The First Dinosaur On The Moon


Now available as desktop wallpaper in three sizes: 1280×1024, 1680×1050, and 1920×1200.


7 Comments so far. Comments are closed.
  1. aww man, where’s the 1920×1200 for us homies with larger monitors? kidding, stretch-mode works just fine.

    This is great, because it looks like the top of an actual desk with slight vignetting around the edges (unlike Mr. Vignette from lightroom killer tips 😉 makes it look like a plank of wood in the shadowbox of your monitor. An interesting effect, that gives me some ideas! To the idearium!

  2. ratchetcat,

    1920×1200? I’ll see what can be done when I return to the laboratory tonight! 🙂

  3. Now that we have GPU-as-Desktop in Vista, it would be nice if we could have some desktop physics simulations – like weighted icons so you could throw them to the side of the screen and have them cluster together (i.e. if the icon travelled near other icons, depending on velocity the icon cluster’s gravity could attract it), allowing easy organization of icons. Or just have marbles you can roll around or something that bounce off icons. I dunno. We need more ways to play with our computers that make it look like we’re working.

    I hope, when multi-touch capable technology actually reaches me, that I can do cool shit like pinch open a folder temporarily with one hand and toss an icon INTO it with the other, then squeeze it back closed. And while they’re at it, I’d like a display with 3nm pixels like they were talking about on 80beats the other day.

  4. ratchetcat,

    I dunno — do we really need to bring physics into our abstracted, digital workspace? Personally, I’m not sure I’d ever use it… heck, I turned off most of the eye candy in OS X once it was installed.

    Multi-touch — and accelerometers — might make physics on the desktop more appealing, I guess, since you could shake all the icons to one side of the screen or do other tricks.

    Here’s a thought: What if you could tap in a certain sequence to shift your desktop into new configurations? Or unlock certain files?

  5. Fortson,

    Personally, I would like a digitized zamboni to clear all the unused icons off my desktop or refresh my inbox after deleting emails…

  6. Need? It’s not a question need, it’s a question of when. You perhaps saw my post on the TED talk on siftables, bringing digital interactive objects off the desktop and into tactile spacetime, it’s only a question of when are the two going to merge, not whether or not we need desktop physics.

    I already use a gesture unlock cypher for my gPhone (yeah i’m paranoid, what can I say the keys to my kingdom are in there, not that any common thief would know how to turn them), so gesture unlock cyphers for files would be great. Honestly, the RSI would be a lot less with full-arm gesturing rather that the rigid arm wrist-only mousing most of us do. Especially since BOTH hands can be in on the game. I mean, people complain about multitouch “i don’t wanna wave my hands at a screen” but have no problem waving their hands at legos to make something.

    It’s like how using a Cintiq will spoil a regular Wacom forever. It’s like things you never even knew you wanted will suddenly (hey “never even” is a palidrome) become things you can’t live without. Imagine being able to take a layer in photoshop, squeeze all your fingers together to crumple it up and shoot it to the bottom corner of the screen to have it delete. Wont that be satisfying when you’re angry at whatever you’ve muffed up and need to get rid of? Maybe you’ll be able to flatten your hands and sweep an area in photoshop to instantly create a new layer mask wherever you’ve touched? I mean, the possibilities with “whatever shape/size/amount you can detect on the screen,” be it ten fingers, a flattened hand, a fore-arm, two people &c. are just endless.

    The question isn’t whether or not we need physics, the question is just how awesome are those physics gonna be? Imagine placing two fingers to either side of an icon and flicking up with another to have the icon chinese football into the background and out of your way?

    Sure, the eye-candy “physics” are just that, eye candy. Pushing a button and having your window tornado away just isn’t very fun. THROWING the window at the dock and seeing it shrink to mate will be an entirely different story. Throwing it at the dock and having it disappear and reappear as a dock icon would break the metaphor. 😀

  7. ratchetcat,

    I’m with you on multi-touch and augmented reality (I lump haptics, siftables, etc in the latter). Once we start mapping our interfaces against objects in our environment, it will be curious to see whether we begin to naturally expect the virtual space to persist with an associated object (and therefore see a lot of mundane objects become rather “smart” through the addition of memory, processing, and interfaces with other “smart” objects) or whether we become accustomed to the virtual space being an ephemeral thing — not associated with any given object, but mappable to anything.

    I look at trends like RFID and think it could go the first way. Mobile phones seem like a step toward the second way — given that they’re basically crude “siftable” atoms which we carry with us.

    We’ll probably end up — as usual — with some crazy kit-bash of both.