Introduction to Doug Engelbart:
Doug Engelbart, a pioneer in computer technology, shares his perspective on the developments of the past 20 years. He emphasizes the importance of archiving historical records to preserve the truth about technological advancements.

Engelbart’s Motivation and Goals:
At 19, Engelbart felt a strong desire to make a meaningful contribution to society. He recognized the growing complexity and urgency of world problems and the need for better coping mechanisms. He aimed to improve humanity’s ability to handle complexity and urgency.

Challenges and Support:
Engelbart faced initial skepticism and resistance to his ideas in the academic and research world. He obtained limited support from SRI Stanford Research Institute and later from the Air Force Office of Scientific Research. He developed a conceptual framework to guide his work.

Building the Laboratory and System:
Engelbart and his team built a laboratory and developed a system with significant functionality based on his framework. They produced a movie in 1968 to showcase their progress.

Expansion and Commercialization:
The project expanded to include network involvement and the sale of services over the network. Engelbart encountered challenges when the project transitioned to the commercial world. Recently, the company acquired by McDonnell Douglas has provided new opportunities for the project.

Importance of Documentation:
Engelbart highlights the significance of the 1962 document and its condensed version in a 1963 book. He emphasizes that the framework presented in the document remains relevant and valuable today.

Early Experimentation:
Engelbart discusses the development of their second machine, connected to a CDC 3100. They experimented with screen selection devices, including light pens and tracking balls.

Mouse:
Engelbart and his team built the first mouse, and its name stuck, despite its unexpected origin. Experiments confirmed the mouse’s superiority in their environment, but other input methods were explored as well.

Display Systems:
They constructed a display system using multiple small CRTs and video cameras. The system was expensive and required constant maintenance, leading Engelbart to strategize skipping typewriters and focusing on displays.

Keyboards:
Engelbart and Licklider disagreed on keyboard design, with Engelbart advocating for separating the keyboard from the display. He emphasized the importance of positioning controls optimally rather than adhering to traditional typewriter layouts. The keyset developed by Engelbart was challenging to learn but had the potential to revolutionize writing.

Learning Curve:
Engelbart acknowledged the difficulty of learning new technologies. He used an analogy of slow writing to illustrate how our perception of effort changes with speed.

User Experience:
Engelbart stressed the significance of making technology easy to learn and use. He drew a parallel to mobility devices, emphasizing the value of investing time in learning versus immediate usability.

Workstations and the NLS/Augment System:
By 1968, Doug Engelbart had a personal workstation in his office and several more in his lab, allowing for time-sharing among researchers. The NLS (oN-Line System), later known as Augment, was a unique system that allowed users to sit at a workstation and seamlessly switch between typing on a keyboard and interacting with the system using a pointing device.

Charles Irby and Bill English’s Contributions:
Charles Irby and Bill English were key figures in Engelbart’s research team. English was instrumental in making the system work smoothly and reliably, while Irby was involved in the development of the NLS/Augment system.

Herman Miller Workstation:
Engelbart showcased a workstation designed by Herman Miller, which featured a console that swiveled on an Eames chair, allowing users to lean back and work comfortably.

The Fall Joint Computer Conference Presentation:
Engelbart and his team took a significant risk by volunteering to present their work at the Fall Joint Computer Conference in San Francisco in December 1968. They set up a video projector to display text on a screen, allowing attendees to read it from the balcony. The video projector, rented from a Swiss company, utilized a high-intensity projection lamp modulated by a thin film to create images.

Doug Engelbart’s Innovative Presentation:
Doug Engelbart shared his groundbreaking vision for computing and collaboration in a presentation at the 1968 Fall Joint Computer Conference.

Technical Complexities and Innovations:
He used leased microwave lines, special electronics, and custom hardware to connect the console at the conference center to the laboratory in Menlo Park. Bill English, a genius technician, played a crucial role in setting up the complex system.

Collaborative Group Effort:
The presentation was a true group project, involving 17 individuals from Engelbart’s lab, including camera operators and Stuart Brand, who helped with the Whole Earth catalog.

Interactive Presentation Setup:
Engelbart sat at a Herman Miller console with a camera capturing his face and another showing the keyboard. Bill English controlled the video signals and camera views, switching between computer and camera video. Engelbart wore a headset to communicate with his team and the audience, creating an immersive experience.

A Complex Scenario:
Engelbart carefully prepared a scenario for the presentation, considering every detail and potential issue. He had to remember his lines without a script and manage the technical aspects while interacting with the audience.

NLS as the Foundation:
The presentation utilized the NLS (oN-Line System) platform, which Engelbart’s team had developed. NLS allowed for mixed text and graphics, diagrams, and flexible organization of information.

Envisioning Future Conferences:
Engelbart’s vision extended beyond the presentation itself, imagining future conferences conducted entirely through interactive systems like NLS.

Demonstrations of Mouse and Software Work:
The presentation showcased the mouse, with Don Andrews demonstrating its precise movements. Jeff Rulison presented structured software work, showing graphical diagrams and coding.

Interactive Control and Collaboration:
Engelbart emphasized the potential for multiple users to control the system and seamlessly share information.

Exploring File Structures and Route Planning:
Engelbart demonstrated hierarchical file structures, allowing for quick navigation and manipulation of information. He also showed a route planning feature, enabling efficient organization of tasks.

Entity Manipulation and Structural Flexibility:
Engelbart highlighted the ability to manipulate entities within the system, including characters and objects. He showcased the dynamic modification of structures, such as interchanging items and renumbering them.

Enhancing the Tool:
Engelbart acknowledged that the presentation only provided a glimpse of the tool’s capabilities, with many details omitted for brevity.

Overall Goal:
Improve the effectiveness of individuals and organizations in performing intellectual tasks.

Methods:
Empirical approach: building and testing systems through experimentation. Evolutionary approach: developing systems incrementally, based on observations and feedback from users. Bootstrapping: using the system to study and improve itself.

Research Subject Group:
The researchers themselves serve as the subject group, testing the tools and providing feedback for improvements.

Benefits:
Improved effectiveness: better and faster solutions to more complex problems, making better use of human capabilities. System-oriented discipline: a framework for designing systems that enhance effectiveness.

Challenges:
Complexity of the system: many factors contribute to effectiveness, and it can be difficult to analyze and optimize the system as a whole. Evolutionary approach: requires patience and adaptability, as the system is developed and refined over time. Bootstrapping: can be challenging to use the system to improve itself, as it requires careful observation and analysis.

Progress:
Six consoles are now working, with six more expected soon. The system has been in development for many years, with a gradual increase in staffing. The researchers are beginning to see the benefits of using the system to improve their own work.

NLS as a System:
NLS (online system) is a tool and vehicle for humans to operate within complex information structures. It allows users to compose, study, and modify information effectively. NLS emphasizes the structural relationship between content entities, representing the relationships between concepts of human thought. Linear text is inadequate for representing complex structures, so NLS uses internal computer representations to navigate and explore these structures efficiently.

The User Interface:
The unique input device features five keys, with each finger resting on a key. Combinations of keystrokes produce characters, delete words, and provide feedback. An echo register displays the last six characters entered, providing visual feedback. View parameters can be adjusted by hitting single strokes, allowing for quick changes to the view.

Control Dialogue:
The repertoire of commands, their functions, and the control dialogue for each command are essential aspects of NLS. A special language is used to talk precisely about these controls, ensuring careful design and implementation. Programming examples will be presented by Jeff Wilson to illustrate the high-level programming of these functions and control feedback.

Collaboration and Information Retrieval:
Bill, located in Menlo Park, joins the presentation and can see Doug’s text. Bill can point to the text using a marker, but Doug maintains control and operation. The presentation continues with examples and collaboration, leading into a discussion on information retrieval.

Connecting Audio, Video, and Collaboration:
Engelbart and another individual set up an audio and video connection between their workstations, allowing them to see and hear each other while collaborating. This setup included a camera on each workstation, enabling face-to-face communication during collaborative work.

Information Retrieval:
Engelbart demonstrates the use of hierarchical structures and content analyzers for efficient information retrieval. Navigating through a sample file structure, they locate a specific directive for formatting Roman numeral page numbers.

Enhanced File Structure:
By 1973, Engelbart and his team redesigned the file structure, separating hierarchical structures and text patterns into distinct sections. This allowed for easier manipulation and restructuring of content. Each node could have a property structure, enabling various types of data, including graphics, images, digitized voice, and raw binary data.

Document-Oriented Files:
Engelbart emphasizes the importance of document-oriented files, aiming to capture arguments, propositions, and proposals in a structured format.

Graphics Capabilities:
Due to strategic reasons, the team shifted from a fast local display to a Tektronix storage tube scope for displaying graphics. They developed the ability to ingest plotter files from external graphic systems and incorporate graphics into formatted documents.

Challenges in Accessibility:
The cost of terminals and storage tubes hindered the widespread adoption of Engelbart’s system. The lack of awareness among potential users made it difficult to convince them of the need for such technology.

Collaboration Efforts:
In 1967, Engelbart and his team focused on enhancing collaboration capabilities. They developed a “shared screen” feature, allowing multiple users to simultaneously view and edit the same document. This feature enabled real-time collaboration and facilitated effective communication among team members.

Engelbart’s Collaboration Setup:
Doug Engelbart describes a setup with special narrow tables for conference meetings. Monitors were placed low enough to see over and allow participants to see each other. Each workstation had a mouse and a shared display. Participants could take turns controlling the large cursor on the shared display.

Review Meeting with Sponsors:
Engelbart held a review meeting with sponsors and team members. Participants included Bill English, Don Andrews, Dave Hopper, Barry Wessler, and Bob Taylor.

Sophisticated Mail System:
Engelbart’s collaboration system included a sophisticated mail system. The system allowed users to send whole documents or short messages. Documents could be cataloged into a journal system, enabling cross-referencing.

Recorded Dialogue:
Engelbart emphasized the importance of recording dialogue for collaboration. Every interaction was printed out and stored by number. The journal system grew to over 100,000 items in four or five years.

Conceptual Framework:
Engelbart referred to a 1962 paper where he discussed the conceptual framework for collaboration. He highlighted the need for a conceptual structure to organize and retrieve information.

Background:
Doug Engelbart’s fascination with the potential of computers led him to envision a future where humans could interact with machines in intuitive and collaborative ways. He recognized that the key to enhancing human capabilities lay in developing an augmentation system that seamlessly integrated technology with human abilities.

Conceptual Framework:
Engelbart proposed a two-part augmentation system consisting of a tool system (technology) and a human system (training, knowledge, skills, and cultural factors). He emphasized the importance of considering the entire system, rather than just the technological components, when designing human-computer interaction systems.

Augmentation System Components:
The tool system encompasses all technological aspects, including hardware, software, and interfaces. The human system includes training, knowledge, skills, language, customs, and organizational procedures.

Hierarchical Nature of Capabilities:
Engelbart recognized that human capabilities are hierarchical, with lower-order skills (e.g., writing, typing) forming the foundation for higher-order capabilities (e.g., problem-solving, decision-making). Augmentation systems can enhance capabilities by introducing new technologies that build upon existing skills and knowledge.

Potential of Digital Technology:
Engelbart foresaw the transformative potential of digital technology, particularly its ability to scale down in size and increase in speed. He recognized that this trend would drive the development of powerful augmentation systems.

Co-Evolution of Technology and Human Capabilities:
Engelbart emphasized the need for co-evolution between technology and human capabilities. He believed that augmentation systems should be designed to facilitate this co-evolutionary process.

Experimental Approach:
Engelbart advocated for an experimental approach to developing augmentation systems, with a focus on bootstrapping and incremental improvements. He recognized the importance of understanding the candidate changes in both the tool system and the human system in order to create effective augmentation systems.

Learning and Naturalness:
Engelbart challenges the notion that technology should be easy to learn and natural to use. He argues that what is considered natural is often culturally learned and can take considerable effort to master.

The Importance of Long-Term Trends:
Engelbart emphasizes the need to focus on long-term trends and responsibilities in technology research and development. He believes that the current market focus on short-term ease of learning may hinder the development of truly high-performance systems.

Harnessing Human Capabilities:
Engelbart proposes that the goal should be to harness human capabilities effectively through technology. He believes that this requires exploring innovative approaches and challenging conventional wisdom.

The Role of Innovations like the Mouse and Key Set:
Engelbart highlights the significance of innovations like the mouse and key set in enabling new ways of interacting with technology. He emphasizes that these innovations were initially considered strange but eventually became widely accepted.

The Dynamics of Change in Large Organizations:
Engelbart describes the complex process of change in large organizations. He explains that change involves multiple parties, each with their own responsibilities and perspectives. Effective change requires a reverberation of ideas and actions between these parties.

The Role of Specialists in Technological Change:
Engelbart acknowledges the importance of specialists in driving technological change. He emphasizes that specialists need to work together and communicate effectively to achieve meaningful progress.

Doug Engelbart on Evolving Tools for Human Augmentation:
Engelbart emphasized the need for extraordinary communication to facilitate the rapid evolution of society and organizations. He recognized the importance of addressing the rate of change and the need for conscious understanding of the evolutionary process. The focus was on creating tools that would enhance collaboration and facilitate efficient information processing.

Document Manipulation and User Interface Design:
Engelbart’s approach to document manipulation involved storing both content and structure, enabling fast control, and allowing remote jumping and manipulation. He aimed for a user interface that provided flexibility, precision, and a customizable display. Engelbart also emphasized the importance of sharing files and collaborating with others.

Separation of Interface and Functionality:
Engelbart advocated for separating the interface and the substantive work in software applications. He wanted to prevent programmers from dictating the user interface and instead create a specialized language for defining the control processes. This approach led to the development of a control metalanguage and a tree meta-translator for compiling and evolving the programming language.

The Networked Community and Knowledge Marketplace:
Engelbart recognized the potential of the network to create a community and a knowledge marketplace. He envisioned a future where people could share data, collaborate, and access a wide range of functionality through their workstations. The focus was on developing a topology that allowed for flexibility and scalability in the distribution of functionality across the network.

User Interface System and Remote Procedure Call:
Engelbart proposed a user interface system that would sit between the user’s hardware and the network’s functionality. This system included a virtual terminal controller, command language translator, user profile, and remote procedure call protocol. The remote procedure call protocol enabled applications to communicate and access functionality across the network.

Evolving the Basic Human Unit:
Engelbart emphasized the need to evolve the basic human unit through communities and conscious evolutionary activity. He believed that communities could facilitate the improvement and bootstrapping of support systems for human augmentation. The focus was on creating a collaborative environment where people could interact, learn from each other, and collectively evolve their tools and practices.

Doug Engelbart’s Vision for a Networked Information Community:
Engelbart envisioned a community-based approach to augmenting human intellect, leveraging the ARPANET to connect and support a network of researchers and collaborators.

The Challenges of Technology Adoption:
Engelbart lamented the slow adoption of the mouse and keyset as input devices, attributing it to cultural resistance to change and the lack of a holistic understanding of the potential benefits.

Perceptions and Progress:
Engelbart emphasized the need to change perceptions about the potential of technology and to find rational ways to evolve human systems without causing disruption.

Combining Mouse and Keyset:
Engelbart acknowledged the potential of combining the mouse and keyset into a single device, but expressed skepticism about the practicality of handwriting recognition as a primary input method.

Insights into Human System Changes:
Engelbart predicted that technological advancements would lead to flatter organizations, improved communication, and new roles and structures within work environments.

Lack of Transfer of Certain Technologies:
Engelbart expressed puzzlement over the lack of adoption of certain technologies developed at SRI, such as structured text, linking mechanisms, and a database-supported mail system.

Cultural Perception and Marketplace Barriers:
Doug Engelbart discusses the challenges of introducing innovative technologies due to cultural perceptions and marketplace readiness. He highlights that personal computers and time-sharing systems initially faced difficulties gaining traction because people needed time to adjust to interacting with them. Investment decisions in the technology industry often rely on experienced consultants, who may be hesitant to embrace cutting-edge ideas. Engelbart emphasizes the need for user organizations to demand better solutions and be open to change.

The Importance of Vannevar Bush’s Work:
Engelbart credits Vannevar Bush’s ideas as a significant influence on his thinking and work in interactive computing. He recalls finding an article about Bush’s Memex in a Life magazine while serving in the Navy during World War II. Engelbart highlights the impact of Bush’s concept of trail generation through documents on the development of features like sequence generators and links in the NLS system. He expresses regret at not having had the opportunity to meet Bush due to his illness.