Talk:WIMP (computing)

Meaning
I just realized this has another meaning. So I added WIMP server, I'm linking it up to the LAMP page as I write. I am not sure however if what I wrote is completely accurate, i.e. if you can actually get python running with IIS like you can with apache, or perl.(Does IIS support CGI on have anything like apache mods?). Could someone who is actually running a WIMP(hehe, it's so humourous to call it a WIMP server)or knows about it edit this up for me? I tried to check most of the wiki links I put up as well, however I think my ignorance of the subject showed through. --Capi crimm 04:43, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

WIMP also means Windows IIS MySQL PHP, which is the development platform of a lot of LAMP developer. --WhiteEcho 15:57, 25 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Haha... I've just realized that too - sorta says it all! (now, back to NPOV :)) Ah, yeah, that seems to be the official way of referring to it (MSFT must be feeling a bit gutted - especially as WIMP could mean Windows IIS Microsoft SQL Server Programming Language - i.e mean a completely proprietary server of all MSFT products) - a quick Google search of "WIMP IIS" reveals hosting companies using that acronym. Well, at least it's something humorous to light up the day! --J. Atkins (talk - contribs) 15:44, 9 June 2008 (UTC)


 * This article does not seem completely accurate conisdering the studies that have been done showing that GUI environments are actually more complicated for completely new users. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.97.99.52 (talk) 02:44, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

I have to disagree with the general concept given in this (and other articles) and feel that the term WIMP has lost it's original concept.

WIMP is WINDOWS, ICONS, MENU, POINTER (not POINTING DEVICE, which begins to imply a mouse, rather than the graphical element the other components imply).

A WIMP is a sub-set of a GUI. For example, a mobile phone has a GUI but not a WIMP system. Windows and MacOS are both WIMP systems (and in turn GUIs). A basic Venn Diagram would show clearly this relationship.


 * Agreed that WIMP continues to have its original meaning. Just because you can come up with other 4-word combinations, doesn't mean there's any academic literature or broad recognition of that set.  Using the P to stand for "PHP", for instance is much more specific.  WIMP as a term is 30 years old and still relevant.  How relevant do you think PHP will be in 2045?


 * Disagree that phones aren't WIMP interfaces. Of course they are.  When you run your application full-screen in Windows, isn't it still a WIMP interface?  When you switch applications on your iPhone, isn't it in a different window, *isolated* from the other applications?  When you choose a menu item and it slides another *windows* in from the left, or you touch an input field and the virtual keyboard rises from the bottom, aren't those windows?  There's no T in WIMP: you don't need a title bar, or more than one window on the screen, to have a WIMP system.  The salient characteristics are the same.    — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jklowden (talk • contribs) 20:49, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

The WINDOW element is a graphic representation of the separation within memory of each program and process. The window is a (supposed) ring-fenced program that could, if necessary, be closed without affecting other windows or system processes. Windows has always been criticised for not truly isolating programs in this way.

The ICONs allow for easy execution of a program through a graphical representation of the command line instruction.

The MENU system is the basic system used within most GUI system and can be a simple text list (such as a basic web page navigation system) to an all-folding, button based system (so frequented by most programs).

The POINTER is the arrow that allows you to navigate the screen through a random selection process (rather than through a sequential system popular within mobile phones - try jumping from the first icon or menu item on your phone to the middle one without having to click or navigate through the ones inbetween).

To treat WIMP and GUI as interchangeable makes the reason for the two terms to be useless. To identify WIMP as a subset of GUI allows for greater clarity and to identify the extending of GUI into more than simply a graphical solution to the old command line routines. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gary.newport (talk • contribs) 10:42, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Lack of neutrality
This article takes a too naive "pro" stance, including a criticism section that is more or less a one-sided praise. Other examples include mentioning power-users among those that benefit---where, in fact, power users tend to be among the more likely to complain, prefer keyboard controls, and even command lines.

Generally, there are many uncritical and unsubstantiated claims of advantages that do not (necessarily) pan out on closer inspection.

While WIMP does bring many advantages, it (and GUI's in general) is also among the most debated topics in usability discussions involving power users, and a one sided laudatory is highly controversial. 94.220.247.12 (talk) 14:53, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Are you concerned only about the overall positive language "are very good", "benefits"? Or do you have some real and verifiable alternate POVs in mind, that you want to be reflected in the article? Diego (talk) 15:24, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

The article is about WIMP, not user-interface, so it's not a "obligation"(it would improve the article, but not "needed") to talk about CLI or other "Options". Look to the CLI article, it don't even as a criticism section. And ""power users tend to be among the more likely to complain"" is biased itself and original research. Wikipedia need to be unbiased, don't matter if most your editors are "power user", "tech savvys", "linuxers" or any other tastes or opinions shared with our editors, so wacth yourself for sistemic bias. Talking about bias, the CLI article is obviously more biased than this, if you really want change something to create a NPOV wikipedia.189.104.174.29 (talk) 18:52, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

I also question the neutrality of the article, in particular the criticism section. The article space is not a place to argue or endorse your vision. I'll remove most of the "criticism" section now; re-expand with neutral and verifiable statements only, please. --141.228.106.150 (talk) 15:57, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

I don't quite understand the sentence "Due to the nature of the WIMP system, simple commands can be chained together to undertake a group of commands that would have taken several lines of command line instructions." It is considerably more difficult to reliably chain together a sequence of icon clicks then it is a sequence of CLI instructions yet this makes it sound like it's easier in the WIMP interface? HazyBlueDot (talk) 20:18, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

HCI
The term HCI should be linked to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human%E2%80%93computer_interaction — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.42.47.172 (talk) 21:15, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Hover over to see pointer
Regarding The image captioned "Hover over to see pointer": Now that we exist in a touch screen world, this is no longer necessarily true. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.178.228.224 (talk) 06:14, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅ -- Trevj (talk) 10:22, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

The caption is cute and all but touch screens are not the only exception to pointer-driven UI. Text/hint-driven interfaces, voice control, and not least static hardcopies aka printouts all do without pointers. The illustration should illustrate a pointer. It avoids this fundamental function in all cases where such an illustration would actually be most useful, i.e. on media that don't have pointers. Don't change the caption, change the picture. --82.113.122.166 (talk) 17:54, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Point taken. I've now replaced the image with File:Geubuntu Prima Luna Sunshine.jpg. If someone finds a better example (preferably in a lossless format rather than JPEG), be bold and replace it. -- Trevj (talk) 10:30, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Chaining Commands
"Due to the nature of the WIMP system, simple commands can be chained together to undertake a group of commands that would have taken several lines of command line instructions."

What does this mean in the context of WIMP? It actually sounds more like a description of command line pipelining. Bagunceiro (talk) 20:24, 25 March 2016 (UTC)