Even if that were true (which it doesn't appear to be... see other comments) I'm not sure that would apply to a field as broad, and as new, as software.
Software does radically different things, things as different as, say, hammering and opening cans. It is difficult for me to believe that the WIMP interface as we know it is actually optimal for all those different software tasks.
I mean, sure, you could probably open a can with a claw hammer, if you used some care, and you might be even able to drive a nail with a can opener.
You wouldn't want to, though.
Note that we still drive cars by using steering wheels and foot pedals. We haven't gone to some "click on the menu item" interface, even though such an interface could easily be written for many modern cars.
Put me in the camp that believes that UIs are stuck in a rut, and need to be fundamentally rethought.
Raskin's humane interface had some interesting ideas, though it does not seem to have caught on.
Software does radically different things, things as different as, say, hammering and opening cans. It is difficult for me to believe that the WIMP interface as we know it is actually optimal for all those different software tasks.
I mean, sure, you could probably open a can with a claw hammer, if you used some care, and you might be even able to drive a nail with a can opener.
You wouldn't want to, though.
Note that we still drive cars by using steering wheels and foot pedals. We haven't gone to some "click on the menu item" interface, even though such an interface could easily be written for many modern cars.
Put me in the camp that believes that UIs are stuck in a rut, and need to be fundamentally rethought.
Raskin's humane interface had some interesting ideas, though it does not seem to have caught on.