Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!hao!ames!lll-lcc!pyramid!hplabs!hplabsz!taylor
From: conybear@moncsbruce.OZ (Roland Conybeare)
Newsgroups: comp.society
Subject: Re: The Aesthetics of Computers
Message-ID: <1507@hplabsz.HPL.HP.COM>
Date: 29 Jan 88 08:18:53 GMT
Sender: taylor@hplabsz.HPL.HP.COM
Lines: 36
Approved: taylor@hplabs

I think there are very good reasons for using paper over CRT's for the
large-scale alteration of text:

 o It's easy to make changes stand out on a printout - use a biro.
 o You can see two or three times as much text at once on paper than you
   can on a CRT.
 o It follows from (1) that since it is easy to recognize alterations,
   it is also easy to remove inappropriate ones.
 o The pen is a better tool for drawing diagrams, making margin notes,
   and exploring a problem than a character-oriented CRT with keyboard
   input.

On the other hand, the processing power of a computer offers enourmous 
composition advantages:

 o If alterations are correct, we don't want them to stand out any more.
   Then the CRT + computer's seamless integration of changes into a document is
   what we want.
 o The CRT + computer can make systematic alterations such as global replace
   easy.
 o The CRT is neat and tidy.
 
I think that the advantages of pen + paper can be accomplished by CRT + 
computer with today's technology, but at great expense.  This could be
done with:

 o A very large (several ft. square) screen, which is also a desk and 
   writing surface.
 o A pen-like input device for drawing pictures, etc.
 o Amazing software :-).

Such a system could give the user the best of the pen+paper and CRT+computer 
worlds.  Now if only it would also fit in your pocket and run on a couple 
of AA batteries :-).

Roland Conybeare