Jim, thanks, that was very interesting, even I have been reading of exciting developments in human-machine interaction space, of cell phones which will scroll if you tilt them and such. Intiutive interfaces/interactions are where we are and should be heading I believe. Till now this has been restricted in many cases by the lack of appropriate technology. On other hand, a breakthrough sometimes will require some effort in getting accepted. One of the innovations that come to mind is the Segway sccoter. Even though on the most basic level, its operation is intiutive(lean forward and it moves forward, lean back and it decelerates),it was too revolutionary that you had to do a lot of unlearning (with your concept of how a transport equipment works)to master it. I think this also ties up to the discussion on why adoption of 3D is lesser than 100% even with all its 'closer to reality' charatcter. Another interesting observation on the Segway when I had tried it out in 2006. The controls to make the scooter turn left or right was a rotating sleeve on the handle bar(similar to the accelerator on a bike). Now this was placed in such a way that it rolled front to back and not in a more intiutive left to right and I had a lot of difficulty in interpreting it. I understand that this has been corrected since. My point is that its critical to evaluate all user interfaces for a truly satisfying experience.

SGTACHAT, that is exactly what I am seeing. With the advancements in technology, people are starting to focus on the usability. Video games are a great example. I don't know about you, but if I try to play one of the sports games with my kids on their game systems, I am lost. It is not intuitive to me to make a controller motion like Left-Right-A-B-X to make something happen. And, I am not willing to spend the time to re-learn my interface with a football or hockey puck to play a game. But being the desk jockey that I am right now, I have invested in programming my keyboard with special functions for the things I do most, I actually have a Function-B mapped to this blog (I know, get a life...). It's not intuitive to anybody that sits at my desk, but I have learned it. I believe that the interaction with a lot of systems is the same way - people that have to spend a lot of time with them learn to use them. When you first sit down, they are very hard to approach. Now interfaces have come a long way, and a lot of companies have started to imitate the look and feel of the most broadly used software (Microsoft). But what about physical control? We all spent years learning to interact with the 3D environment we live in. Learning to walk, throw, catch, etc. was a huge investment in time and effort. Why not take advantage of it? That's what's exciting to me. In the same way I can learn a Wii controller relatively quickly, I can see a time where interfaces leverage our common understanding of interacting with the 3D universe. It might not work as well for complex, abstract ideas like an accounting transaction. But for product development, I see a lot of applicability. So I'll play some more games on the Wii to do some more research on the topic, although my kids will probably still beat me. But then again, aren't they the next generation of software users? Aren't they going to expect this? Or are they going to be willing to keep hitting Left-Right-A-B-A at work like they do on their sports games? Maybe they will just be able to think more abstractly than we do about interacting with computers. But on the other hand, do we want to pay everybody to learn the interface or do their work?