Actually, Surface is anything but gimmicky.. it is in fact very nice, with a huge amount of commercial application.
Unfortunately, just not very stable, when it ran on Vista!!
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Planning 22-Inch Touchscreen iMac for Later This Year?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Actually, Surface is anything but gimmicky.. it is in fact very nice, with a huge amount of commercial application.
Unfortunately, just not very stable, when it ran on Vista!!
Touchscreen is EXCELLENT that what I need it. I knew lot of you think that is negative. Let me tell you reason why I told it is excellent. Long as we still use mouse for our regular daily. One big positive about touchscreen is perfect for business. It will go faster and smooth when work at Sale-Point at checkout. And also Package processing. I have been work on packet everyday to select box size, etc. touchscreen it will be HUGE save time to get everything done.
I really need touchscreen on iMac rather than purchase non-Apple monitor.
I really need touchscreen on iMac rather than purchase non-Apple monitor.
I am amazed at the amount of people here who are not seeing the big picture and just thinking in terms of todays way of using a computer. Especially those of you who say things like "my arm will get tired after 10 minutes" Are you really serious?
As for the "the screen will get dirty" arguments. Please, that really is last century. Do you really believe Apple would do this if they did not have the materials to overcome this obvious problem? These are the people who said the same thing about the iPhone...and were proved so very wrong.
The whole touch screen thing is the future but it will be based on a new paradigm of working with a computer. Surely most of you have seen Star Trek. Mice are so 20th century. Running programs where control panels are used..ie most audio and video..will become so much more efficient. Why the hell would you want to use a mouse or keyboard to press a button or move a slider?
There are thousands of applications where direct "contact" with the control surface or interface works better than a mouse ever could. So it won't replace a keyboard for text entry but selecting songs in iTunes or other mundane tasks would be so much easier with a touch screen. And why are people thinking the screen will still be an upright item? Why can't it lay down in a more horizontal position.
Start thinking outside the box and you will see the huge potential of a device like this. Trust me, this is the future of computing. It will also spurn a whole new breed of software much like the iPhone did with apps. Software that previously could or would not be efficient or work at all with the old way of doing things will be introduced.
With the imminent arrival of the tablet and Apple's on going investment into touch and gesture control this is a no brainer as far as I am concerned. This is the most logical and exciting rumor to come out of Apple in years and I for one cannot wait for it's implementation.
As for the "the screen will get dirty" arguments. Please, that really is last century. Do you really believe Apple would do this if they did not have the materials to overcome this obvious problem? These are the people who said the same thing about the iPhone...and were proved so very wrong.
The whole touch screen thing is the future but it will be based on a new paradigm of working with a computer. Surely most of you have seen Star Trek. Mice are so 20th century. Running programs where control panels are used..ie most audio and video..will become so much more efficient. Why the hell would you want to use a mouse or keyboard to press a button or move a slider?
There are thousands of applications where direct "contact" with the control surface or interface works better than a mouse ever could. So it won't replace a keyboard for text entry but selecting songs in iTunes or other mundane tasks would be so much easier with a touch screen. And why are people thinking the screen will still be an upright item? Why can't it lay down in a more horizontal position.
Start thinking outside the box and you will see the huge potential of a device like this. Trust me, this is the future of computing. It will also spurn a whole new breed of software much like the iPhone did with apps. Software that previously could or would not be efficient or work at all with the old way of doing things will be introduced.
With the imminent arrival of the tablet and Apple's on going investment into touch and gesture control this is a no brainer as far as I am concerned. This is the most logical and exciting rumor to come out of Apple in years and I for one cannot wait for it's implementation.
Ermmm... not really. Depending on the user, the screen can get "dirty" with finger prints. Maybe I'm just a bit obsessive with this kind of things.
Yeh I realize that some people will get it dirty whatever it is made of.
My point is that this will only be viable if finger prints are not going to be a problem...which I am sure Apple have already or will address.
My company uses plenty of Panasonic Toughbooks with touchsceens and I find it to be something I use in addition to a mouse or touchpad, not exclusively in place of.
So if Apple added it to the iMac line, it would be just another input device available to me. There are times when it would be convenient to use the touchscreen and times it would be convenient to use a mouse.
So if Apple added it to the iMac line, it would be just another input device available to me. There are times when it would be convenient to use the touchscreen and times it would be convenient to use a mouse.
Put a decent, non core 2 duo processor in a 21.5 (or 22) inch iMac, and I'll buy it in an instant.
That is, of course, if Apple can make a fast computer under $2000.
That is, of course, if Apple can make a fast computer under $2000.
Ah....the voice of reason
Except if it almost always makes more sense NOT to touch the screen, then having the (cool and occasionally useful) touch feature would not be worth the cost. I dont see Apple applying touch as something thats usually not very good but well throw it in because sometimes its nice. (That sounds like HP.) I see Apple applying touch where its good in its OWN right. An iMac doesnt need that.
As for arms tiringthats not an imaginary problem, thats real. Look up the history of light pens."
Wayback machine.
1985, May, I started my 1st job at GM Tech Center in Warren Mi.
GM had touchscreen PC's back then, and they were terrible!!
They also had MacPlus and Laserprinters in 1986/87, then EDS came in a got rid of them all.
![hp150.jpg]()
1985, May, I started my 1st job at GM Tech Center in Warren Mi.
GM had touchscreen PC's back then, and they were terrible!!
They also had MacPlus and Laserprinters in 1986/87, then EDS came in a got rid of them all.
Maybe everyone using a Light pen was a wimp. Or maybe they longed to be a WIMP.
Before computers we used Drawing boards for 8+ hours a day, that could be upright or flat or anywhere in between. During the day we would mix between standing and sitting. Rarely would your arms be resting on a surface like now with keyboard and mice. Rarely did i get to the end of the day and go "my arms are tired".
I think the "tired arm" problem is more an example of how bad the sedentary seated computer posture really is for you. The body loves movement as touch screens be come common place we will we will embrace working standing up and moving round. Putting the larger touch screens on stands and arms that offer a freedom of movement we gave up for this new fan dangled technology.
I don't want to reach to touch a screen all day while on the net. All I want is HAL or SAL in my house. Once we reach that point then I will head into the future.
Better be ambidextrous, or else one of your arms is going to be gigantic and the other emaciated
The majority of the comments posted about a the negatives of a touchscreen iMac are irrational. Here are some of the brainless remarks and some logical retorts.
1. Fingerprints and germs on the screen... Everything you have in your home and office gets touched--books, papers, pens, carpet, pillows, etc. Many are difficult to clean, but an LCD screen is smooth and can be cleaned easily and has the potential to be way cleaner than everything else you have since you can actually see the dirt and grease on it, rather than having it hidden inside of your mattress pad or within the keys on your keyboard.
2. Reaching up and out across the desk would be tiring... True, but why on earth would a company whose designs are usually so good design a touch computer meant to be used across your desk? When is the last time you taped your newspaper onto the wall across your desk rather than placing it down on the table and angling it up to you. They would have to design in like a drafting desk and I am sure would only consider that.
3. Typing on a virtual keyboard for any length of time would be cumbersome... OK, now that is true since you have no tactile feedback about where your fingers are.
4. A touchscreen would make it tiring and will cause tendinitis or the like... When a person does paperwork, reads the newspaper, reads a book, they touch and move their arms several times more than you do with a mouse. Years ago people used to do things with their arms and hands without any problems. Now we see people thinking they are getting injured because they are moving, but what would happen when a terribly out of shape, inactive person (like most of us today) with muscular atrophy tries to play football? They would get hurt. Inactivity causes problems, not activity.
5. Other Windows all-in-one desktops have failed and shown us how hard to use they are, and therefore have no point. ...Since when were Apple's designs ever comparable to the Windows machine counterparts? It seems logical to me that computing (in all senses) is on a path that makes it more realistic, presenting computing as a viable virtual alternative to real life. Since when in real life do you view a photo album and proceed to view the next picture by moving a tiny little pointer to a tiny little "next" arrow and press down with your right pointer finger? I just flick page over.
Now, with that said, I still have no clue as to whether or not Apple will release such a product, nor if it will sell well or not. I just wanted to give my thoughts and some feedback on what everyone else has been saying. Call me crazy but everyone seems crazy to me.
1. Fingerprints and germs on the screen... Everything you have in your home and office gets touched--books, papers, pens, carpet, pillows, etc. Many are difficult to clean, but an LCD screen is smooth and can be cleaned easily and has the potential to be way cleaner than everything else you have since you can actually see the dirt and grease on it, rather than having it hidden inside of your mattress pad or within the keys on your keyboard.
2. Reaching up and out across the desk would be tiring... True, but why on earth would a company whose designs are usually so good design a touch computer meant to be used across your desk? When is the last time you taped your newspaper onto the wall across your desk rather than placing it down on the table and angling it up to you. They would have to design in like a drafting desk and I am sure would only consider that.
3. Typing on a virtual keyboard for any length of time would be cumbersome... OK, now that is true since you have no tactile feedback about where your fingers are.
4. A touchscreen would make it tiring and will cause tendinitis or the like... When a person does paperwork, reads the newspaper, reads a book, they touch and move their arms several times more than you do with a mouse. Years ago people used to do things with their arms and hands without any problems. Now we see people thinking they are getting injured because they are moving, but what would happen when a terribly out of shape, inactive person (like most of us today) with muscular atrophy tries to play football? They would get hurt. Inactivity causes problems, not activity.
5. Other Windows all-in-one desktops have failed and shown us how hard to use they are, and therefore have no point. ...Since when were Apple's designs ever comparable to the Windows machine counterparts? It seems logical to me that computing (in all senses) is on a path that makes it more realistic, presenting computing as a viable virtual alternative to real life. Since when in real life do you view a photo album and proceed to view the next picture by moving a tiny little pointer to a tiny little "next" arrow and press down with your right pointer finger? I just flick page over.
Now, with that said, I still have no clue as to whether or not Apple will release such a product, nor if it will sell well or not. I just wanted to give my thoughts and some feedback on what everyone else has been saying. Call me crazy but everyone seems crazy to me.
Connect the dots
Why would Apple want to copy the very inconvenient-to-use large-touchscreen implementation of HP? What does Steve Jobs stand for: trying to make really great products that are produced by thinking differently. Steve Jobs is not into copying; he is into innovating. If Apple does produce a "touchscreen" desktop computer, the user will not directly touch the screen but will interact with the monitor and computer via the Apple Magic Trackpad which has leaked out. And the Apple Magic Trackpad will work with the same multi-touch finger and hand gestures as the iPhone and iPad. Connect the dots...and this is the logical prediction that you arrive at.
Come up w/ your own ideas, Apple, and stop stealing others. lol
http://www.hp.com/united-states/campaigns/touchsmart/
Just keeping the "Praise Apple" fanboys here humble. I wonder how they'd feel if HP sued Apple over this? Oh, wait... I know!
Now getting serious: Won't work. People are use to having their iMacs a good foot away from them at the far back end of the desk. Imagine how tired your arms would get having to stretch. Imagine how tired your eyes would get to have your iMac a few inches away from your face... besides awkward looking.
Why would Apple want to copy the very inconvenient-to-use large-touchscreen implementation of HP? What does Steve Jobs stand for: trying to make really great products that are produced by thinking differently. Steve Jobs is not into copying; he is into innovating. If Apple does produce a "touchscreen" desktop computer, the user will not directly touch the screen but will interact with the monitor and computer via the Apple Magic Trackpad which has leaked out. And the Apple Magic Trackpad will work with the same multi-touch finger and hand gestures as the iPhone and iPad. Connect the dots...and this is the logical prediction that you arrive at.
This "feature" is already available on imacs. One just sold on eBay for $1400
http://trolltouch.com/page7/videos.html
http://trolltouch.com/page7/videos.html
I know my left pointer finger is so weak and puny compared to my right after using the iPhone so much!
