Windows 7 Touch, Dead On Arrival 352
snydeq writes "Ongoing Microsoft hype around its Surface touch technology has suggested that, with Windows 7, a touch-based UI revolution is brewing. Unfortunately, the realities of touch use in the desktop environment and the lack of worthwhile development around the technology are conspiring against the notion of touch ever finding a meaningful place on the desktop, as InfoWorld's Galen Gruman finds out reviewing Windows 7's touch capabilities. 'There's a chicken-and-egg issue to resolve,' Gruman writes. 'Few apps cry out for a touch UI, so Microsoft and Apple can continue to get away with merely dabbling with touch as an occasional mouse-based substitute. It would take one or both of these OS makers to truly touchify their platforms, using common components to pull touch into a great number of apps automatically. Without a clear demand, their incentive to do so doesn't exist.'"
annoying format (Score:3, Informative)
article in one page [infoworld.com]
Re:kinda like... (Score:5, Informative)
yeah except I am currently running Assassin's Creed, Prototype, Tom Clancy's H.A.W.X, UT3, Mirror's Edge and Bioshock all on Linux.
Re:kinda like... (Score:0, Informative)
I hope you're not so stupid that you require someone to explain why your analogy is so shitty.
Re:I actually like this idea (Score:3, Informative)
The tricky bit would be interpreting it usefully. The various patterns that people's eyes naturally follow when interpreting stimuli are complex and can vary considerably depending on what the user is trying to do, how experienced they are, and probably other factors. Creating a "natural gaze" interpreting interface without an unacceptable rate of false positives would be quite tricky indeed, and setups where you have to treat your gaze as though it is a mouse pointer would be pretty wearing on the user. Having to stare and click beats the hell out of the alternatives when it comes to helping paralyzed people; but it is likely to be considerably slower than just using a mouse. For interfaces that are mostly keyboard; but require occasional mouse input, I could see considerable promise, however.
Re:Desktop multitouch: a tool looking for a purpos (Score:2, Informative)
As a graphic artist who uses a tablet, I can say with confidence that a mouse is far, far, far, far, far easier to use than a touch screen monitor.
Point one: a mouse (like a tablet) lies flat on my desk, requiring zero upper arm/shoulder exertion. I can spend eight hours using a tablet no problem--imagine holding your arm straight out for eight hours. Or imagine having to hunch over a monitor mounted flat on your desk--you'd destroy your neck and back within a week.
Point 2: I can move my cursor from one side of the screen to the other by moving my mouse about 1.5 inches. Tablets, while larger than mouse pads, are almost always much smaller than monitors. Most graphic artists use 8x5 or smaller tablets. My monitor is 16x22. That's a lot more space.
Point 3: a mouse cursor (or tablet stylus) is much more precise than a finger on a touch screen. With my mouse, I can hit a single pixel, no problem. With my stylus, I can get within 2-3 pixels, no problem. With my finger? I would guess 10 pixel accuracy would be hard...and 20-30 would be more realistic.
Not so fast (Score:3, Informative)
Seems like Wacom is planning something just like that for the Desktop. ;)
http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/15/wacom-bamboo-multitouch-pen-tablet-spotted-by-mr-blurrycam/ [engadget.com]
I would totally buy one.
I often find myself trying to execute pinch gestures on my mouse pad after working with my MacBook
Also (Score:3, Informative)
Try holding your arms up for an extended period of time. It is extremely tiring. Well, that's what you'd be doing with a touch display on a desktop. Very bad ergonomics. To be able to comfortably work at computer for longer periods, you want to have your arms at rest on the desk. Now you could in theory move the monitor down to the desk. Ok but now we have a bad neck/back position. You are going to have to lean over to get a good view of it. You'll have to lean in even farther if you use a standard, cheap, Twisted Nematic LCD panel (which most panels are) as they have poor off axis viewing.
Ergonomics are important, not just a talking point. Depending on your body, poor ergonomics in a repetitive task can lead to RSI of one sort or another. Even if not, it is tiring and thus decreases productivity.
Currently, touch screens have no benefit at all I can see for a desktop environment. They are only really useful when space is limited. Something like an iTouch makes sense because you want more screen space, but you don't want to make the device bigger. Ok, you make the screen touch sensitive. It does not make sense when there's plenty of desk space.
While there are some tasks that call for finer control than a mouse gives, like some art tasks, that is what a tablet is for. A pen interface provides much finer control than a touch interface, and also doesn't suffer from the smudge problems.
Re:kinda like... (Score:5, Informative)
You know, that it what I have always wondered about this whole "touch control" idea-who exactly out there is screaming "Hey I WANT to put big honking greasy fingerprints on my screen
There are coatings [wikipedia.org] to somewhat alleviate that problem. Some newer mobile phones, which rely heavily on a touch screen interface, have this coating. It repels the natural grease from your hands and makes the display look less smudgy.
For a bit of fun (well...), check out this link: iPhone 3G S Oleophobic Screen Passes the Ear Grease Test [gearlog.com]. Utterly disgusting.
Note I don't disagree with your other points.
Re:Ok, here comes my teacher's hat (Score:2, Informative)
Touch, Multi-Touch, and Pen are all already supported in the core of the Windows 7 operating system. This isn't a small feat. No other OS has that today.
Mac OS X *does* have Touch and Multi-Touch support build in.
There's als support for Tablets and Pen input.
(Though I'm not sure how it compares to Windows.)
http://developer.apple.com/mac/library/documentation/AppKit/Reference/NSTouch_Class/Reference/Reference.html [apple.com]
Re:Ok, here comes my teacher's hat (Score:2, Informative)
1. Its very true, and if you go read Bill Buxton's multi-touch paper, you will also get a great history of the multi-touch input device. The key here is using an input device, with having the OS recognize it as such so it allows you to have multiple numbers, and mixed numbers of each. The main difference is that its now a recognized device seperate from the already existing devices. So, if you use a Wacom tablet, yes you are using a stylus, and that is recognized as such by the API. If you use a touch, right beside your Wacom stylus.... it sees a touch, not a mouse click, nor a stylus.
The difference isn't so much in the UX, as much as its in the software backend of it. The benefit of it though, is you can have much more rich interactions using a multitude of different manipulations and gestures from mixed sources. It allows for offhand interactions, tapping with your thumb as you are about to paint in Photoshop, etc.
So an iPhone sees touch, and you can use a jury-rigged stylus, but thats because you are tricking the phone into recognizing a touch.
You also bring up an interesting challenge about selling the multiple inputs. I think what I would say to you to sell it would be something like:
What if you never had to remember another shortcut key combination again? CTRL C is a thing of the past.... never reach your pinky and thumb to stretch to hit two keys again.
2. You have a valid point about recognizing who made the choice to buy Fingerworks. I would seriously buy this person dinner in a heartbeat. Whoever that was, really turned the tide for Apple as a whole and saved their company.
Now let me give you an idea why I put so much value on him. They had literally, almost nothing in regards to touch. They had a small team that was struggling. They recognized and bought Fingerworks and by doing that, brought in one of the preeminent geniuses of the input world. I think Wayne is far underrecognized for his contribution to touch and multi-touch and deserves all the credit and thanks we can throw at it. It would be different, if he went to a team of IXDers and helped out... much like what I am doing. No, its different because when he went, there was nothing, and he created a wonderful system. I hope that explains my point a bit better? That's not a dig on Apple at all. I think it was brilliant and commend them for scooping up genius.
Re:kinda like... (Score:3, Informative)
... Then of course there is the arm fatigue from pointing at the thing all damned day, it just seems like such a bad idea to me. Yeah, I can see it for like Kiosks, where you are only there a couple of minutes, but everyday?
Arm fatigue: Because moving around and becoming healthy is such a sin that we should avoid it at all costs. Sure, at first there might be some fatigue, but it doesn't hurt and certainly isn't as bad as having carpal tunnel. I've used touch screen displays heavily in the past few months and honestly I love them quite a bit more than using a mouse. My wrist doesn't hurt as much, I can access menus faster without as much interaction from keyboards, and I get a little extra exercise out of it. I've actually considered elevating my displays so that I can use them without having to sit down and thus eliminating my desk chair.
Touch screen interfaces are not only practical, but the "greasy finger" issue is a paper tiger these days. Displays are treated to handle these issues. My brother solved the Cheetoh issue before he ever had it by forcing his kids to wash their hands after every time they eat. Being clean prevents such problems, so now when his kids use the computer he doesn't worry about them doing stuff like that because the issue is non existent. As for pressure from rough usage, there are many types of displays that don't have this problem and the upcoming OLED screens that are being released into the market now are devoid of such short comings.
Re:kinda like... (Score:3, Informative)
the trouble with a horizontal touch surface is that you still have arm fatigue, or your mouse will always be stuck down at the bottom where your elbows will end up resting.
Why use a mouse with a touchscreen? If you need to use a mouse you could just mount your screen like a regular old-fashioned screen (if the screen is small and light-weight enough to be handled that way).
I believe he meant "cursor" not "mouse."
I don't think the GP was thinking of a table angled like a drafting/drawing table but rather the ill-conceived Microsoft Surface [wikipedia.org] which is a flat table with no place to rest your arms or coffee which will give you neck cramps.
AutoCAD (Score:3, Informative)
Having said that, the demo touch computer that I walk by on the MS campus in Redmond generally seems to be either blue-screened or at a "operating system not found" prompt. Two of the three times that it was up and I tried it the interface seemed locked. Admittedly it's probably a very old beta release.