Re: Next steps forward?

Wendy, I thank you for the compliment but no, I don't want to be
president. Am enjoying life without a bullseye painted
on my back. . .("Hell of a birthmark, eh?")

I believe that instead of contrasting with my point, you represent one 
of the best (most resonating, most looking-for-an-answer, least happy 
with the current state) groups of users.

Litestep does represent an entirely awesome tool in the hands of a great
visual/graphical designer.

After all, how many of us now spend much of our lives looking at our
screens? Doesn't it strike you as a bit odd that we will spend thousands
of dollars to change the look of a room, to create "a special spot" for
ourselves and our families yet put up with however the
design-by-committee group at MS decided our screens should look?

It's not just Vista. Every Linux distro, even every small OS has its own
default look (except of course for those who claim to look like another 
OS). . .and almost everyone who uses a computer stares at that same 
screen, displaying some implementation of the same theme, day after day 
after day.

So far there hasn't really been much of a choice. It truly surprises
me to see what some otherwise intelligent, well traveled,
free-thinking person will consider amazing--oohing and ahhing over a 
computer screen. Our computer screens aren't much beyond Henry Ford's 
tongue-in-cheek motto "you can buy a new automobile in any color you 
like--as long as that color is black!"

Even those operating systems hailed as great steps forward from the 
dreary world of IBM-business-blue offer very little beyond changing a 
color or two or slapping some other image on the existing page (but 
"you'll have to take your chances with the effect on your computer!"

Within our work lives we do not expect everyone to be a graphic
designer--when we start out on a new venture, or try to shake up the old 
one, we look for a qualified and imaginative graphic designer to
find a way to best reflect *who we want to be* and then transform that
image, that sensibility, into every place in which we communicate with
others, and even among ourselves.

So if you were to see a software package that would enable you--someone 
with a designer's instincts--to bring your designs to life on the 
computer screens of thousands of people might you be interested? What if 
that package included the possibility of escaping the two-dimensional 
world within which designers have been forced to work for decades? And 
sound. And light. And motion?

Would you be interested in a tool that allows you to express your
designer's eye, your own sensibility and "space" needs, (or those of 
your client, or family)? What if this tool could enable you to implement 
your design throughout a company, whether it be a one-computer electric
installation company, or a thousand-computer office? What if people in
different departments using Macs, PCs and maybe even a few Solaris screens?

We are not talking here about either left- or right-justified menus. 
This is about changing your entire computing experience.

It's hardly news that our surroundings affect our ability to work--this 
issue has kept a couple of academic fields humming with theories, fads 
and curiosities for decades.

Why should anyone be surprised that your computing space, the world 
within that screen in which you work, play and connect with others for 
most of the day, affect how you respond to different challenges, 
opportunities or relationships? Could anyone really believe "it doesn't 
matter--you can put anything at all in my life surroundings and I would 
react, interact and connect with others in the exact same ways?"

Can anyone watch the "Second Life" phenomenon and believe that our 
relationships, our identities, even our selves are affected by how we 
interact with our "computing environment?"

Why then should we be surprised that the ability to truly take command 
of your computer, to not only rearrange a few fixed elements or change 
some colors or add some sparkly bits makes a great deal of difference to 
who we are as we interact with others through this computer?

Doesn't it "just make sense" that the ability to choose our workplace, 
family and recreational computing environments is at least as important 
to each of us as the speed of our CPU? And given that I could not design 
my way out of an open-sided cube I should expect that my ability to talk 
with a visual designer about different design elements in my computing 
"home" and to bring together elements in a way that enhances my screen 
time to be sure I'm not trying to use tools designed for a very 
different sort of job (or person)?

What would you need to make that happen?

You will know far better than I, but let me take a beginning stab at it:

(1) Total control of your screen, including color, sound and motion.

(2) The ability to reuse patterns, to "stamp" a visual kernel into a
variety of manifestations without having to recreate it each time. (such
as the ability to take a company logo, copy it to a new work area and
change colors, intensity, opacity, scale, visual weight, transitions, etc.)

(3) Some sort of "sandbox" that would let you easily flow through a
group of selected characteristics, such as a floating color bar,
on-screen palette of visual effects, and transitions, trying out 
different combinations and comparing different choices.

(4) Further, this sandbox would allow you to revisit each or every
change of this session, so that if something caught your eye and clicked
with something you remember playing with an hour ago, you can rewind and
pluck the desired image/piece/snippet to start a new sandbox session.

(5) Plays nice with existing (however dinosaur-ish) graphics tools.
It needs to be easy for me to add in images or sounds or color 
combinations I come across, and easy for me to output samples to show 
around, think about and maybe get comfortable with. (Not every computing 
experience has to be the equivalent of the "throw you into the deep 
water so you would *have* to learn how to swim" trauma.)

(6) Is savvy to non-computer basic design tools. For example, even while
recognizing the inherent impossibility of getting a true match between a
light-color and a pigment-color source (CMYK vs RGB, etc.), it would be
great to enter in a couple of Pantone numbers (especially if Pantone 
gets its electronic act together) and have something that works with an 
existing business logo (or perhaps your child's favorite Mr. Squeek-ums 
stuffed bear).

(7) While realizing that any graphic designer worth a nickel and a book
of green stamps will invest the time and energy needed to learn how to
effectively use their key tools, you are sitting in front of this 
computer, now, to design, not to learn yet another somewhat obscure 
programming language. There has to be a high "tool effectiveness"/"time 
and effort required" ratio to make learning yet another idiomatic code 
structure worth your while.

In short, we need a tool that will allow us to manipulate all the 
aspects of our computer-location including color, shape, motion and 
sound, to create some sort of patterns which will then reproduce 
themselves in future computing locations (e.g., frames within which most 
programs will appear), and some way of putting things together and 
pulling them apart so that we can gain as much control as is possible 
over our computing-selves.

This means specifically that we don't have to make LiteStep 
"idiot-proof." We do need to categorize your idiots, however! To help 
explain what I mean a database might be a useful analog.

(a) First we have the database language structure itself. Like a
programming language, different sorts of things will be easier or more
difficult to accomplish depending on its tools and rules.

(b) the database implementation of that overall structure is established
so that each database instance does not have to function as if it were a
self-contained program, while various tools are created to make the job
of creating a specific database easier, more distributable and a whole
lot less work

(c) Next is the structure of a particular individual database. The
anticipated data are set up (in tables, routines, etc.) and related to
one another, assigned limits, and linked to outside tools. Note that all
this is in advance of entering a single piece of raw data.

(d) Different people serving different functions will need different
ways to most effectively deal with this data. So various data
manipulation tools are created to generate the sorts of information
likely to be needed. Some of these will be elaborate, precise, allowing
little change and some even insisting that the data entry conform to a
small number of possible keystrokes. Other forms and templates will be
small and general, allowing the user to create a wide variety of reports.

(e) The actual instance-specific data is then entered, checked and
cleaned up.

(f) Finally, with data entered, the first reports can be generated.

In a somewhat analogous manner, LiteStep (or any desktop customization
software) has several discrete steps. Some of these require extensive
programming knowledge, some require only the ability to turn on the
computer and enjoy the show.

Like the database the customized desktop should not try to do everything
at once; there is no need to either dumb-down the program or to require
all users become programmers.

Yet also like the database, one size does not fit everyone--the best 
tool fits the needs of its users as they attempt to do one sort of task. 
The tools useful for setting up the basics for a theme might not be the 
tools most useful for marking or changing elements on the fly. There is 
room for the person who perhaps does not easily read English (or who 
does fine with English but can't manage C++) as well as for the person 
who feels completely at ease authoring code snippets to smooth out some 
formatting task.

Simply put, there is lots of room for people of all experience levels: 
It is the size and diversity of this community that represents one
of LiteStep's strongest advantages.

Programmers don't have to be graphic designers (or even manufacturing 
engineers) in order to benefit from LiteStep.

  ("here's a secret, all you programming-types out there. Crowd around 
and listen close. It doesn't take museum-quality design skills to figure 
out that most of the work done in LiteStep so far--and in other desktop 
customization programs--is not the work of people with a gift for visual 
design. . .just thought I would let you know. . .Just as the first four 
or five years after the Mac put different font faces right there up 
front in their word processing program were trying times for graphic 
designers--"NO! You don't get points for largest selection of type faces 
in one document!"--these are times of stress for visual designers. Just 
be aware that "flashy" or "unusual" does not in itself make for good 
design. . .Many--perhaps most--of the web sites in use today are 
visual-design-challenged. This will no doubt clean itself up within a 
few years. Meanwhile, we cope.).

On the other hand, visual designers don't have to be programmers to 
benefit from LiteStep as a tool.

In fact someone who is neither a designer nor a programmer can still 
benefit from LiteStep.

LiteStep users will enter into the long process of creating an
amazing and working desktop at different places and will exit at
different places. Just as a visual designer might be emboldened to take 
their first small steps at writing code, perhaps a hot code jock will 
see for the first time that there is a visual life outside of black and 
florescent blue.

It is entirely possible that someone new to the LiteStep community might 
experience the "AHA!" moment that is the spark behind an amazingly 
paradigm rockin' down-cool widget.

Because of its scope, flexibility and open source roots, LiteStep offers
opportunities far beyond those in XP, commercial desk customization
software and yes, even Vista.

No matter how many bells and whistles MS packs into Vista, it will
never, ever accomplish this small and very important task. Vista offers 
a much larger selection of carefully prescribed and delimited options 
than does XP, but there is no opportunity to take a shot at modifying 
some bits of code within Vista:

To even try is to risk criminal action: Fines, equipment confiscation 
and even imprisonment.

At every step Vista is saying "you may go here, but no further." 
Crossing that barrier in itself elevates LiteStep to a spot as a 
completely different sort of experience. Vista will always be 
constrained by the "what works for most people?" maxim. As long as they 
work from within this framework, they will never produce "the best 
possible" even for most users.

Vista isn't a real threat to a vibrant LiteStep community. There are, of 
course, many ways a LiteStep community could develop.

This particular form of a vision for LiteStep's future calls for a 
vibrant community of free-spirit developers and programmers to continue 
to move this family of programs alongside of the other computer 
advances. LiteStep might even transcend "a collection of programs" and 
become "a movement!"--a way of seeing the computer world and of being 
within it, an attitude towards the computing worlds rather than a set of 
really good tools, a way to approach computing).

LiteStep doesn't have much to offer, however, if it takes constant 
tweaking to keep it up going, if parts of it may or may not work with 
other parts of it, or if it gets locked into the soon-tired "Computing: 
last year."

The vision also requires a community of visual designers, ranging in 
skill and experience from professional designers to those who seem to 
"have an eye" for design. If LiteStep's face to the public is ugly, 
scarred and beaten black-and-blue to the point that most adult computer 
users see nothing they would want on their own computer screens, the 
LiteStep community will fade into yet another small and dying out 
"Irrelevant Computer Stuff Museum and User Group (ICS-MUG)."

There are other professional-level groups. Professional online sellers, 
IT Administrators, Stereophiles, assistive technology, video, and K-12 
educators (kindergarten/pre-school up to the point of university 
admission) might discover as things go along that their area of interest 
has some important unusual needs or opportunities and that LiteStep 
shows promise of evolving to a point to meet these needs, given the 
right interest-programmer-designer environment.

Point is, instead of falling prey to most desktop customization sites in 
which the ethos is to praise every submittal and/or reeks "snob--if you 
don't know how to get in here, you're not welcome!" There is no magic 
set of site rules that will both keep the interest of accomplished and 
experienced contributors and the absolute beginner coming back. There 
are many, many site corpses along that particular road.

Thus the most important element for LiteStep's vital and growing future 
is a communicative platform where hard-core programmers can talk 
programming to other hard-core programmers, demanding visual artists can 
talk (and show) with other demanding visual artists, and there are 
carefully maintained places where programmers with a bit of an eye for 
design can talk with visual designers who are willing to play around 
with some code.

This "LiteStep WorkPlace" can not be for tinkerers, dabblers and 
newcomers: "Bad money drives out good money" and good programmers and 
gifted visual artists will not hang around for long if most of what is 
being produced is shoddy. If we want LiteStep to stand on its own along 
side of (or in front of) Vista, we have to offer something better than 
Vista design and Vista code.

In no sense, however, am I suggesting we offer no entrance place for 
beginners, or a place for folks who have heard about (or seen) some 
LiteStep computer environments and want to see more. In fact, even as 
the "LiteStep WorkPlace" needs to be carefully managed to continue to 
attract and keep the best programmers and designers, a "FirstStep" area 
must always remain open and welcoming to anyone who is interested. (as 
well as a nice 'hanging out' space for those often working in the 
LiteStep WorkPlace).

This is the place where every submission is admired, where people give 
and receive good strokes for their work. FirstStep is the place for 
contests, for tutorials and for the necessary "what! do I! do!!! I 
installed! LiteStep! and now! my computer! is! Dead!!!" help-one-another 
fora.

It is also the place from which people wanting to get into the thick of 
the programming issues and design issues can find their way to those 
places.

And it will probably serve as the most fruitful (if scattered) supply of 
genuinely fresh ideas for those programmers and designers who will 
necessarily tend to get a bit too comfortable with their respective 
circles.

I obviously don't know your abilities, Wendy. I'm the new kid on the
block (if I'm invited to stay after preaching so long--which, by the 
way, is an invitation I am *not* taking for granted.) What I can say,
however, is that whatever your specific abilities, there is a place for
you within the LiteStep community. There are probably several places, 
and each will fit you best at one time or another.

This is taking advantage of some of our strengths: portability across 
platforms, huge and diverse developer base, the ability to push out the 
product without careful tracking of each download or change in every 
recipient's computer.

Microsoft's strengths lie in huge numbers: Lots of programmers, testers
and marketing people, and their ability to deliver boxes containing
their products to just about any small patch of somewhere on the globe.
Their products are huge (some would say "bloated") and this is a
reflection of their "bigness." When you are Microsoft, you have to put
out a product that will deliver mostly good stuff most of the time to
most of the people.

They are simply not about focusing on one great idea.

LiteStep is not about size, but rather diversity. You can do just about
anything with LiteStep *because* of its free-sourceness (sourcity?).
While Microsoft will vigorously hunt down anyone they can find who grabs
some of their code to do something a bit different on a desktop, that
very level of participation is welcomed, here.

So instead of thinking in terms of "idiot proof" or "most popular" or
even "best of ________" let's work to improve the way we work with one
another. Let's clean up the documentation, figure out which ways of
doing things just won't work (if there are any) and how we can get
LiteStep in front of more people.

If we can successfully make available to people good solid themes that
come close to running by themselves, configurable themes that reward
some learning time with more spectacular results and the opportunity for
gifted people to create computing places that are no less than works of
both art and technology, why would we have reason not to believe people
will use LiteStep?

If instead of saying "you have to learn this and this and this before
you can use our program" we say "what do you already know? what are your
  goals? how much learning are you willing to do?" then here's the
LiteStep for you, . . ."

And there is always the hope that someone, somewhere might actually wake
up to the fact that the question "which is the best computer for. . ."
is the wrong question, that instead we ought to be asking "what do you
want to accomplish, in which direction do you want to head?"

Doesn't it make sense that looking at desktop customization as "changing
your computing space to fit you" makes a lot more sense than stating "in
order to use this computer efficiently you must learn . . ." ?


Wendy Harlow wrote:
> "Thank you, Darrin.
> 
> <--snip-->
> 
> Is this worth pursuing? In what ways?
> 
> Vagabundus
> 
> Roy Gathercoal"
> 
> ------------------------
> 
> Wow.
> 
> Just....wow.
> 
> Can we elect you President?
> 
> Seriously, though - the prospect of absolute control over my own environment
> is what drew me into Litestep to begin with. The fact that I could design my
> own User Interface, and not be dependent on someone else's interpretation of
> my needs was a huge turn-on. The fact that I could make it look like almost
> anything I wanted... I didn't have a specific problem I needed solving - it
> just looked COOL, and very not-M$.
> 
> To be honest, when we went into OTS and things got a bit more complicated, I
> stopped theming, because I couldn't keep up with the sweeping changes taking
> place. Housing config in several files seemed unintuitive to me (still does,
> but I'm more used to it now). Then scripting became more common and I felt
> even more lost - I'm a designer, not a programmer.
> 
> Litestep has a serious geek factor and a steep learning curve. In order to
> increase use and gain more widespread acceptance, steps need to be taken to
> make it as "idiot-proof" as possible. That includes good documentation and
> good publicity. Unfortunately, when ls.net went down for that extended
> period of time, a lot of old-timers lost their LS lifeline. Even now,
> despite heroic efforts, ls.net still isn't what it used to be - *THE* LS
> site. We seem scattered all over.
> 
> Now, with the release of Vista, it seems that folks have decided it's not
> worth updating LS for it - a lot of people have commented they'd rather go
> Linux than use Vista ("better dead than red"?), leaving us who happen to
> like Vista wondering what's going to happen.
> 
> (And yes, I know I haven't gotten back with the problems I've had with LS on
> Vista - work and life and kids going back to school...I don't have the
> luxury to have my computer acting wonky for an extended period of time.)
> 
> ~Wendy Harlow
> Tonsei-rs
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>     Can't Unsubscribe? Check http://desktopian.org/listunsub.html
>         LS List Homepage: http://wuzzle.org/list/litestep.php
>             Get the LS FAQ: http://lsfaq.shellfront.org
> 
> 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
    Can't Unsubscribe? Check http://desktopian.org/listunsub.html
        LS List Homepage: http://wuzzle.org/list/litestep.php
            Get the LS FAQ: http://lsfaq.shellfront.org