My take on Doug's vision - having worked with him for a few years before his untimely departure:
While he is celebrated for the mouse, windows, and other ideas coming out of his lab, he should be better understood, not for the MotherOfAllDemos, but for what it meant (my opinions):
He spoke of the ABC architecture, where "C" work is the production line, "B" work is facilitating and improving C work, and "A" work is improving B work.
"A" work is where the concept flourishes: he spoke of networked imrovement communities (NICs) where the "A" team is an improvement community, and a NIC is those "A" teams in a network. Think IEEE as a NIC.
But, he didn't stop there. What is an improvement community? My interpretation is that he uses the term "Dynamic Knowledge Repository" (DKR) to explain the A team; "repository" does not refer to a bank account; rather, a DKR is a combination of human systems, tool systems, and the knowledge brought to the table by the humans. Draw a circle around that. That's how I interpret a DKR.
Key point to take home: all of the elements of a DKR are in a state of continuous coevolution. As humans improve, the tools they use must rise to the occasion.
What held back that concept, historically, has been the tool systems. When he did MOAD, I was working at IBM on OS 360 mainframes. That's what we had in the 60's. Today, my cell phone has more compute power and memory than one of the 360s I serviced back then.
It's for that reason that I am optimistic that we are on a path to realizing Doug's grand vision; our tool systems are now way ahead of we humans.
"A" work is where the concept flourishes: he spoke of networked imrovement communities (NICs) where the "A" team is an improvement community, and a NIC is those "A" teams in a network. Think IEEE as a NIC.
But, he didn't stop there. What is an improvement community? My interpretation is that he uses the term "Dynamic Knowledge Repository" (DKR) to explain the A team; "repository" does not refer to a bank account; rather, a DKR is a combination of human systems, tool systems, and the knowledge brought to the table by the humans. Draw a circle around that. That's how I interpret a DKR.
Key point to take home: all of the elements of a DKR are in a state of continuous coevolution. As humans improve, the tools they use must rise to the occasion.
What held back that concept, historically, has been the tool systems. When he did MOAD, I was working at IBM on OS 360 mainframes. That's what we had in the 60's. Today, my cell phone has more compute power and memory than one of the 360s I serviced back then.
It's for that reason that I am optimistic that we are on a path to realizing Doug's grand vision; our tool systems are now way ahead of we humans.