Apple Reinvesting in Handwriting Recognition?

[EagerDragon]

Still waiting on the mini-iTablet. I hope it is soon and not a year from now.

Am I going to write with my fingers? Steve already told us how be feels about the stylus. Ooops I mean: he told us how WE feel about the stylus.

Does sound exciting though. Maybe we'll see a tablet.

Steve has told us about how he feels about a lot of things and a year later we see a new product with that feature. The most famous I believe is the video on iPods.

 

[olternaut]

Using tools is more advanced than using your fingers, not more primitive. People once wrote with their fingers, then they advanced to using things we call "pens".

Drawing ad writing require a stylus, having one available for (par example) a sketchpad app would be great.

You won't be doing that on your iphone.

 

[QuarterSwede]

One of many examples on YouTube of MS handwriting recognition smoking Inkwell. This difference is most apparent when writing in cursive. Turn of your sound...

http://youtube.com/watch?v=CCHqMENtKkA&feature=related

To be fair it's a lot easier to write on a screen like pen and paper than on a tablet because there is a huge disconnect with that. When I used Inkwell it recognized a lot more than what was shown in that video. As far as Microsoft's recognition goes, it's definitely better, but slow. I'd rather just type.

 

[sleepingworker]

This is only a good thing. And with R&D, better than our experiences might have been in the past. I was using this in one of my PALM's four or five years ago - learning the Graffiti alphabet. It worked ... pretty well.

 

[Constable Odo]

I had always thought that the media made fun out of how bad handwriting recognition was on the Newton. Wasn't that the main reason why the Newton failed? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Newton.:confused:

I do hear rumors that people still use them and still find them useful. I'd never seen one in person, but they look pretty outdated from some of the pictures I've seen of them.

 

[arn]

I had always thought that the media made fun out of how bad handwriting recognition was on the Newton. Wasn't that the main reason why the Newton failed? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Newton.:confused:

If you read the article...

The Newton first came out with 3rd party handwriting recognizer... which was the one that was criticised and made fun of. Apple later released their own handwriting recognizer alongside the original one.... and it was dramatically better.

From wiki: "many reviewers, testers, and users consider the Newton 2.1 handwriting recognition software better than any of the alternatives even 10 years after it was introduced."

The Newton was actually gaining momentum when it was killed during Jobs' return and restructuring.

arn

 

[sleepingworker]

I had always thought that the media made fun out of how bad handwriting recognition was on the Newton. Wasn't that the main reason why the Newton failed? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Newton.:confused:

I do hear rumors that people still use them and still find them useful. I'd never seen one in person, but they look pretty outdated from some of the pictures I've seen of them.

I guess one hopes that technology doesn't stand still. What was, is not necessarily what will be. Handwriting recognition software hopefully will be advancing pretty much like everything else has.

A lot has happened since 1998.

 

[LizKat]

you need a special stylus

https://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2007/12/01/iphone-and-ipod-touch-stylus/

arn

I looked, I saw, I assessed it as A SERIOUS KLUDGE.

You should be able to handwrite with one finger or your thumb or pretending you have a matchstick between index finger and thumb - actual size would be like a fat marker but it could be reduced to look as thin as you want it to.

(and of course given a programming spec like that, I would quit)

 

[thogs_cave]

I had always thought that the media made fun out of how bad handwriting recognition was on the Newton. Wasn't that the main reason why the Newton failed? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Newton.:confused:

Actually, it was true that the original MP's were a bit off, I had little problems with my MP130, but nothing that bad. Slow at times, which is why the 2000 then the 2100 were so bloody cool. I could take notes faster than I could type. Wonderful interface, and as I mentioned in an earlier post, a godsend in meetings. (The other SA at the time and I would beam comments back and forth during a meeting.)

I do hear rumors that people still use them and still find them useful. I'd never seen one in person, but they look pretty outdated from some of the pictures I've seen of them.

I dunno, my 2100 still feels good. The display has gotten a bit faded, but it still works well and is very snappy, even by today's standards. I think my rechargeable battery has bit the big one, but it can still take AA batteries. Plus, I have the keyboard kit for it, as well as a modem and an ethernet card.

I have yet to find something as useful. My Nokia N800 comes close, but the Newtie was just the best.

 

[SiliconAddict]

Apple had YEARS of work when it comes to catching up to where Microsoft's handwriting recog is in Vista.

I could be drunk, upside down, writing with my feet, and using my left foot instead of my right and Vista's handwriting recog would still get it right.

Then again Apple may just go out and buy a company....it would be easier.

 

[SiliconAddict]

To be fair it's a lot easier to write on a screen like pen and paper than on a tablet because there is a huge disconnect with that. When I used Inkwell it recognized a lot more than what was shown in that video. As far as Microsoft's recognition goes, it's definitely better, but slow. I'd rather just type.

Lets call a spade a spade. The writing that is being used with Inkwell would easily be good enough to be recognized with Vista's HW recog. I've played around with Inkwell in the Appel store by grabbing a sheet of paper, writing on it, and then using the WACOM tablet with the sheet on top, wrote in inkwell. The results were NOT even remotely impressive. To be blunt....Inkwell sucks....hard and rightly so. Apple hasn't done crap with it since day one.

Slow is a relative term. You do NOT want the recog to do it thing too fast or in the event of a mistake you are going to have to back out of the entire word and sentence instead of just a letter. Microsoft's solution, in Vista...XP's is all kinds of meh, is easily the most elegant.

I've spent plenty of time thinking about this. There are 3 levels of bandwidth when it comes to manual data input.

The slowest will always be handwriting. It takes time to write something out, and as such it is, what I term, bandwidth limited. However it is also the most flexible when it comes to taking notes, drawings, document markup, capturing signatures, etc.
The second is a keyboard. Nice, practical, cheep, and something in the range of high bandwidth when it comes to data input. however it consumes space, and it makes noise (Depending on the type of keyboard and the environment it is being used in.).
Finally you have voice to text recog. This is by far the highest in terms of overall "bandwidth". The catch is that the software, at least the last time I looked at it, hasn't gotten to the point where you can speak fast, which sadly puts it closer to the keyboard in terms of "bandwidth". Usually..it..needs..to..be..in..a..slow..rhythmic..and..even..tone to let it correctly ID your words, and even then most software packages are hit and miss usually in the greater then 80-85% range. With training it can usually get _over_ 90% though. The beauty of this is that it doesn't require any peripheral to use, beyond a microphone array. No pen to loose, no keyboard to take up space. However the drawbacks are obvious. There is no way, at least for people who aren't annoying pricks, that someone is going to be dictating to their tablet on the bus, or in the mall. And no way they are going to do that in a boardroom. That and I've seen CPU's spike when using voice recog. Battery life becomes an issues, for now, with such tech.