BumpTop: Do we really need a 3D Windows desktop?

No we don't !

Apple has patented a 3D operating system. So Mac OS 3D is coming soon....

It's by no means necessary or even efficient, but it sure makes the desktop fun! I'd transitioned to the point where I didn't even use my desktop anymore, but I love this program so far. It even runs pretty well on my 3-year-old Dell integrated graphics desktop with only a gig of RAM.

I totally need this - I already organise my computer's desktop in a similar way. Pity there's no Mac version yet :(

I got into the beta for this early and it is freaking amazing.. the video doesn't do it justice. I was skeptical at first when installing it, my views mirrored Brad's. I absolutely love this program.

Well, if you're using a mouse it might suck a bit to use this program, even though it's cool beyond a doubt.

However, should you have a touchscreen with Windows 7, well then it gets more interesting.

1 - Like a screen saver, it does nothing.
2 - The user does (or is supposed to do) things.
3 - Remember GIGO?

I don't envy your work habit, Brad (the reviewer) if your desk does look like what you say it does. I may be wrong, but help comes from within.

Pretty doesn't make a computer run more efficient. One of the reasons I remove all the bling in no matter what OS I've used.....
Kenn.....

I really liked the Sphere XP stuff that worked well and made multi screens really easy. It seems that its gone quiet on his site and no activuty for a couple of years now:( Sad was trully innovative.

I actually don't use my desktop, so this would be a waste for me. I have Vista set to not even display icons on my desktop, it makes no sense for me to minimize windows to click on the desktop.

I've been in the Bumptop beta for a couple of months now and it does have its uses. If you have a cluttered desktop, the quick stacking/grouping of files by type is great, for example. Do we *need* it? no, but that's rather a stupid question to ask - we don't *need* half the stuff on our computers, nor do we need Download Squad itself when there are so many similar blogs out there. It comes down to preference.

I think it would work better as a file manager than as a desktop though, but for touchscreen systems or other specialised setups where efficiency isn't a primary concern it makes a useful and unusual addition (I've had it running on a 22" TV controlled by a PS2 dual shock, where the radial menus and gesture recognition really came in handy)

Sounds really pointless to me.

3D desktops are still not for mainstream use. Linux tried to seize people's attention with 3D eye candy and a two years later, it basically fizzled out.

Ok, so he shows it working fine with a dozen images, a few documents and a couple program launchers. But how is this going to handle the THOUSANDS of files your typical computer user has? No matter how nice you make your desktop, eventually you are going to pull up a file manager.

I think they would be better off making this into an application and releasing it for brainstorming and organizing projects, not an entire computer. I would find this useful for some of the projects I do (which have maybe 50 files), but over that and you end up with so many icons and "piles" of icons you would not be able to do anything.

bugmenot perfectly outlined how I was feeling about the comments. Great comment.

I would add that 3D on the desktop is going to be a good thing, eventually. These first steps from creative programmers should be applauded and encouraged.

Everything we do on the PC right now is strictly 2D, we even control PC's in 2D but our brains work much better in 3D. The moment you give a 3D modeling user a 3D device, everything changes for them, the window onto controlling this 2D space just gets easier.

Interestingly the reverse is also true but with the caveat that users have to learn a new way of controlling things, and this is what makes it so difficult to get 3D going outside of gaming (where most used have already mastered the learning curve of controlling 3D with a 2D device)
Hardly any sensible person would mock 3D games for using the third element and call it unnecessary, but right back at the beginning with simple vector graphics, there were many more who argued 2D was better (because technologically, it was easier and produced visually better results)

The tech is almost there to realise a 3D space, we really just lack resolution right now. On a 30" screen, something like bumptop could be extremely useful and equal 2D interaction, but a lot still needs to happen. We need truly 3D icons, not tiles (and also need to breakout of the limitations of what 2D icons offer). Tiles are just an easy workaround in Bumptop that help bridge what users know about icons in 2D with what Bumptop can do in 3D.

When you break into full 3D though, it could get much more exciting. For instance, if a USB device is plugged in, and a real 3D object of it appears on the desktop, it will be visually much richer than the flat 2D tile icons we see today. If you have 3 USB keys, each one could look like its real world counterpart and we'd instantly recognise them without the need for file names. This is where the resolution really comes into play. At 1680x1050 on a 22" monitor, the fidelity isn't really there to do this. Pushing up to well beyond those resolutions gives us the potential to show visually detailed real world objects that can behave like we would expect them to in 3D.

Take a list of documents as an example, in 2D, the best we can do is show a brief clip of what the document contains within a 256x256 pixel space. Vista does this extremely well and I use this feature all the time in Directory Opus under Windows XP. Now if I'm able to see higher fidelity within the same space, we can push these small elements to start containing a lot more of the document in question (in its iconic form) and really understand what it is without the need for a file name. Looking at Bumptop i see icons called myd, docu and really useless snippets of the full file name because the resolution just isn't there to really show all of it. Higher resolutions will solve this problem.

Physics is also an extremely interesting part of bumptop that isn't really used to its full potential. Adding weight to files could start to get interesting. Lets say you have a large movie file and a few small youtube clips, if the large movie file weighed more, it would be a subtle reminder it was larger without having to look at the file size. With a collection of pictures, the heavier ones being the largest in file size would again add subtle reminders. When 3D starts to get used like this, few could argue it was not improving upon the strict 2D interface we use today.

When I first heard that Windows was going to run a 3D desktop, I was so looking forward to the (what I thought at the time) inevitable uses programmers would come up with, to really make use of 3D after Microsoft introduced some key concepts. Sadly Microsoft completely copped out and ignored 3D completely. Now programmers, while often creative, do tend to write software that works within the strict confines of what has gone before it. You can see this at play when another OS comes out with a new feature and soon after clones of it appear on every other OS, variations are worked out on a theme and programmers run with these new concepts. It really does take the few genius thinkers to get the ball rolling, and that's why I applaud the guys behind Bumptop, SphereXP and every other attempt at realising 3D environments for general computer use.

Whether something like Bumptop makes your computing life easier or not is almost irrelevent. Software shouldn't always be about making complete solutions today, but experimenting with the way we could be doing things tomorrow. It's a shame software scores and or the reviewing process doesn't take into account potential like this.

Walt Mossberg reviews BumpTop in his Mossberg Solution column in today's Wall Street Journal giving The Download Squad exclusive credit for bringing BumpTop to his attention

THE MOSSBERG SOLUTION
APRIL 8, 2009
A Desktop That Begs to Be Organized
http://xrl.in/1yvu

I like how every remark that questions the utility of this program has been voted down - EXCEPT the one from the Apple faggot. Speaks volumes, doesn't it, folks? Oh, and this desktop concept is stupid, inefficient and completely non-intuitive. People do NOT think in 3D with regards to a desktop. Is your physical desktop really 3D? Or just disorganized piles of two dimensional junk? I think anyone who's honest with themselves knows the answer.

I love how every comment questioning the utility of this concept has been voted down, EXCEPT the one from the Mac faggot. Speaks volumes, doesn't it? Oh, and this concept is inefficient, unnecessary and non-intuitive. Nobody has a physical 3-D desktop, they just have disorganized piles of 2-D junk. With every new version of Windows I'm astounded at how much less usable its becoming. I hope Microsoft pulls its collective head out before long, otherwise Google is going to own the desktop and Apple is going to own everything else.