In Bolter and Grusin’s book Remediation: Understanding New Media, in a chapter devoted partially to The Logic of Hypermediacy, they state that graphical user interfaces are unique in their demand to not become transparent.
Unlike a perspective painting or three-dimensional computer graphic, this windowed interface does not attempt to unify the space around any one point of view. Instead, each text window defines it’s own verbal, each graphic window it’s own visual, point of view…The multiplicity of windows and the heterogeneity of their contents mean that the user is repeatedly brought back into contact with the interface which she learns to read just as she would read any hypertext. She oscillates between looking at hypertext as a texture of links and looking through the links to the textual units as language.
This characteristic can be exploited by good design. If you have a sound metaphor, and if you group you content into logical clusters, users will overlook any “differences” in data display. What always amazes me is that each discrete window or part is read individually and read collectively - simultaneously. Then, to top it off each piece is expected to transform independent of the whole. This gives you tremendous leeway that you are not afforded in any other art form. The post-structuralists would have a field day.Of course, this doesn’t take into consideration interaction, only the presentation layer. Everyone knows that looking fabulous and performing horribly is only tolerated in Hollywood.
