PDA

View Full Version : Microsoft to Acquire Multi-Touch Pioneer Perceptive Pixel




MacRumors
Jul 9, 2012, 03:07 PM
http://images.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/07/09/microsoft-to-acquire-multi-touch-pioneer-perceptive-pixel/)


Microsoft today announced (http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/news/Press/2012/Jul12/07-09TouchscreenPR.aspx) that it intends to acquire Perceptive Pixel (http://www.perceptivepixel.com/), a company founded by multi-touch pioneer Jeff Han and currently focused on large-screen touch displays such as those used by CNN (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/05/08/jeff-hans-multitouch-screen-hits-mainstream/) and other television networks to allow anchors to present live, interactive data on set.

http://images.macrumors.com/article-new/2012/07/perceptive_pixel_display-500x511.jpg


We've featured Han's work (http://www.macrumors.com/2006/02/14/apple-multi-touch-display/) a number of times over the years both before and after the launch of the iPhone as examples of what could be done with the technology.

89sz8ExZndc
While Han was not involved in Apple's multi-touch efforts, which were based in significant part on the efforts of FingerWorks (http://www.macrumors.com/2006/03/10/apple-refining-the-touch-screen-interface-evidence-for-a-tablet-mac/), his work has been looked to as some of the key early examples of the potential for multi-touch input technology in action.Founded in 2006 by Jeff Han, a renowned pioneer in multi-touch technology, PPI shipped its first multi-touch workstation and large wall solutions in early 2007. In 2008 its technology gained widespread recognition for transforming the way CNN and other broadcasters covered the 2008 U.S. presidential election. In 2009 the Smithsonian awarded the company the National Design Award in the inaugural category of Interaction Design. PPI's patented technologies are used across a wide variety of industries such as government, defense, broadcast, energy exploration, engineering and higher education, and its expertise in both software and hardware will contribute to success in broad scenarios such as collaboration, meetings and presentations.Microsoft is no stranger to the market either, having launched its "Surface" tabletop multi-touch screens (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/05/30/microsoft-launches-multitouch-surface-computing/) back in mid-2007. While that effort did not lead to significant success, Microsoft just last month relaunched the Surface brand (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/06/18/microsoft-announces-new-surface-tablet-new-hardware-and-software-based-on-windows-8/) for its forthcoming portable tablet devices running Windows 8.

The addition of Perceptive Pixel will strengthen Microsoft's patent holdings in the area of multi-touch input, as well as provide the larger company with expertise that will help it to develop new tools for collaborative work with its multi-platform Windows 8. Microsoft is planning for a general release of Windows 8 by the end of October (http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2012/07/09/upcoming-windows-milestones-shared-with-partners-at-wpc.aspx), with pricing and availability on its Surface tablet hardware yet to be announced.

Article Link: Microsoft to Acquire Multi-Touch Pioneer Perceptive Pixel (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/07/09/microsoft-to-acquire-multi-touch-pioneer-perceptive-pixel/)



DingleButt
Jul 9, 2012, 03:10 PM
Microsoft is acting like a new company that sees Apple for what it is. Great to see and eagerly awaiting the future.

nevir
Jul 9, 2012, 03:17 PM
How is a business started in 2006 even remotely a pioneer in a technology that's been around for well over a decade?

(Fingerworks and other companies of that era, for example, are pioneers of multi-touch)

coder12
Jul 9, 2012, 03:20 PM
I remember Saturday Night Live doing an entire skit on the Perceptive Pixel displays, laughed my butt off the entire time! :D

Drunken Master
Jul 9, 2012, 03:20 PM
Can't wait to sit on the couch with my 60-inch Microsoft Surface tablet!

w00master
Jul 9, 2012, 03:23 PM
How is a business started in 2006 even remotely a pioneer in a technology that's been around for well over a decade?

(Fingerworks and other companies of that era, for example, are pioneers of multi-touch)

You do know that Jeff Han is one of the pioneers of multi-touch.. Don't you?

Or do are one of those who thinks that Apple has invented everything?

w00master

Blu-Ray
Jul 9, 2012, 03:27 PM
Looks like MS is continuing to move toward a software and hardware company. This is good for consumers.

infiniteammo
Jul 9, 2012, 03:29 PM
That awkward moment when you accidentally hit your coworker, enthusiastically sharing a spreadsheet.

deannnnn
Jul 9, 2012, 03:30 PM
I think those huge touch screen displays on CNN are awesome, even if they don't work quite right or add much to the story.

Peace
Jul 9, 2012, 03:32 PM
You do know that Jeff Han is one of the pioneers of multi-touch.. Don't you?

Or do are one of those who thinks that Apple has invented everything?

w00master

Jeff Han is one of the pioneers. At the same time other people/think tanks were also working on multi touch. Fingerworks being another pioneer from the same time.

Jeff Han worked mostly on projector based input output while fingerworks was working on capacitive touch surfaces.

Nunyabinez
Jul 9, 2012, 03:33 PM
My arms are tired just watching that video.

That lady has a nice ass.

Nice to see that your technerdery hasn't killed your testosterone. Couldn't help but think of Dumb and Dumber:
"Wow, look at that ass."
"Yeah, I bet he works out."

Skika
Jul 9, 2012, 03:35 PM
Multitouch truly is amazing. And you get used to it very quickly.
Just the other day i tried to pinch zoom on a magazine :)

deannnnn
Jul 9, 2012, 03:35 PM
I remember Saturday Night Live doing an entire skit on the Perceptive Pixel displays, laughed my butt off the entire time! :D

http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/update-freds-map-fix-it/784121

AngerDanger
Jul 9, 2012, 03:36 PM
My arms are tired just watching that video.

That lady has a nice ass.

Never talk about how tired your arm is in the same comment where you point out an attractive girl; it might give people the wrong impression…

I remember laughing out loud while watching the part of the original Surface's introduction video that mentioned the use of hundreds of cameras to capture motion of multiple fingers. It just seemed like the least efficient approach to multitouch. However, the surface revamp looks phenomenal, and while the iPad is ideal for many, I cannot wait for the new Surface to be released.

Mad-B-One
Jul 9, 2012, 03:36 PM
That awkward moment when you accidentally hit your coworker, enthusiastically sharing a spreadsheet.


You definitely gave me a laugh!
Better than playing boxing on the Wii and getting hit because you don't have 50sqf room to play. That controller can be hard!


On the other hand, I think Microsoft is filling up their Patent Portfolio before launching the Windows 8 tablets. You simply have to have something to bargin with.

MacNewsFix
Jul 9, 2012, 03:37 PM
I'll be curious to see what technology they've acquired that wasn't already in the Microsoft Big A** Table (http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9021839/Microsoft_unveils_tabletop_Milan_computer).


That lady has a nice ass.

Is that your professional opinion? ;)

chaynes
Jul 9, 2012, 03:38 PM
When has Microsoft ever done anything that was good for consumers? They perfected the maximum intimidation factor which lasted for a decade, giving rise to the "IT" standard of rewarding IT folks for recommending their own job security. After, and I wonder how long, they came up with "Surface," a tablet that isn't a tablet. I have to work with both major platforms all the time trying to do similar work on both and Microsoft is past.

jz1492
Jul 9, 2012, 03:39 PM
Multi-touch gestures on large, presentation screens is awkward, as demonstrated by the woman pictured.

She has to stay up close, which is disorienting, and use both hands, giving her back to the audience while obscuring parts of the image. It's the blackboard dilemma times two.

There are better ways --we live in the post-laser-pointer era :rolleyes:

But it is Microsoft. What do they care?

Nunyabinez
Jul 9, 2012, 03:42 PM
As with many new technologies, people kind of force the technology into places where it is not necessarily needed, just because they can. I teach at a university and I could see using this to make a lecture more interactive. But then again, there are lots of alternatives that would work very well too. I would rather have an iPad and a Apple TV in the room where I could throw the iPad screen up on the projector. That way I could still use interactivity, but not have to reach over my head to move something on a giant interactive display. That's not to say that there aren't some really good uses for this, but initially there will be lots of people using these in a way that is less productive than what they could do with older technology.

davidgnomo
Jul 9, 2012, 03:43 PM
That lady has a nice ass.

No way, I've seen much better ...

rendevouspoo
Jul 9, 2012, 03:43 PM
Multi-touch gestures on large, presentation screens is awkward, as demonstrated by the woman pictured.

She has to stay up close, which is disorienting, and use both hands, giving her back to the audience while obscuring parts of the image. It's the blackboard dilemma times two.

There are better ways --we live in the post-laser-pointer era :rolleyes:

But it is Microsoft. What do they care?

I wonder how different this post would have been if the emblem on that device in the picture was an apple with a bite taken out.

powers74
Jul 9, 2012, 03:43 PM
So much for remaining independent. A little surprised they're caving to Micro$oft. (as I remember, Han was pretty adamant about not selling out, BICBW).

Doctor Q
Jul 9, 2012, 03:44 PM
It seems that many people think the purpose of touchscreen presentations is to wow the audience with special effects rather than to communicate efficiently.

SandboxGeneral
Jul 9, 2012, 03:51 PM
There is probably a niché market for something like this, perhaps in education for toddlers or something. But for as neat and cool as it looks, I don't think I can see a practical use for this in my daily life. There are still too many things that I think require a keyboard and/or mouse.

And what's with their YouTube video being only in 240? :confused:

bungiefan89
Jul 9, 2012, 03:51 PM
I always hated those big multi-touch surfaces they use on CNN. Watching the news anchors use them, it was like they were just subtly advertising for tablet devices instead of just presenting the news.

SandboxGeneral
Jul 9, 2012, 03:53 PM
I always hated those big multi-touch surfaces they use on CNN. Watching the news anchors use them, it was like they were just subtly advertising for tablet devices instead of just presenting the news.

Or is it a marketing ploy to gain more viewers? If they look all high-tech and fancy, maybe more people will watch their network...:rolleyes:

ILikeTurtles
Jul 9, 2012, 03:55 PM
Ever see the craptacular response these panels have. They "swipe" almost as bad as an Android phone.

Peace
Jul 9, 2012, 03:55 PM
I always hated those big multi-touch surfaces they use on CNN. Watching the news anchors use them, it was like they were just subtly advertising for tablet devices instead of just presenting the news.

I guess that's why Jeff Han called his company perceptive pixel.

From my perception I've always thought the guys at CNN were just playing with some cool new stuff.

Oohara
Jul 9, 2012, 03:55 PM
Apple won't let this stand, 30" iMaxipad incoming within the year. Yep you read it here first folks :cool:

Bezetos
Jul 9, 2012, 03:56 PM
How is a business started in 2006 even remotely a pioneer in a technology that's been around for well over a decade?

A decade? Multi-touch is over thirty years old. It appeared even before the first Mac was released.

I remember laughing out loud while watching the part of the original Surface's introduction video that mentioned the use of hundreds of cameras to capture motion of multiple fingers. It just seemed like the least efficient approach to multitouch.
Microsoft Surface (now PixelSense) is able to recognise objects placed on the surface of the table, something that isn't possible using a capacitive screen and at the time of the release was only achievable by using cameras. However the cameras were now replaced by a technology developed by Samsung that still allows to detect objects.

Actually one of the first multi-touch prototypes developed in 1982 used cameras to detect movement.

----------

Ever see the craptacular response these panels have. They "swipe" almost as bad as an Android phone.Have you touched an Android phone that came out during the last three years?

Navdakilla
Jul 9, 2012, 03:57 PM
uh oh

Piggie
Jul 9, 2012, 04:02 PM
I think the question need to be asked:

How will multitouch screens benefit on screen porn :D

rendevouspoo
Jul 9, 2012, 04:08 PM
They "swipe" almost as bad as an Android phone.

Lolwut?

Jokintosh
Jul 9, 2012, 04:10 PM
Is that Brent Spiner?

genovelle
Jul 9, 2012, 04:29 PM
I wonder how different this post would have been if the emblem on that device in the picture was an apple with a bite taken out.

When Apple does something bonehead their supporters are their worst critics too. They have been careful to no screw up lately.

smoledman
Jul 9, 2012, 04:41 PM
When Apple does something bonehead their supporters are their worst critics too. They have been careful to no screw up lately.

How is this a screw up?

bmturney
Jul 9, 2012, 05:31 PM
Ballmer sells it as "cutting edge" and "innovative"... you no longer need a remote... now you can just get up off your couch and walk across your room and swipe your fingers across the screen to change the channels... You will never need another remote again!!!!!

Ballmer is quoted as saying that this is the "most innovative piece of technology to come out of Microsoft in 30 years"...

kdarling
Jul 9, 2012, 05:39 PM
Jeff Han worked mostly on projector based input output while fingerworks was working on capacitive touch surfaces.

This is correct. Fingerworks did some very extensive fingertip motion research. Perceptive Pixel, to me, was more about presenting and marketing fairly well known gestures in a very nice way.

Perceptive Pixel, btw, is the reason why Apple failed to get a trademark on "Multi-Touch". They almost got it, but then Jeff Han found out and wrote an 80 page challenge to the USPTO explaining why the term was already generic.

A pretty good timeline of multi-touch can be found in graphic below taken from a rather large and interesting presentation (http://www.slideshare.net/ArnoutdeVries/multitouch-interaction-overview).

(Click on the thumbnail below to see full size.)

AidenShaw
Jul 9, 2012, 05:57 PM
A pretty good timeline of multi-touch can be found in graphic below taken from a rather large and interesting presentation (http://www.slideshare.net/ArnoutdeVries/multitouch-interaction-overview).

...the timeline starts in 1982, and Apple doesn't appear until more than ¾ of the timeline is over.

OrangeSVTguy
Jul 9, 2012, 06:03 PM
http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/update-freds-map-fix-it/784121

"Check out Michigan, I can make it bounce" Haha I love SNL!

Kwill
Jul 9, 2012, 06:05 PM
Ooh, Pinch and zoom! :rolleyes:

nuckinfutz
Jul 9, 2012, 06:29 PM
My arms are tired just watching that video.

That lady has a nice ass.


She knows it too or she wouldn't be wearing skin tight "Professional" wear LOL.

iMikeT
Jul 9, 2012, 06:50 PM
Great... More technology for the technologically illiterate news anchors. Doh! :rolleyes:

eject
Jul 9, 2012, 07:38 PM
...the timeline starts in 1982, and Apple doesn't appear until more than ¾ of the timeline is over.

So what, nor did they have any involvement in the timeline of telephony...

SeattleMoose
Jul 9, 2012, 07:49 PM
But, as we all know from multiple previous acquisitions....what is MS gonna DO with it???

They don't have a good track record with their acquisitions lately.

But as much as I hate to say it, as a consumer I need a healthy MS to keep Apple honest and to fight off the likes of Google and Facebook (the "ad driven" tech companies...)

KnightWRX
Jul 9, 2012, 07:55 PM
So what, nor did they have any involvement in the timeline of telephony...

I think you're renforcing his point. ;) (ie, Apple doesn't really have anything to do with multi-touch, except using it and marketing it).

jayducharme
Jul 9, 2012, 08:12 PM
What really impressed me about Han's work and the MS Surface is that they were made for collaborative computing. In other words, more than one person can work at the same screen simultaneously. Even though the iPad has multi-touch, it's still a single-person computing device (outside of a couple of multi-player games).

hobo.hopkins
Jul 9, 2012, 08:17 PM
I think done properly this could be interesting technology. Unfortunately my faith in Microsoft doing it properly is not very high.

JoeG4
Jul 9, 2012, 08:34 PM
You do know that Jeff Han is one of the pioneers of multi-touch.. Don't you?

Or do are one of those who thinks that Apple has invented everything?

w00master


Apple really did invent everything. :D Including the kitchen sink, and Steve Jobs later made a deal with the family of John Crapper to purchase the patents for flushing fecal matter down the drain.

Rogifan
Jul 9, 2012, 09:45 PM
...the timeline starts in 1982, and Apple doesn't appear until more than ¾ of the timeline is over.
I'm assuming that's why kdarling posted it. ;). Though I'm curious to know who ever suggested that Apple invented multi touch technology? :confused:

Kludge420
Jul 9, 2012, 09:47 PM
You do know that Jeff Han is one of the pioneers of multi-touch.. Don't you?

Or do are one of those who thinks that Apple has invented everything?

w00master

Yeah but Apple invented fingers so they are suing Jeff Han for patent violations.

kdarling
Jul 9, 2012, 10:07 PM
What really impressed me about Han's work and the MS Surface is that they were made for collaborative computing. In other words, more than one person can work at the same screen simultaneously.

Agreed, that's pretty cool.

Interestingly enough, Mitsubishi sold a hundred such multi-user devices back in 2000-2001.

http://www.merl.com/projects/DiamondTouch/

I'm assuming that's why kdarling posted it. ;)

I posted the timeline as a visual aid for people wondering how long that multi-touch had been worked on before Han's TED demo in 2006.

the8thark
Jul 10, 2012, 12:45 AM
Ballmer sells it as "cutting edge" and "innovative"... you no longer need a remote... now you can just get up off your couch and walk across your room and swipe your fingers across the screen to change the channels... You will never need another remote again!!!!!

Ballmer is quoted as saying that this is the "most innovative piece of technology to come out of Microsoft in 30 years"...

Why was the remote invented? So people don't have to lift their ass off the couch. That's why people like Ballmer got fat. Now you are telling people, hey drop that remote that made you so comfortable (fat) for all those years and actually move around the room while watching your TV (or other) screen?

Sure we do need the exercise but I think Ballmer has it backwards. This is like trying to get yourself to fit with the device by forcing you to move. The device should work around your lifestyle. Most people don't want to move when watching TV. I think Ballmer and co forgot this.

Lancer
Jul 10, 2012, 01:12 AM
...the timeline starts in 1982, and Apple doesn't appear until more than ¾ of the timeline is over.

So what, did the first electronic computers appear just after WW2, look how long before the Apple 1 was made.

dr Dunkel
Jul 10, 2012, 01:45 AM
Yeah but Apple invented fingers so they are suing Jeff Han for patent violations.

Naa.. not invented, they patented them!

jayducharme
Jul 10, 2012, 06:10 AM
Interestingly enough, Mitsubishi sold a hundred such multi-user devices back in 2000-2001.

Wow. I never knew that. It looks like their implementation was a bit clunky. But I still think the concept is valid. I'm surprised Apple (of all companies) didn't adopt something like this, with their focus on team work and collaboration. Maybe Jobs' love of whiteboards took precidence.

KnightWRX
Jul 10, 2012, 06:32 AM
So what, did the first electronic computers appear just after WW2, look how long before the Apple 1 was made.

Again, you make his point, that Apple did not invent multi-touch, just like they didn't invent computers. ;)

jonnysods
Jul 10, 2012, 08:08 AM
Go Microsoft. Start competing, and do it well!

divinox
Jul 10, 2012, 02:41 PM
Never talk about how tired your arm is in the same comment where you point out an attractive girl; it might give people the wrong impression…

I remember laughing out loud while watching the part of the original Surface's introduction video that mentioned the use of hundreds of cameras to capture motion of multiple fingers. It just seemed like the least efficient approach to multitouch. However, the surface revamp looks phenomenal, and while the iPad is ideal for many, I cannot wait for the new Surface to be released.

What you failed, and probably still fail, to realize is that touch is extremely limited in its use case, compared to visual solutions. Touch is a step-stone technology at best. Visual solutions allow for non-touch solutions, it allows for visual recognition of objects, it allows for stacking of objects etc. Further, by being able to see what you are doing, it knows that your right index finger is always your right index finger, no matter how you move your hands etc. Take any brush, pen, tool, whatever. Use it. Short sample from a very long list you'd spend a lot of time and resources implementing using "touch".

That said, the first implementation of the Surface was hardly ideal. Then again, technology decades ahead of its time rarely are. Thats not why you do them.

----------

This is correct. Fingerworks did some very extensive fingertip motion research. Perceptive Pixel, to me, was more about presenting and marketing fairly well known gestures in a very nice way.

Perceptive Pixel, btw, is the reason why Apple failed to get a trademark on "Multi-Touch". They almost got it, but then Jeff Han found out and wrote an 80 page challenge to the USPTO explaining why the term was already generic.

A pretty good timeline of multi-touch can be found in graphic below taken from a rather large and interesting presentation (http://www.slideshare.net/ArnoutdeVries/multitouch-interaction-overview).

(Click on the thumbnail below to see full size.)

Interestingly, the first point in the timeline is directly connected to MSFT.

----------

What really impressed me about Han's work and the MS Surface is that they were made for collaborative computing. In other words, more than one person can work at the same screen simultaneously. Even though the iPad has multi-touch, it's still a single-person computing device (outside of a couple of multi-player games).

Yet another thing largely enabled by the fact that Surface (PixelSense) doesn't rely on touch, but on the screen actually seeing what people are doing. Even if you switch places, cross arms what ever, chances are the screen knows exactly what is going on.

coder12
Jul 10, 2012, 03:47 PM
http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/update-freds-map-fix-it/784121

Yup, that's the one! :D :D

AngerDanger
Jul 10, 2012, 04:07 PM
What you failed, and probably still fail, to realize is that touch is extremely limited in its use case, compared to visual solutions. Touch is a step-stone technology at best. Visual solutions allow for non-touch solutions, it allows for visual recognition of objects, it allows for stacking of objects etc. Further, by being able to see what you are doing, it knows that your right index finger is always your right index finger, no matter how you move your hands etc. Take any brush, pen, tool, whatever. Use it. Short sample from a very long list you'd spend a lot of time and resources implementing using "touch".

That said, the first implementation of the Surface was hardly ideal. Then again, technology decades ahead of its time rarely are. Thats not why you do them

What you failed, and probably still fail, to realize is how little my original post had to do with yours. I never said that multitouch was any better than its visual counterparts, nor did I state that multitouch isn't limited. It is. If you reread my comment, you'll see that I said cameras are the least efficient approach to multitouch; they add bulk, they must be placed a distance from the screen, and they're more expensive (especially in large numbers, like hundreds). These pitfalls can be best demonstrated by the fact that the original Microsoft Surfaces sold so poorly that they were replaced by Microsoft's future line of capacitive touch (presumably) tablets.

divinox
Jul 10, 2012, 04:30 PM
What you failed, and probably still fail, to realize is how little my original post had to do with yours. I never said that multitouch was any better than its visual counterparts, nor did I state that multitouch isn't limited. It is. If you reread my comment, you'll see that I said cameras are the least efficient approach to multitouch; they add bulk, they must be placed a distance from the screen, and they're more expensive (especially in large numbers, like hundreds). These pitfalls can be best demonstrated by the fact that the original Microsoft Surfaces sold so poorly that they were replaced by Microsoft's future line of capacitive touch (presumably) tablets.

My point is, and was, that your laughter merely reflects your ignorance. Because if you really got it, what reason would you have to laugh? By restating your "efficiency argument", and making arguments based on sales, you're just putting the final nail in the ignorance coffin.

By your logic, flipping through PARC history would be comedy at its best. Great thinking. Really.

---

For those interested:

http://vimeo.com/31899108
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVhgUs3_RGU

AngerDanger
Jul 10, 2012, 04:45 PM
My point is, and was, that your laughter merely reflects your ignorance. Because if you really got it, what reason would you have to laugh? By restating your "efficiency argument", and making arguments based on sales, you're just putting the final nail in the ignorance coffin.

By your logic, flipping through PARC history would be comedy at its best. Great thinking. Really.

Flipping through PARC history was comedy at its best; didn't you see that scene in Pirates of Silicone Valley where the CEO of Xerox looked at the team demoing the first mouse + GUI like they were a bunch of lunatics? It was hysterical! My point was that, although visual solutions have far more potential than multitouch, it was horribly inefficient to use them in the original Surface.

That doesn't mena visual technology hasn't/won't become something else that actually is awesome. BTW, have you seen the Leap Motion (http://leapmotion.com/)? Looks fantastic!

divinox
Jul 10, 2012, 04:54 PM
Flipping through PARC history was comedy at its best; didn't you see that scene in Pirates of Silicone Valley where the CEO of Xerox looked at the team demoing the first mouse + GUI like they were a bunch of lunatics? It was hysterical! My point was that, although visual solutions have far more potential than multitouch, it was horribly inefficient to use them in the original Surface.

That doesn't mena visual technology hasn't/won't become something else that actually is awesome. BTW, have you seen the Leap Motion (http://leapmotion.com/)? Looks fantastic!

Flash forward 30 years, and here you are, just as ignorant as the CEO. In other words, the joke is on you.

And yes, i have seen it. Neat, but just another dead-end in my view*. Might turn out being a useful stepping stone though. The sooner we see the use in re-thinking computing, the better; in that sense, Leapmotion can certainly do good.

* Less so than touch, i should add. further, can't say i have done that much research on it, so i could be missing something here. But given that i see issues just looking at it, the device as such - i.e., the particular implementation of the idea, rather than the idea itself - seems flawed in the long run.

AngerDanger
Jul 10, 2012, 05:01 PM
Flash forward 30 years, and here you are, just as ignorant as the CEO. In other words, the joke is on you.

How am I ignorant? The joke was that the CEO was too stupid to realize the mouse was going to play a major role in the future of computing, yet he passed it up. I understood that, and I understand that visual technology could have an impact on our own futures. It's gotten to where you seem to be bashing me for the sake of it rather than attempting to make any sort of valid point.

divinox
Jul 10, 2012, 05:47 PM
How am I ignorant? The joke was that the CEO was too stupid to realize the mouse was going to play a major role in the future of computing, yet he passed it up. I understood that, and I understand that visual technology could have an impact on our own futures. It's gotten to where you seem to be bashing me for the sake of it rather than attempting to make any sort of valid point.

Like the CEO before you, by not realizing what you have in front of you. Unless your whole "this is funny"-feeling was rooted in "this will never sell", in which case ill opt for replacing ignorant with mere stupid. And i apologize for phrasing myself so bluntly, i do not mean to offend you. I just find it sad that people seem so incapable of thinking things through before saying them. MSFT, a billion dollar company employing some of the brightest people in the world, clearly sees value in pursuing this type of research - maybe, just maybe, they do have a point, even though you can't see it....

...just like the CEO of Xerox*.



* Xerox PARC is a great analogy in several ways. Many, even most, of the projects carried out at PARC had slim market potential. Heck, for every sensible thing i've read about, there are many more "laughable" things - and being in IS, i have come across quite a few PARC projects over the years. And in the end, that is why PARC managed to do more for technology than most, if not all.

AngerDanger
Jul 10, 2012, 07:18 PM
Like the CEO before you, by not realizing what you have in front of you. Unless your whole "this is funny"-feeling was rooted in "this will never sell", in which case ill opt for replacing ignorant with mere stupid. And i apologize for phrasing myself so bluntly, i do not mean to offend you. I just find it sad that people seem so incapable of thinking things through before saying them. MSFT, a billion dollar company employing some of the brightest people in the world, clearly sees value in pursuing this type of research - maybe, just maybe, they do have a point, even though you can't see it....

...just like the CEO of Xerox*.



* Xerox PARC is a great analogy in several ways. Many, even most, of the projects carried out at PARC had slim market potential. Heck, for every sensible thing i've read about, there are many more "laughable" things - and being in IS, i have come across quite a few PARC projects over the years. And in the end, that is why PARC managed to do more for technology than most, if not all.

Except, as I've said a few times before, I laughed at it's inefficiency. I've already stated that I understand how great this technology could be, but it was horribly misunderstood when implemented in the Microsoft Surface. The "brightest people" in the world seem to agree with that, as they have completely changed the Microsoft Surface.

divinox
Jul 11, 2012, 12:34 PM
Except, as I've said a few times before, I laughed at it's inefficiency. I've already stated that I understand how great this technology could be, but it was horribly misunderstood when implemented in the Microsoft Surface. The "brightest people" in the world seem to agree with that, as they have completely changed the Microsoft Surface.

They haven't completely changed the Surface (assuming we are talking about the Surface aka PixelSense). Its just that technology moves forward, making things doable today in different ways than they were in the past. So yes, it was big, but it allowed them to do what they needed to do, given them an advantage now when the same thing can be done sans the bulkiness (and even more so, when these things become marketable). So no, the only horrible misunderstanding here is yours.

Laughing at "its inefficiency" is "not getting it". Thus, i hear what you say, but even more so, i hear what you are not saying, which is what is truly laughable if anything.

AngerDanger
Jul 11, 2012, 12:51 PM
They haven't completely changed the Surface (assuming we are talking about the Surface aka PixelSense). Its just that technology moves forward, making things doable today in different ways than they were in the past. So yes, it was big, but it allowed them to do what they needed to do, given them an advantage now when the same thing can be done sans the bulkiness (and even more so, when these things become marketable). So no, the only horrible misunderstanding here is yours.

Laughing at "its inefficiency" is "not getting it". Thus, i hear what you say, but even more so, i hear what you are not saying, which is what is truly laughable if anything.

I'm talking about Microsoft's Surface, which has been changed into a line of tablet computers, utilizing multitouch (or some variant) displays.

Laughing at its inefficiency is getting it; even Microsoft's best and brightest got it when they decided to revamp the surface. I understood the potential of the technology, but I knew it was misapplied in the first iteration of Surfaces.

divinox
Jul 11, 2012, 01:13 PM
I'm talking about Microsoft's Surface, which has been changed into a line of tablet computers, utilizing multitouch (or some variant) displays.

Laughing at its inefficiency is getting it; even Microsoft's best and brightest got it when they decided to revamp the surface. I understood the potential of the technology, but I knew it was misapplied in the first iteration of Surfaces.

Obviously you're incapable of getting it, so i see no point in taking this further.

kdarling
Jul 11, 2012, 01:19 PM
I'm talking about Microsoft's Surface, which has been changed into a line of tablet computers, utilizing multitouch (or some variant) displays.

Laughing at its inefficiency is getting it; even Microsoft's best and brightest got it when they decided to revamp the surface. I understood the potential of the technology, but I knew it was misapplied in the first iteration of Surfaces.

You're confused by the reuse of the name. They're two totally different products.

All Microsoft did was switch the name "Surface" over to tablets, and rename the original furniture device as "PixelSense" instead.

The "PixelSense" is still sold (http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/pixelsense/default.aspx) for those who need a literal tabletop device in their lobby, bar, store, etc.

AngerDanger
Jul 11, 2012, 01:23 PM
Obviously you're incapable of getting it, so i see no point in taking this further.

What a fantastic way to win any argument! :rolleyes:

You're confused by the reuse of the name. They're two totally different products.

All Microsoft did was switch the name "Surface" over to tablets, and rename the original furniture device as "PixelSense" instead.

The "PixelSense" is still sold (http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/pixelsense/default.aspx) for those who need a literal tabletop device.

Oh, thanks for explaining that.

Youclay
Aug 30, 2012, 03:00 AM
Thank you. I have always wondered what Jeff Han contributions were vs. Fingerworks. The timeline image is an eye-opener.


This is correct. Fingerworks did some very extensive fingertip motion research. Perceptive Pixel, to me, was more about presenting and marketing fairly well known gestures in a very nice way.

Perceptive Pixel, btw, is the reason why Apple failed to get a trademark on "Multi-Touch". They almost got it, but then Jeff Han found out and wrote an 80 page challenge to the USPTO explaining why the term was already generic.

A pretty good timeline of multi-touch can be found in graphic below taken from a rather large and interesting presentation (http://www.slideshare.net/ArnoutdeVries/multitouch-interaction-overview).

(Click on the thumbnail below to see full size.)

kdarling
Aug 30, 2012, 08:45 AM
Thank you. I have always wondered what Jeff Han contributions were vs. Fingerworks. The timeline image is an eye-opener.

You're welcome!

Yet even that timeline is missing a stupendous amount of touch work done for military, entertainment, enterprise and industrial purposes.

Touch friendly UIs date back decades in those fields:


Factories / power plants / etc often use graphical diagrams of their processes that a supervisor can touch for status and control.
Field workers have had touch handhelds with touch based UIs for a long time.
Casinos embraced touchscreens two decades ago for the exact same reason that Jobs later brought up about having an onscreen keyboard: no need to change physical button labels if you flip between different games.

These target markets also often have R&D resources and contract prices that dwarf the mass consumer field. When someone is willing to pay $2000+ per device, you can use better equipment. (E.g. a touchscreen/LCD combination with an internal heater so it can work in deep freeze conditions. Or a glass capacitive screen even 30 years ago.)

subsonix
Aug 30, 2012, 11:15 AM
...the timeline starts in 1982, and Apple doesn't appear until more than ¾ of the timeline is over.

Apple bought Fingerworks in 2005 though, and with it, it's entire patent portfolio. Also, Apple never show concepts or unfinished products, so it's unknown how long they have really been involved and planned for the actual release of a finished product when the technology finally was ready.

KnightWRX
Aug 30, 2012, 11:29 AM
Apple bought Fingerworks in 2005 though, and with it, it's entire patent portfolio. Also, Apple never show concepts or unfinished products, so it's unknown how long they have really been involved and planned for the actual release of a finished product when the technology finally was ready.

Has as been pointed out many times though : Fingerworks patents and expertise mostly related to non-touchscreens. Think trackpads.