *cough*

  • Nice.. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by grub ( 11606 ) <slashdot@grub.net> on Tuesday February 01, 2005 @10:12AM (#11539543) Homepage Journal

    It's nice eye candy but I really don't see how this will make a user more efficient as it seems to be distracting (just more ammo for those with ADD). I do find Windowmaker's [windowmaker.org] multiple workspaces to be a great boon though but it's not XP.
  • Not quite.

    I just lost my textpad window... maybe I'm floating over it.

    Very strange experience this is!

  • Not so 'super cool' (Score:5, Informative)

    by BBrown ( 70466 ) on Tuesday February 01, 2005 @10:14AM (#11539557)
    Tried it last night, actually, while I was playing with my desktop.

    It's a fun theory tool and shows you exactly what SUN was going for in Project Looking Glass [sun.com]. However, when it comes down to it, it has no current practical application. Windows are stored in the sphere, not used in it, which means that everytime you want to recover an open window, you need to go into sphere mode, look arounnd for the window, find it, and then bring it back to flat mode. It adds a whole extra step to the process, and definitely a lot more time.

    I think the best improvement may be interaction with windows inside the sphere, but as the website proclaims, this project is still in Beta.

    Best,
    - Brandon

    • Re:Yes, 'super cool' (Score:2, Interesting)

      by skarphace ( 812333 )
      I think this would have loads of applications. Monitoring for instance. It would be nice to be running 18 different system monitors all in this interface and all you have to do to see other screens is move your mouse.

      The only problem is, currently, the windows will not update while inactive. So for monitoring it would be kind of stupid to keep looking at the same second in time.
    • I've had this very idea before and think it would be great. Instead of a sphere, though, I'd think of being on the inside of a many-sided polygon.

      I'm not sure which would be more valuable, a multi desktop or a multi monitor paradigm, perhaps both, or all three -- multiple desktops within a polygon, some desktops spanning multiple polygon faces, and perhaps a multiple polygon paradigm as well. It gets kind of trippy if you start thinking of how you would implement this with multiple physical monitors.

      Any
      • As far as a multiple monitor vs. multiple desktop setup... I'd definitely go with multiple monitor by far. I have a dual-monitor setup in my cube and I never want to go back. I like to be able to have something up on both screens at the same time (think comparing documents). With a dual-desktop approach, you have to switch back and forth (whether it's keyboard combo, or moving the mouse to the edge of the screen).

        Perhaps have a dual-monitor setup where if you go past the edge of the entire display (lef
      • On Mac OS X, there is a small, free software program called "Desktop Manager [sourceforge.net]" that provides multiple desktops. You can configure the desktop "transition" to look as if it's a multiple faced cylindrical polygon (where each side face is rectangular) rotating. This transition is advertised as cube rotation rather than polygon rotation, but you can have more than 4 desktops/faces, and it certainly doesn't make a cube.

  • old news (Score:2, Informative)

    by mackermacker ( 250587 )
    This is actually old news, and am surprised if this would be the first mention of it on /. Actually I think I originally came across it in a slashdot thread maybey 7 months ago.

    Anyhow, I hope they have improved it, as I had it installed just for the *neat* factor, and the damn thing would always start up whenever I booted into XP. I use windows so little, I didnt bother tracking down where the start up processes were, but it wasnt in the norm HKEY/LOCALM...BLAHBLAH. It was very buggy too. Even 3d desktop [sourceforge.net]

  • Dupe (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/04/14/214020 3&tid=189&tid=190 [slashdot.org]

    Hey look, it was also posted by CmdrTaco.
    • Although it's not mentioned on the OP, a new version was released on 31 January 2005 so it is news and not exactly a dupe
  • I like it. The one comment I have from watching the videos is that it seems a bit obnoxious the way the you restore a window to normal size. The windows zoom all the way in (fullscreen) and then restore themselves - instead of simply zooming to the appropriate size.
  • Experience My virus scanner, pop up blocker, IE Tool Bar Spyware, Spyware scanner all in 3D glory.
  • but what REAL practicality does this have? what's gonna happen to your window management when you have 50+ windows open in you sphere and one of your windows/apps starts misbehaving?

    osx could have something like this if aqua were to use/borrow the QTVR technology. spherical distortion of windows is easy when your view point is always from the center(?)... the genie effect and exposé already work quite well for staking and layering of windows.

    this alos looks like it has similarities to sun's looking g
  • http://www.majorgeeks.com/download4222.html

  • Highly Impractical (Score:2, Informative)

    by nxtr ( 813179 )
    I tried it out when it was first posted on Slashdot of spring of 2004. It was extremely impractical and had numerous flaws. It was susceptable to alt-tabbing for example. If you were going back and forth between windows a lot, you would occasionaly switch out of the gui and see your regular Windows destktop. Kinda kills the 3D effect right there.

  • This looks a lot ... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by dorward ( 129628 ) on Tuesday February 01, 2005 @10:20AM (#11539632) Homepage Journal

    This looks a lot like 3d desktop [freshmeat.net], but ontop of the desktop instead of the black background.

  • Grr, can't browse that site with Opera.

    It's serving me octet streams for its web pages, so it asks me to download them.

    Firefox got confused on http://www.hamar.sk/sphere/ as well -- "document contains no data".

    Even the default Apache settings get these basic things right. *sigh*

  • So, editors.. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Pahalial ( 580781 ) on Tuesday February 01, 2005 @10:24AM (#11539662)
    Do you even bother with dupe checks [slashdot.org] anymore?

  • Mirror (Score:5, Informative)

    by Novanix ( 656269 ) * on Tuesday February 01, 2005 @10:24AM (#11539669) Homepage
    Sorry, I only grab one page deap on stories but you can see the thumbnails:

    http://slashdot.fluky.org/www.hamar.sk/sphere/scre enshots.htm [fluky.org]

    Also their main page:
    http://slashdot.fluky.org/www.hamar.sk/sphere/inde x.html [fluky.org]
  • I confess to not looking at the software demo but if all it does is provide a greater surface area on which you place icons then there is absolutely no benefit to having it in 3D.

    Having a spherical desktop does not make it any easier to find your files since there is no point of reference.

    I saw the looking glass demo a long time ago, and even this does not go as far as it should.

    If you imagine a 3d terrain, preferably photographic, with recognisable features as your desktop picture, you could place files

  • Google images (Score:2, Informative)

    by 91degrees ( 207121 )
    The links aren't going to work but you can get the idea from the thumbnails Google image search [google.com]

  • Smells like.... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Barny ( 103770 ) on Tuesday February 01, 2005 @10:32AM (#11539725) Journal
    Hehe, windowsXP with an interface that chugs it down, slows down the user, and STILL has no decent file system?

    Sounds like someone beat MS to longhorn ;)
  • Lately I've been thinking a lot about the future of UIs and the lack of new paradigms (besides the somewhat lame 3D extension of current window managers).

    I think that we are in a situation with a lot to do with the early renaissance: before Piero della Francesca and he's works on perpective, drawings and paintings did not used perspective. At all.

    Some years later, perspective became part of the pictorial language, and it was used to express things in a new way.

    I believe that we need a paradigm shif
    • As long as most of our information is textual I don't see any benefit in going 3D. Text was displayed effectively in 2D for several millenia now and if there were ways to display the same information in a better way I am sure someone would have thought of it by now.
      • Not really.. how long did it take for ppl to learn how to write? Actually history is way shorter than prehistory.

        It's like saying that animations aren't better than stills only because they weren't used until invented!

  • download (Score:3, Informative)

    by frieked ( 187664 ) on Tuesday February 01, 2005 @10:44AM (#11539855) Homepage Journal
    Since the site was slashdotted before it was even posted to non-subscribers you can go here if you want to download it:
    http://www.majorgeeks.com/download4222.html [majorgeeks.com]

  • Interesting Idea, but . . . (Score:3, Informative)

    by Badgerman ( 19207 ) on Tuesday February 01, 2005 @10:44AM (#11539856)
    OK, kudos for an interesting idea. But I don't see a lot of practacal application of it.

    I'm all for modifying the desktop, but I don't think this model is going to really solve any problems. Cool stuff is all fun and good, but in the end for something like this you have to address and solve a problem. Fulfill a need.

  • I've used it a bit (Score:4, Informative)

    by Daath ( 225404 ) <(kd.redoc) (ta) (pl)> on Tuesday February 01, 2005 @10:50AM (#11539917) Homepage Journal
    I've used it a bit - It's really nice - Or rather promising!
    I didn't use SphereXP for very long, as it wasn't very mature when I used it, but I found Spaces [spatialresearch.com], which was pretty good - It's not exactly the same, but they both make use of our spacial memory - With spaces I could have 30+ windows open and have no problems at all navigating them ;)
    The only problem is that they are "images" of the window, and hence does not update once they are out of focus.

    Plus, none of them support multiple screens, as far as I can remember - I use a dual screen setup right now, but I would still *love* to have it ;)

    I got interested in it after viewing demonstrations of Sun's Looking Glass (I think it's called) - now they updated in real time, but that was "built in"... Plus it was linux ;)
  • Yanno, when I use Windows, I *do* feel like I'm in a sphere, just like one of those hamster balls.

  • 3D Desktop NOT the wave of the future (Score:5, Interesting)

    by LoudMusic ( 199347 ) on Tuesday February 01, 2005 @11:09AM (#11540118)
    I can't see a 3D Desktop ever becoming the way we use computers while we're still using a 2D screen. The image is distorted so much that it becomes useless. Navigation in a 3D relm with a 2D input and display is cumbersome, and really ... the current desktop systems work pretty darn good. The modifications / enhancements that Apple have included in OS X are additionally helpful, though there are changes I would make.

    The ability to put a window into the dock is pretty nice, though that section should be larger so the contents of the window are still recognizable, while shortcut icons are still small (16x16-ish).

    To get more 'desktop space' we've tried bigger displays with higher resolution; multiple virtual desktops; multiple displays; parts of the desktop sliding in and out of view ... what am I missing?

    What we really want is the ability to see everything that's going on at the same time without having to turn our head or move anything on the screen.

    I think if there were a system like Expose with a central area for displaying the current window, we'd be there. That way you could have all your windows displayed miniturized and your primary window large in the center of the screen. You could still get information from the rest of your windows without having to switch to them or stop whatever it is you're working on.
    • Here's something you can do in WinXP (maybe in earlier versions too). It's not quite what you asked for, but it'll let you see everything at once:

      CTRL-Click on the taskbar the windows you want to use. Then right-click on one of them, and select "Tile" either horizontally or vertically. I do this when I'm trying to watch different IM conversations.
    • When all windows are 3d accelerated (there in osx now, here in longhorn next year maybe) then it will be worth it to use 3d desktops. You'll be able to have sufficiently high image quality that you can actually carry something like this off. Also, if you can't USE the windows while they're in the 3d space it's useless. You fail to realize that this basically IS a system where all your windows display miniaturized and your primary window is, well, wherever you want it to be, the difference is that you can pu
      • When users stop maximizing every window they want to use, I can see this being a reality. Until then, it won't happen.

        Most of my users still want to run at 800x600 on 17" or 19" screens and maximize their browser window, even when the text in that window is only an inch across. Why? The overlapping windows distract them.

        You think a 3D desktop would be less distracting?

    • speak for yourself, 3-neuron wonder!

      i would rather see one window [nongnu.org]!

      yours truly, a 2-neuron programmer...

  • waste of time and of CPU cycles. I wouldn't want to have my desktop look like that and if it is only for navigation between windows, we already have a good way of doing that. It's the same boring thing - mapping a 3D world onto a 2D screen. It works for games but has no real useful purpose as a desktop. 3D is not needed for handling lists, and that is what a desktop is - a list of things.

  • /.ed already (Score:3, Funny)

    by Walkiry ( 698192 ) on Tuesday February 01, 2005 @11:27AM (#11540282) Homepage
    Here's a paper copy of the device:



    O



  • It looks like the software uses screenshots to take snapsots of windows and then changes the background picture of your desktop to "Animate" the movment.

    This is a true 3D desktop currently being worked on by SUN. I can not wait to play with it (NOTE: runs onlu on linux)...

    Project home w/ pics and vids [sun.com]
    Developer site w/ some doenloads [java.net]
  • This XP GUI will go the way of the IRIX "it's a unix system; I know this" [imdb.com] 3D filesystem interface: unused forgotten obscurity. And along the way, MS will milk it for endless "we're innovators" propaganda.
  • This reminds me of the GGI Cube [ggi-project.org] which did something similar. Sadly GGI is today rather irrelevant.

  • The research shows... (Score:5, Funny)

    by eno2001 ( 527078 ) on Tuesday February 01, 2005 @12:07PM (#11540754) Homepage Journal
    ...that what drives innovation is new input and output devices. There is a limited set of software that can be made to add or enhance functionality of the existing input and outbput devices on a computer. For example, a plain old QWERTY keyboard can only do so much regardless of whether it connects with an AT, PS/2 or USB interface. You might be able to write software that will use the scroll lock LED as a network link/traffic indicator, but that's about it. I've also heard that there were some projects that utilized the numeric section of the KB in a chording mode so you could ostensible type with one hand and possibly get a little faster at it. But as you can see, a keyboard is a keyboard is a keyboard. The same goes for a mouse. There is only so much you can do with a mouse before you hit limitations no matter how unique your GUI is (Mac, Windows, *nix, it doesn't matter).

    So the only answer to continue to drive innovation is new input and output devices. This is where Microsoft has got it right. They see the need for this and are constantly developing newer and more unique interfaces. They have their biometric login device that allows you to log in just by touching something. And now they have this new 3D sphere interface. What they need is a corresponding physical input device to take the most advantage of this new UI. Since they are so keen on the tactile approach, they should probably make an input device that is more convenient to what most of the users of their products are accustomed to interacting with.

    I would suggest that they build a unit that can be placed on the lap for convenient reach. It should have a firm cylindrical projection that is easy to grab (probably about 6.5 inches in length and about 2 inches thick to fit the majority of the users hands) and two spheres placed on either side of the control rod. The placement of the two spheres on either side should accomodate left or right handed users who with to interact with the 3D Sphere UI. Just to make the make the spheres more tactile, they should use a surface that is somewhat riled. Possibly the entir e device could even be heated to approximately 98.6F so that touching it would be a little more intuitive.

    Following up on their force feedback technology from the mid 90s, they could add the same kind of technology to this input device. A little jerking to and fro to represent more 3D features in this new UI might be helpful for most users. There could also be an automatic sensor in the control rod that can detect when a user's skin is getting a little dry and a plume of self contained moisturizing cream could be oozed out of the tip of the control rod and directed down the sides to the users hand(s) for instant skin relief.

    Just a simple premise to prove that innovation in UIs is purely driven by the input and output hardware. :)
    • They want a 3D sphere for an environment, let them put a hamster in one of those run-around globes and roll that around their desktops...

      The same goes for a mouse. There is only so much you can do with a mouse before you hit limitations no matter how unique your GUI is (Mac, Windows, *nix, it doesn't matter).

      So why not wire up a REAL mouse - you know, a furry white beast with red eyes and a red nose? Teach him what you want done when he sees different stuff on the screen. For example, he sees porn, he cli

  • 3D interface for OS X (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Writer ( 746272 ) on Tuesday February 01, 2005 @12:25PM (#11541021)

    I would love this built into OS X but it is just for Windows right now.

    I can recall seeing some kind of 3D finder for OS X before, so I did a google and found it. It's called 3DOSX [uiuc.edu]. However, I also found another one called 3D-Space VFS [marcmoini.com] as well. They aren't the same thing as the UI the Slashdot post is talking about, but still are some kind of 3D interface.

  • I have tried most 3D desktops and one thing has been common amongst them. After the first week its not that useful anymore. Eycandy deluxe is nice for the newbie but often just slows the more experienced user down. I suspect that is why none of the ones done on linux has taken off, its just not useful.

  • it's been done before, on a console even:
    Katamari Damacy [namco.com]
  • I tried this out a couple of weeks ago. In short, it's utterly unusable and brings nothing of worth to the table. You basically map static images of your current windows onto a virtual "sphere." Manuvering around inside the sphere to find your windows is a pain. It's an ugly hack that I can't see ever being all that useful even if all the kinks get worked out.
  • Thanks, I think I'll wait for Steve Jobs to demo it on a Mac, at which point it will have been done right -- built into the OS, graceful, beautiful, helpful, etc...

    It is an interesting idea (as it was when this story was FIRST posted a year ago or more). It seems they have a new version since then but it's not a new slashdot story.

    RP

  • Still prefer the NeXTstep virtual desktop man. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Kris_J ( 10111 ) * on Tuesday February 01, 2005 @10:33PM (#11547172) Homepage Journal
    I used the Litestep implementation of a virtual desktop manager where you could just pickup a window and drag it to another virtual desktop (it jumped from one to the other when the mouse hit the edge of the screen). I'm yet to see anything but extra physical screens beat that.

Slashdot Top Deals

Remember to say hello to your bank teller.

Close