Man it is gonna be so nice when the average young adult has a device in their pocket that folds out to the size of a paperback, or even a magazine, and we can start making popular culture that fits that size again instead of everything having to make sense through the tiny window of a phone.
I make comics. I grew up reading stuff that used the space of a magazine spread in all kinds of clever ways, I fell in love with the way I can play with layout across a page. I made an entire graphic novel with multiple storylines running in parallel across every page.
A phone can show one or two panels at a time, at best. There’s a lot of stuff you just can’t do. It’s a tiny, limited canvas, even before it gets shitted up with ads and pop ups.
I don't think any book could give the feeling of transitions as the webtoon format can, yes, its only a panel (or less!) at a time, but the artist can give a halting thought-by-thought feel of a man on his deathbed, or roll out an entire red carpet of flourishes to introduce a character of nobility
You can't go super transition-heavy in print, because well, printing and pages cost. and people need to move their big hands to flick the pages, there is an expected consumption rate for that effort put in, so even if cost wasn't an issue, people would get fed up with the transitions anyhow.
so yeah, 1 panel at a time, is a bit of a downside, but IMO its also an upside in that one can give each panel its own treatment and such. an infinite vertical strip as one's canvas
- - -
of course, getting all the bits into the right places with the right breathing rooms and the right flow is a true skill in of itself, but, I dunno, is it better to read 1 super good comic, or 100 entertaining enough ones? the bar is lowered by all of this, yes, but is that a bad thing?
I've noticed this smartphone layout in comics before and I recognise the strengths but find it really less enjoyable to read. I have to be constantly scrolling and it's difficult to ever settle into a scene and feel it since they're gone in the blink of an eye. In regular pages that panel is still on the page and/or you can play with panel size and layout to create impact, but I just don't feel it with these scrolling comics.
That being said, I /do/ like the transition thing you mentioned.
I’ve recently started following a few webcomics that are phone first. I’m sure they’ve been around a while, but it was novel to me to have a story set up as a continuous downward scroll. There isn’t as much flexibility as you get with a comic spread, but there are still interesting tricks that contribute significantly to the overall feel and pacing of the story.
Definitely agree with this. They achieve a form of dynamic animation sometimes, where the continuous scroll can "lead" objects on the screen into new scenes which can be really cool. I'd recommend the previous poster to read a couple of episodes, one example I found really cool was this one https://www.webtoons.com/en/thriller/not-even-bones/ep-1/vie...
Works best on the phone where you can have it fullscreen and smooth scrolling.
I love comics like MSPA that use web elements like animation, hypertext, chatlogs, and interactive panels as progressive enhancements on the comic form. But I actually really dislike the scroll comic format.
I don't enjoy fiddling with the scroll position, or things peeking in from the edges, I like a nicely laid out scene and a button or other control that takes me to the next "page" or scene without the fuss that scrolling to the right position adds.
Scott McCloud of Zot fame was an early adopter of the web, I attended a talk from him where he was talking about how frustrated he was that the 3 panel format had persisted to the web, when there were so many ways to use space creatively.
He later adapted that talk for his "understanding comics" Ted talk. Worth a watch if you love the medium
I've got all his books and he's even linked to one of my comics in the past. http://egypt.urnash.com/rita/ if you're curious.
It's pretty cool on a decent-sized screen, it was designed around the size of the iPad I'd just gotten when I started it. Not so cool on a phone. Try it on both and you'll see what I mean.
Yeah. This is a big problem with the "metaverse". Peering into a high-resolution 3D world via a hand-sized screen is tunnel vision. We're still a long way from the "swim goggles" form factor in VR headgear, which is what Carmack says is the minimum for reasonable consumer adoption levels.
Playing "Papers Please" on a phone requires a good memory. Do you remember what the recognized visa issuing cities for Kolechia are? You need to know that. If you have to swipe to the rulebook to look it up, your productivity will drop and you won't make enough money for the day to keep your family fed.
I'm noticing a lot of the younger crowd don't seem as glued to the phone as their parents. Materialists will always be materialists, but as an adherent to Ordnung, I don't own/need a phone, so it sticks out and it's obvious to me that the normal garden variety youth these days are not as absorbed as the first generation to this little thing known to 'create fire' because it is now commonplace. A computer in your pocket has 0 novelty or wow-factor to this generation, as it should. Nobody fawns over a butane-lighter or debit card, they're commonplace despite being relatively new.
This isn't just in my community, it's noticeable enough in my travels that it seems to be a trend. I assume it is because of more short-format digestible content, along with the shift of social being one-to-one and one-to-many, to being many-to-many, in the sense that you're not necessarily seeking out those you had a direct relationship with, you're seeking out elements and segments of a topical zeitgeist, whether that be tech videos, memes, cat compilations etc.
I also have another hypothesis- when phones that provided a rich experience first debuted, it was the nerds and city folk who got it first. iPhone then brought this mobile-first-lifestyle to the stylemakers and artists and those whose inner monologue is narrated by Justin Long, folks who'd likely have bought anything apple anyway. From there, smartphones and rich experiences were disseminated into the lesser elements of the greater public who either are receptive to tastemaker's influences or have limited option to refute the convenience of popularity; popular hardware is cheap, ubiquitous and accessible, some might say in some regards modern smart phones are disposable.
What I'm getting at is this, this stuff is no longer a mystery to this generation. We are now 2 or 3 generations removed from this type of pocket-computer being anything wow-inducing. I think of it sometimes like when I was a youngster, the class of people who traveled via air vs everyone else at ground level. Air travel had a mystique and prestige, this person must be doing something to be enjoying a cigarette and being served a glass of wine however many feet in the air, direct to destination. The same way I might not be in admiration of my neighbors boots for having a good welt, because a good welt is a given, I assume the youngster of today are no longer enamored by the novelty of a mobile phone or pocket-computer. As such, it is no longer a status symbol for most. So what the new iPhone came out and you got one, that's only a valid status symbol for maybe a few weeks, for over 1,000 USD invested in some models.
Youth of today, I don't see them going for a pocket atlas or any such form factor, I see them going for augmented spectacles or lenses. Everything indicates that a new 'moores law' is taking effect around energy storage and thermodynamics - we are no longer optimizing per-core clock speed, we are optimizing core count and the amount of energy that can be stored to later be turned into CPU cycles rather than heat. As soon as the battery technology will allow it, you will see lenses, whether they be spectacles or contacts, that will take in and assimilate your surroundings, your focus, and the imperceptible changes to your heart rate, retinal dilation, and ocular pressure responses to commercial items. It's not far fetched, we already know of this research being done. Despite the cumbersome experience of VR, we are seeing a point where it is no longer 3D TV or bluray level tech, it's sub-standard as a whole but more and more people are buying it because it shows promise.
I see in the future that our interface devices, whether they be communicators like phones, or additive interfaces like AR spectacles that can dole out retail info in response to a brief biomarker-spike like pupil dilation when glancing at a new pair of shoes. These devices will be funded by corporations much the same way tech learning materials, operating systems, and software is today. It makes most sense that before wider adoption, they'd first be available to those with the most capacity for realizing an ad-prompt via converting to a purchase, so think of like snapchat goggles release, but at your local best buy.
pocket-held mobile phones are the least optimal form factor for every purpose or task it can accommodate other than "fits in pocket". Mark my words, as soon as it can be bonded to a wearable lens, it will be, and the corporations will subsidize it heavily. You think adtech is bad now, just wait.
The Ordnung is a set of rules for Amish, Old Order Mennonite and Conservative Mennonite living. Ordnung is the German word for order, discipline, rule, arrangement, organization, or system. Because the Amish have no central church government, each assembly is autonomous and is its own governing authority. Thus, every local church maintains an individual set of rules, adhering to its own Ordnung, which may vary from district to district as each community administers its own guidelines.
It is notable that in Srinivasan's "The Network State" there is no mention of Ordnung as a positive example of how a parallel social order can and does work. All the mentions of Amish are negative examples at best.
Much value creation is already digital. If you’re reading this,
you’re probably an information worker. You may not have thought
about it this way, but the majority of your waking hours are
probably spent in front of one screen or another a laptop for
work, a phone on the go, a tablet for reading, and so on. So, most
of your life is already spent in the Matrix, in a sense, even
before the advent of widespread AR/VR. Short of a pullback to an
Amish or Andaman Islander existence, most of your life is and will
be digitally influenced in some form. Moreover, much of the value
in the physical world comes from blueprints created on a computer
in some form; eg, the iPhones manufactured in Shenzhen gain much
of their value from the designers in California. So, a good
fraction of value creation is largely digital.
Srinivasan, Balaji. The Network State: How To Start a New Country (p. 279). Kindle Edition.
No social network. If there’s no social network, you have no
digital profiles, no messaging, no community fora, no mass media,
and no easy way to recruit from the internet. You’d essentially be
living an Amish life, relying on pieces of paper or offline cues
to determine who was part of your new state and how they
interacted. This isn’t going to succeed the nation state.
Srinivasan, Balaji. The Network State: How To Start a New Country (p. 371). Kindle Edition.
All is hyperbole, since the ergonomics on a laptop are terrible, and there will always be a segment for which that's a showstopper, but it's already true for certain segments of the population. Especially among the less privileged where there may not even be a desktop computer available or only at school/library, mobile phones are increasingly where work is done. Writing essays and emails, and filling out important forms, may not be the most ergonomic, but it beats not being able to.
Look at devices with foldable screens and external keyboards like the Asus Zenbook 17. Without getting lost in arguing semantics of if an iPad (mini/pro/regular) sized tablet counts as a mobile telephone, it's clearly not a desktop, and it's easy enough to imagine that desktop computers will go the way of the mainframe.
Agreed. Honestly if I had a way to comfortably write software on my phone I don't think I'd ever use my laptop ever again. Phones are simply too comfortable.
Unfortunately the vast majority of them are consumer devices: unlike real computers they don't come with the tools used to program them. I can't make a new app on my phone and run it.
I've heard a professor lament a student stating that all CAD applications should work on phones.
And why is that such a lamentable idea? Modern phones have the processing power these days. Walking around a factory, building sites or a muddy field with a phone in your hand is a lot easier than walking around with a laptop. Plus modern phones have LiDAR and multiple cameras opening up for all kinds of interesting options. Frankly any CAD platform which doesn’t embrace mobile will probably fall out of favour over the next few years.
You are probably right to the extent of multimodal for some tasks or for sensor input. But redlining a 200 page set of drawings to capture as built info is still different from assembling that set of drawings in the first place. I doubt it will be all or nothing. E.g., supporting field service will require generating particular views, but I don't see engineering review meetings skimping on monitor pixels, at a cost of N laptops per hour just to assemble a meeting.
Indeed, I'm not suggesting that CAD tools go mobile only or even mobile first, just there is a lot of very practical uses for mobiles (and tablets) in the CAD (and BIM) space that shouldn't be ignored.
In terms of number of hours used daily, there is no context. Mobiles are the largest video game market, and the most used computing platforms. So, not quite all computing, but an awful lot of it.
