Microsoft Launches Multitouch Surface Computing

[dscottbuch]

This isn't concept, its a working device - may not be complete, but the hardware and software works.

Just like that 'longhorn' demo 'worked'???? and how long did that take and how many of the great features were deep six'd???

In actuality for the observant among us the current 'surface computer' doesn't really work. Other have reported this as well but I watched Gates demo this on the Today show this morning and several times when Gates tried to move two pictures at once from the 'pile' the system got confused, the pictures simply vibrated back and forth as stayed where they were. This shows that its just a tech demo at this point. I will be amazed if even the $10k device is available by the end of this year.

BTW there is no comparison between the methodical and steady development of OS X and the Longhorn marketing fiasco.

 

[SiliconAddict]

BTW there is no comparison between the methodical and steady development of OS X and the Longhorn marketing fiasco.

Again to add a little reality check on Apple's "steady" development...

Pink, Taligent, Rhapsody, Copland, finally OS X which in and of itself was a mess out of the gates. It took two releases to get thing to a point where speed didn't drive people nuts. Apple users have nothing to crow over. compared to the road to Jaguar Vista has had a pretty damn good start. Again there are too many Mac users who forget their history. Apple's path to where they are today is pretty damn rocky at points.
Microsoft may be late to the game but they also have a major lead in it which isn't going to make Gates or Monkey boy loose any sleep.

 

[rainydays]

ReacTable

If you don't have the cash to buy it you can always build your own.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ReacTable

The software is open source, so go ahead and improve it!

 

[saurus]

Intarweb is a Microsoft troll

Scratches head at an Apple fan making this comment. The device that saved Apple, iPod, is one of the biggest rape jobs that has ever been seen.....

<rant>
You know "Intarweb", from all your posts, you seem quite offended by my implication that Microsoft is unable to invent anything. You see, having worked in IT for 19 years (a number I suspect is greater than your age), I've seen first hand how much "Inventing" Microsoft has done.

No doubt Microsoft muddies the water between invention and buying/crushing the companies that actually do, but having been on the receiving end of numerous jobs that died no thanks to Microsoft's "inventing" and then trashing that invention, I don't have an ounce of respect for the company anymore.

No Microsoft didn't invent anything here - it's been in research labs at various Universities for years. Microsoft's claim to fame is packaging and marketing something that faculty spent thousands of people hours creating. Did anyone at Microsoft give any credit to these people for their FREE research? No. It speaks volumes about how MS loves taking the spotlight for a product that they had little part in, and then turn around and talk about trashing the free software movement. That's irks me.

Never in my post did I mention that Apple invented the concept behind the iPod. However business school will often tell you, it's not the first product to market that takes the biggest market share. That's a different argument. At what point did I mention how Apple is inventing everything?

My personal anti-Microsoft opinion comes from working with numerous Microsoft products, only to find the rug pulled from under my feet, when someone in Microsoft pulled a product, or failed to adequately keep a product alive. Not to mention the number of YEARS of life I've wasted trying to keep garbage products working. I've stopped putting my career on the line, and regained a surprising amount of free time by avoiding Microsoft products like the plague - apparently the quarter over quarter numbers defecting to Apple products gives you some indication just how many other people are tired of Microsoft's lack of concern for their paying customers.

Intarweb, M$ isn't worth defending on any level. And stop labeling everyone an Apple fanboi just because you think we don't have a clue outside Apple products.

Oh and as for my comment about cameras, yes the camera is in the table - but don't you think that will incur a problem regarding peoples privacy? Whats stopping this thing tracking you?

</rant>

 

[matznentosh]

In actuality for the observant among us the current 'surface computer' doesn't really work. Other have reported this as well but I watched Gates demo this on the Today show this morning and several times when Gates tried to move two pictures at once from the 'pile' the system got confused, the pictures simply vibrated back and forth as stayed where they were. This shows that its just a tech demo at this point. I will be amazed if even the $10k device is available by the end of this year.

If that's true, I think it's important. Microsoft shows off one project after another that's really just a concept, and then as a rule never actually delivers. Seems like a simple marketing ploy to pull attention away from the iPhone.

 

[Intarweb]

<rant>
You know "Intarweb", from all your posts, you seem quite offended by my implication that Microsoft is unable to invent anything. You see, having worked in IT for 19 years (a number I suspect is greater than your age), I've seen first hand how much "Inventing" Microsoft has done.

No doubt Microsoft muddies the water between invention and buying/crushing the companies that actually do, but having been on the receiving end of numerous jobs that died no thanks to Microsoft's "inventing" and then trashing that invention, I don't have an ounce of respect for the company anymore.

No Microsoft didn't invent anything here - it's been in research labs at various Universities for years. Microsoft's claim to fame is packaging and marketing something that faculty spent thousands of people hours creating. Did anyone at Microsoft give any credit to these people for their FREE research? No. It speaks volumes about how MS loves taking the spotlight for a product that they had little part in, and then turn around and talk about trashing the free software movement. That's irks me.

Never in my post did I mention that Apple invented the concept behind the iPod. However business school will often tell you, it's not the first product to market that takes the biggest market share. That's a different argument. At what point did I mention how Apple is inventing everything?

My personal anti-Microsoft opinion comes from working with numerous Microsoft products, only to find the rug pulled from under my feet, when someone in Microsoft pulled a product, or failed to adequately keep a product alive. Not to mention the number of YEARS of life I've wasted trying to keep garbage products working. I've stopped putting my career on the line, and regained a surprising amount of free time by avoiding Microsoft products like the plague - apparently the quarter over quarter numbers defecting to Apple products gives you some indication just how many other people are tired of Microsoft's lack of concern for their paying customers.

Intarweb, M$ isn't worth defending on any level. And stop labeling everyone an Apple fanboi just because you think we don't have a clue outside Apple products.

Oh and as for my comment about cameras, yes the camera is in the table - but don't you think that will incur a problem regarding peoples privacy? Whats stopping this thing tracking you?

</rant>

I agree that Apple's products are much more stable. That's why I primarily do all of my video and graphics work on G5s and Pros. I have a Ti book but I also have a PC lap and desktop, and to this day have never had a problem with either. The reason, I keep them as clean as I do my Macs.

I'm not labeling everyone a Fanbot, just the ones who hate just for the sake of hating. It's quite easy to tell who is who.

What MS created here is something that is amazing technology on a grand scale. The should be commended for it, not hammered. They are the ones who are pushing this technology forward. This is going to push other companies, including Apple, to get their asses in gear and join the market (when this becomes a viable home market).

P.$. Using M$ is lame and old.

 

[saurus]

What MS created here is something that is amazing technology on a grand scale. The should be commended for it, not hammered. They are the ones who are pushing this technology forward.

I still don't think you get it. Microsoft created a coffee table? Microsoft created a touch interface? Microsoft pushed this technology forward?

No! The only think Microsoft did was make a questionably marketable product with everyone else's work bundled into one, and took all the credit for it. I'd be surprised if Microsoft could even patent any of this.

I'm sorry but I don't see the big deal - a Wacom Cintiq is way more useful IMHO, and I doubt it would take much effort to make the Cintiq do the same thing...

Microsoft's only in it for the money. Nothing new there.

 

[failsafe1]

I forgot to ask if anyone thinks MS can redesign their GUI so the blue screen of death has a user friendly push button for the tabletop restart?

 

[mymacmini]

Surface

WHY THE HELL IS ANY PHONE THAT COMPANIES RELEASE AFTER JANUARY 2007 AN iPHONE RIPOFF???

I am so sick and tired of hearing that. "OMG, it's a touch screen. iPhone ripoff!!!!" "It makes a phone call, iPhone ripoff!!!" "I can surf the web on it. iPhone ripoff!"

I'm guessing since this makes phone calls too, it's an iPhone ripoff?
http://cse.unl.edu/~bplowman/photography/oldPhone.gif

It can't be silly - it wasn't released after January 2007.



Personnally, I think the MS surface is neat, but would not be suitable for the everyday home user. It would be good for photographers to show work to their clients, and let their clients touch the photos. It could work with Aperature to create a killer photo app for photographers. However, past thatand the other ideas proposed by MS, I think that the Surface is limited.

 

[gmanrique]

hmmm... isn't that why Apple is in the markets they are?

...
Microsoft's only in it for the money. Nothing new there.

This is just silly. Surface looks like a great product. And remember, the killer part is the actual usefull software and apps that you can get to work with it, which is what MS is triying to do.

Concepts and stuff from Universities, etc. are the beginning for innovative companies to take them to the next level. Imagine where would we be if Apple had not taken the UI and mouse concepts from Xerox and make them comercial products.

I have seen all the videos showing 'similar' ideas and concepts to move images, maps etc. But I have not seen a demo showing how I put my camera on the 'demo device' and then 'boom' there are the pictures, and then I place my cell phone and just drag and drop the images I want. I place my credit card and 'boom' there is the usefull info I need.

I love Apple products and I know they will keep innovating. That does not prevent me from giving credit where credit is due.

 

[dscottbuch]

Again to add a little reality check on Apple's "steady" development...

Pink, Taligent, Rhapsody, Copland, finally OS X which in and of itself was a mess out of the gates. It took two releases to get thing to a point where speed didn't drive people nuts. Apple users have nothing to crow over. compared to the road to Jaguar Vista has had a pretty damn good start. Again there are too many Mac users who forget their history. Apple's path to where they are today is pretty damn rocky at points.
Microsoft may be late to the game but they also have a major lead in it which isn't going to make Gates or Monkey boy loose any sleep.

I'm talking about post Copland. I'm well aware of the history pre-Jobs. If, and very very big IF, MS pulls the same change of culture that Apple did they'll get my credit. Zune and this demo don't begin to show they type of changes they need to make.

The iPod is another methodical development path. Everyone screaming that it needs this, it needs that to be successful. Apple didn't just put on a tech show to feed the masses but did careful market and product development.

The Retails sector is another.

This is just silly. Surface looks like a great product. And remember, the killer part is the actual usefull software and apps that you can get to work with it, which is what MS is triying to do.

Concepts and stuff from Universities, etc. are the beginning for innovative companies to take them to the next level. Imagine where would we be if Apple had not taken the UI and mouse concepts from Xerox and make them comercial products.

I have seen all the videos showing 'similar' ideas and concepts to move images, maps etc. But I have not seen a demo showing how I put my camera on the 'demo device' and then 'boom' there are the pictures, and then I place my cell phone and just drag and drop the images I want. I place my credit card and 'boom' there is the usefull info I need.

I love Apple products and I know they will keep innovating. That does not prevent me from giving credit where credit is due.

What useful (meaning released and someone using it) software is there? There is NO product here, just a development platform, and even that is not yet well enough defined to review.

 

[gmanrique]

read my post completely

What useful (meaning released and someone using it) software is there? There is NO product here, just a development platform, and even that is not yet well enough defined to review.

- the sych features to interact with your media and devices is great (simply put, iLife would be great here)
- the credit card thing so there is no need to type, scan etc.
- the obvious, maps, etc. that are showing in the video

and there are more that will come with time.

 

[dscottbuch]

- the sych features to interact with your media and devices is great
- the credit card thing so there is no need to type, scan etc.
- the obvious, maps, etc. that are showing in the video

and there are more that will come with time.

As far as I know those are no more than demos of ideas. Look at the Longhorn video that was posted earlier in this thread. There were lots of 'great ideas' in that in 2003 that have never yet seen the light of day as a product. This is the worst type of smoke and mirrors. Its more tech ideas with not product directing it.

I appreciate more and more Apple's 'secrecy' when it comes to its development. For the most part they deliver what they show.

 

[oootle]

- the sych features to interact with your media and devices is great (simply put, iLife would be great here)
- the credit card thing so there is no need to type, scan etc.
- the obvious, maps, etc. that are showing in the video

and there are more that will come with time.

anyone know how the credit cars is scanned btw.

 

[Fukui]

anyone know how the credit cars is scanned btw.

I would have thought, the cameras, but cameras can't read magnetic strips.......

 

[DMann]

Why Microsoft's innovation is only Surface deep

No guessing involved here, Pixel Image Capture is very real. Let me state again, Bravo to Microsoft for introducing a great implementation of Multi-Touch, with some awesome interactive functionality involving digital cameras and phones. This is wonderful, and I do not downplay that greatness. We are not comparing the iPhone to what Surfaces brings to the table, we are pointing out that they both utilize Multi-Touch technology, which makes the cool stuff happen. While MS needs a large housing to contain the engines, cameras, lenses, and mechanical arms for it to operate, the capabilities are beyond great. This is a major breakthrough in interactive technology, and a great arcade machine. It is also impressive that the iPhone (which I have seen) can implement Multi-Touch without all the bulk - this is the point.

This article from The Register further elaborates the points made about Surface:

http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2007/06/01/fentem_microsoft_surface/

Comment [ Microsoft calls its multitouch user interface Surface Computing "a new paradigm". We asked a British pioneer in the field to examine the claim. - ed.]
This week Microsoft demonstrated a 'multi-touch' coffee table user interface it calls Surface Computing, and it got the BBC - and some Register readers - very excited.

"The amount of time they spent working on this suggests they didn't just nick it off someone else in the last 18 months", writes Dan. "Give credit to Microsoft for being first to a commercial market," agrees Amy Wohl. But let's set the record straight. Microsoft's Surface Computing isn't "a new paradigm", nor is it adding any innovation to an existing paradigm. Table computing isn't a new market, either, and Microsoft's demos are years away from being productized. In fact, according to Bill Buxton - ironically a Principal Researcher at Microsoft's own research centre - these kinds of multi-touch interfaces have been around for over twenty years. Perhaps the Surface Computing marketing guys at Microsoft should check out Bill's web site.
Moreover, perhaps Microsoft and developers like Jeff Han at NYU, who are building these 'old-school' multi-touch interfaces out of cameras and projectors, should consider the fatal flaw in their 'innovations'. This being that all back-projection interfaces are enormous. Think about it - you've essentially got a small cinema in a box behind a screen. Forget mobility and portability. Is it even moveable?

Another major concern about this pioneering work, was pointed out by Reg commenter Nick Ryan. "Notice something about all the examples? It's only used in the dark, which is nice considering that on average it's dark only 50 per cent of the time!" The systems developed by Microsoft and Han do indeed look pretty on YouTube, but more pragmatic developers have known for some years that a successful commercial product would have to be flat and portable. People just don't want huge cabinets in the era of mobile computing and flat-screen TV's.
I've developed several multi-touch interfaces, and I know the problems and challenges. While Microsoft and Han appear to have been resurrecting ergonomics exercises from the past, other major players, such as Apple, Philips and Toshiba have been thinking hard about how to do multi-touch sensing without resorting to using a camera and a projector.
Apple acquired the multi-touch know-how that is going into their imminent iPhone product from the company Fingerworks , while some interesting developments have come from Toshiba Matsushita who have created a very clever multi-touch LCD display using negligible additional hardware. Potentially even more exciting is a British company Plastic Logic who seem to have created a flexible pressure-sensitive multi-touch interactive display, surely the Holy Grail of commercial touchscreen technologies. Just last week Plastic Logic laid the foundation stone of its e-paper fabrication plant in Dresden, expected to be operational in 2008.

Multitouch: it's no cinch
A major usability problem that has dogged multi-touch computer interfaces for the last twenty five years is the lack of tactile feedback. The physical feel of the interface is something you take for granted when using a conventional 'hard' interface, such as a keyboard. And when it's not there, you really miss it, as users of virtual keyboards have discovered to their cost. This issue may not even be a 'known unknown' yet for Microsoft. Some of Apple's recent patent applications appear to be addressing this issue. Philips, too, has demonstrated real advances - unveiling a rival coffee table system called an 'Entertaible'. This sophisticated table-top games system elegantly combines multi-touch with multi-object sensing, so that physical objects, as well as many hands and fingers, can be tracked by the 32-inch LCD playing surface. According to the BBC, "Microsoft said it aimed to produce cheaper versions for homes within three to five years". And despite the sterling work of the likes of Philips et al, Microsoft have also claimed to be "the first major technology company to bring surface computing to market in a commercially ready product". These conflicting statements seem to raise question marks over quite how far Microsoft have actually got. Only time will tell whether or not these demos are just smoke, mirrors, cameras and projectors. ®

 

[Jenny1]

expensive

It is expensive mainly because of the large screen size. I'll definitely buy one if they had a smaller version

btw watching a movie on a surface won't look good regardless of the screen size.


Jenny

 

[unclewinkie]

this is cool, but i cant wait to see what apple does to top this

 

[zgh1999]

Does MS expect me to chuck the table around with me?

Heh.

Even if I were to use a computing table, what makes them think I would want a Windows powered computing table?

They will have to pay me in order for me to use it.

 

[oldwatery]

Does MS expect me to chuck the table around with me?

Heh.

Even if I were to use a computing table, what makes them think I would want a Windows powered computing table?

They will have to pay me in order for me to use it.

and if they did...would you?

 

[sighduck]

Does MS expect me to chuck the table around with me?

Heh.

Even if I were to use a computing table, what makes them think I would want a Windows powered computing table?

They will have to pay me in order for me to use it.

Because Microsoft obviously designed the Surface as a portable table for snobby Apple fans to carry around in their Mini Cooper.

 

[oldwatery]

Because Microsoft obviously designed the Surface as a portable table for snobby Apple fans to carry around in their Mini Cooper.

sighduck...me thinks he thinks a Mini Cooper is a small gold colored Mac

 

[DMann]

Surface Remarks

Because Microsoft obviously designed the Surface as a portable table for snobby Apple fans to carry around in their Mini Cooper.

Now, that would be innovative, would it not? Love the technology! Never imagined one would choose to fuse fluid innovations of the future with limited mechanical technology from the past. Heck, if I could build a hovercraft out of milk crates, that would be a cool feat too. But the 9 turbo jet engines necessary to propel it from within the wooden casing just might tarnish it's mystique a bit. Better use a layer of mirrored Titanium on top to make it look modern, and we'll offer to sell it to NASA.

Love the abilities to extract photos from special cameras souped-up to work with the device, along with transfer of data to sensor-equipped phones. All of this is amazing - and soon can also be accomplished using Pixel Image Capture technology to replace the bulk of moving parts. It will be interesting to see what becomes of these monstrous show pieces once Multi-Touch technology merges with Pixel Recognition. Blue screen tabletops would be quite the eye sore

 

[martianrobot]

Fake

This is obviously fake. Anyone could mock that up in Gimpshop.

Becaue nothing that cool could really exist beyond a Steven Spielberg movie with Tom Cruise, certainly not developed by Microsoft anyway.



I just hope they've developed a multitouch surface completely resistant to fingerprints. And buttery toast with Marmite.

 

[DMann]

Surface

I don't really see to much in this There are some major issue that would make it impractical for most people.

1. Size The trend is for less desktop and more wall space. This thing is a piece of furniture itself.

2. Real life table problems. In the demo I haven't seen a person take a piece of paper and write on it and see what it does, or what will it do to it. If there is a flat table people like to use it to put paper down and write on the paper. If it feels the pressure from your writing it will either scratch the screen and or try to record what you are writing, neither are desirable.

3. Smugges. iPhone will have the same problem too but at least the iPhone is small enough to hide away until it is on and the display shines over the smugges. This will be visible all the time and with finger prints all over it and smugges it will be less appealing.

4. Angle of display. It assumes that we like looking down all the time. I bet you can get a good kink in your neck from it.

5. Being it is from Microsoft it will only want to play with Microsoft's products. Apples approach was make an iPod so when people are happy with it they will get a more expensive Mac. Microsoft approach is buy an expensive piece of equipment that forces you to use their less popular stuff.

6. 2D problem. This is still a 2D Display and only interactive in 2D with their demo of Pictures spread across the table people normally like to pick them up and look at them and put it down. You cant do that. With a more portable equipment like a laptop or a Cell Phone then you can hold it and put it closer to you.

7. People with bad vision. This is looks like this is normally placed in a bad spot for people to naturally read comfortable.

8. Limited use. It is big expensive and very limited use. I know Microsoft is trying to turn the apple users because Apple tends to say how great it is at things like dealing with photos and music and such. But Apples can do a lot more then that because they are a full computer. This really limits what you can do with it.

9. Keeping clean in order for it to work properly you probably need to keep it clean. I know if I have a table Ill put papers on it. or Perhaps eat my lunch and perhaps drop some mustard on the table. Do I really want my real life clutter clutter my virtual world?

10. number of input In the demo I haven't seen more then 3 inputs at the same time on the screen. 2 cellphone and a finger, 2 People using it at the same time, A Cellphone PDA and a finger. Being a commercial I would assume that it its limit. Which would really stink for applications like a virtual piano, More then 2 people using it (as a table).

11. The interface seems messy. I know seeing all those pictures and stuff come out shuffled like in real life looks cool but the only reason why it is like that in real life is due to natural entropy. If I had a computer managing it I would want them to be more organized and not overlapping.

12. It looks expensive I could get a more powerfull desktop or a really good laptop for that price. So I could get more portability or more power or both. ANd perhaps a good size display as well.

13. Small homes. It just wouldn't fit into small homes, It is fine for Balmer and Gates who can afford to add a new wing to their home just use it. But for use normal folk in the east coast This will take up to much room for a small home, Even if we could afford it.

14. Children. Kids are hard on everything. This device is located for kids to have easy access to it. A desktop and be places far back on a desk to a child can't easily play or break the expensive stuff. But for this I could see permeant magic markers. Sticky finger marks, Sneeze snot, hamster poop, paint, crayons, or just huge cracks when the kid gets angry and smashes their cup on it.

15. Pets. I could see working on this my cat sees that my hands are free will jump up on it probably messing up all my work just to be pet. Or the cat will sleep on it and it processing for hours trying to figure what type of cellphone is shaped like that.

16. Limited software. The interface will limit the software available.

R Boylin said on Sunday, 10 June 2007

Surface is a "joke"! It's already been done for years by other kiosk makers. See RoughlyDrafted.com. I predict that in 5 years you won't even remember "Surface" was once rolled out by MS in a pathetic attempt to look "advanced" in advance of the iPhone debut.

Terrin said on Sunday, 10 June 2007

Multi-touch is great for some things, but not so much so for others. I suggest for home computers it is not that practical. Most of all, typing on a screen is not a super fast process compared to typing on a keyboard.

ALso, Surface uses cameras below the surface. I cannot see that approach used in small devices like phones or notebooks. Also, Apple has patented its multi-touch system.

Pope said on Sunday, 10 June 2007

You have got to be kidding. First off, Microsoft is never on time in anything. At least a year late. Second, if they do ship something called Surface, it will be a $10,000 computer system, not for consumers. I think a new generation interface is at least 5 years off for either company and you will see it in small incremental steps possibly starting with one program or bits in several programs. It will take a while for the consumer to get used to it on a large scale, so slow and steady will win out. You just dont roll out something that advanced without plenty of consumer familiarity first. For Michael Elgan to not acknowledge this is rather sophomoric of him. A phone working this way is one thing (closed system from one company). A computer is another (have to deal with thousands of 3rd party developers) .

Pope said on Sunday, 10 June 2007

You have got to be kidding. First off, Microsoft is never on time in anything. At least a year late. Second, if they do ship something called Surface, it will be a $10,000 computer system, not for consumers. I think a new generation interface is at least 5 years off for either company and you will see it in small incremental steps possibly starting with one program or bits in several programs. It will take a while for the consumer to get used to it on a large scale, so slow and steady will win out. You just dont roll out something that advanced without plenty of consumer familiarity first. For Michael Elgan to not acknowledge this is rather sophomoric of him. A phone working this way is one thing (closed system from one company). A computer is another (have to deal with thousands of 3rd party developers) .

Jack said on Sunday, 10 June 2007

You forget that besides the multi-touch iPhone, Mac users have been using spatial recognition via the isight camera for some time. Take a look at www.freeverse.com/tsg/ or look at delicious library, which has been using the isight to identify books, cds and DVDs.

Jman said on Sunday, 10 June 2007

"Microsoft beat Apple with the Surface announcement. But will Apple beat Microsoft with shipping an actual product?"

LOL, Ha, ha, ha..... whew! that was funny. Care to explain that one...


dorian said on Sunday, 10 June 2007

I agree with jMan. I don't see where MS has beat Apple at anything. The software barrows tremendously from the iPhone so thats that. And the 5 camera system doesn't seem to efficient. As another reader mentioned, how are they going to place 5 cameras into an LCD? Vistas if full of bugs and Surface is probably the same. I actually have to see this thing to believe it. The idea that MS has released Vista, a second rate OS at the same time are realeasing this futuristing item, doesn't jive. Something is not right.

I say, Apple will most likely have something with the elegance of the iPhone and loaded with Core Animation sooner than MS will have a realiable product that can be used in anything that is not 3' tall.

flint said on Sunday, 10 June 2007

What some people will write for a free lunch is quite staggering. LOL ....'next generation UI'...unbelievable! and hilarious to be so ludicrously wrong. This site sucks too...doesn't render properly in Safari or Firefox.
the blind leading the blind comes to mind.

dorian said on Sunday, 10 June 2007

I agree with jMan. I don't see where MS has beat Apple at anything. The software barrows tremendously from the iPhone so thats that. And the 5 camera system doesn't seem to efficient. As another reader mentioned, how are they going to place 5 cameras into an LCD? Vistas if full of bugs and Surface is probably the same. I actually have to see this thing to believe it. The idea that MS has released Vista, a second rate OS at the same time are realeasing this futuristing item, doesn't jive. Something is not right.

I say, Apple will most likely have something with the elegance of the iPhone and loaded with Core Animation sooner than MS will have a realiable product that can be used in anything that is not 3' tall.

lrd said on Sunday, 10 June 2007

Surface is concept technology meant to give MS followers hope and perhaps an excuse for falling so far behind Apple. I can see it now, a PC magazine's dodo bird writing that MS, not Apple, came out with this technology- just like they're saying now that it was Apple who copied many of the faetures of Vista despite the five year difference in the commercialization of the two.

Bradley Caldwell said on Sunday, 10 June 2007

Surface is interesting.. but.... I have a camera that has 802.11. I don't need to sit it on a surface to upload photos.. I can do it anywhere in my house. I think it is a gimic... The real future is being able to ask a computer a question or verbally give it a task and have it accomplish that. Surface... he he... glorified coffee table.

Viswakarma said on Sunday, 10 June 2007

I did not realize that PC Advisor is into satire!!!

Bizar Ballmer said on Sunday, 10 June 2007

This is easily one of the most foolish articles I've read this weekend. And there are a LOT of them. BUt this takes the cake in it's misguided pandering of a silly useless product from MS. If the product requires a barcode then ANY product can be scanned to gain info on it, or simply Google the said product.
Here's a bit of reality, you will absolutely, definitively NOT see this in your home. It's a novelty and is large and requires 5 cameras? Fit that on your lap.
What a dumb, dumb article. I'll be sure NOT to ever reference PVadvisor for advice, Wow, what a stupid sales pitch this was for an MS product.

David McElroy said on Sunday, 10 June 2007

Why would you make comments such as, "...[Surface is] going to be in your home within five years"? Is there ANY evidence of that? Are you quoting Microsoft? Some alleged expert? The local psychic? Anybody who thinks seriously about this can see that it is full of potential problems. I don't think devices similar to what has been shown are going to be in home in five years or 50 years. But to baldly state it as fact is just plain bad journalism.

Robin said on Sunday, 10 June 2007

This is the quality of writing that gets published on PC Advisor? It's my first time visiting this site and probably will be my last.

Is this article really meant to be taken seriously? Microsoft's "new" Surface technology is a giant (40 cubic feet or so) mess of cameras, projectors and a full-size tower computer, housed in a $10,000+ box.

Innovative, ha! Clumsy, clunky and useful in only the most limited and specialized circumstances is more like it.

Farney Byiave said on Sunday, 10 June 2007

Surely you jest. Projectors, cameras. Microsoft must REALLY be desperate to throw this concept idea out in such a transparent ploy to take attention away from the release of Apple's iPhone, a real case of (MS's fave word) innovation.

Jumpthesnark said on Sunday, 10 June 2007

"Microsoft beat Apple with the Surface announcement. But will Apple beat Microsoft with shipping an actual product?"

Wow. So Apple DIDN'T announce the iPhone UI all those months ago? It was some sort of fevered dream I had?

Ridiculous. Apple is just weeks away from shipping the iPhone, which uses multi-touch in a tiny form factor. MS is left throwing a full-size computer, a bunch of cameras and a projector into a bathtub and covering it with an LCD screen and you think it's the Second Coming.

MS fanboys.... just wake up, will you? They can't even port Office to OSX on the Intel chip. And MS has been working with Intel for how long now?

The big innovative leaps in UI didn't come from Redmond before. I don't expect them to come from Redmond in the future.

Chris Brown said on Sunday, 10 June 2007

Can't wait to buy a Surface and use it to call for pizza. No wait, it won't make phone calls, will it? But I can use my new iPhone to order the pizza, then use my new Surface as a table. I'm excited.
<a href="hppt://www.FilmPhotoWeb.com">FilmPhotoWeb.com</a>

Paul said on Sunday, 10 June 2007

There are applications on OS X that alreardy scan bar codes and present data about the object. For example Delicious library does this with books. Its been around for at least 2 years.

If you have a wi-fi camera you can already download the images by just sitting on any table. Pros do this during games, where images are sent to the editors in real time. With phones many carriers prevent you from using the local network to say sync your address book or ringtones or what have you. Why should this behavior change with Surface.

You haven't presented good arguments for why this is innovative for one thing and you haven't provided good reasons for why this would be successful in the home. An average income home that is, not some NFL player's home.

I'd like to particularly know why you consider this innovative. To read data with cameras and act on that is obvious, why should that make it innovative.

Terrin said on Monday, 11 June 2007

Multi-touch is great for some things, but not so much so for others. I suggest for home computers it is not that practical. Most of all, typing on a screen is not a super fast process compared to typing on a keyboard.

ALso, Surface uses cameras below the surface. I cannot see that approach used in small devices like phones or notebooks. Also, Apple has patented its multi-touch system.

brotherStefan said on Monday, 11 June 2007

Anybody remember seeing Apple's recent patent for an LCD screen where each pixel also includes a camera cell? Now, THAT's innovation. Five cameras in a tub computer? Not so much.

Robert said on Monday, 11 June 2007

Surface sounds like the light pen of the 80s tied to a projection TV given bar code reading ability. Hardly a new interface. Definitely not new technology.

Swampthing said on Monday, 11 June 2007

Microsoft was pushing mobility. Apple took it to the next level or did they? Why would Microsoft have the consumer sit around their PC coffee table? Now I have to go looking for a coffee table.

Swampthing said on Monday, 11 June 2007

How does Microsoft's Surface help me shop while walking thru the isles of Best Buy for an object? With a web enabled mobile device, a consumer / web user could click on a, 1D, 2D, UPC, QR, slogan, logo, trademark, keyword, RFID, etc. and get price comparison, location, watch a preview of a movie, get a schedule, get a coupon, click on link of a short story (like the WSJ) that goes to the whole story, concert tickets, sent instantly back to me on my mobile device. So really how innovative is Microsoft and their new Surface PC table? Who will have the upper hand?
IMO, all Apple needs to do is talk to Neomedia to introduce a mobile platform for the iPhone.
Qode, a mobile platform, offers one click to content.

Go to www.qode.com.

Tired of the pundits, press, and users all jumping to report the same thing about MSFT over and over?

Synthmeister said on Monday, 11 June 2007

Surface is barely a proof-of-concept idea. It's up to vendors and customers to come up with something useful. iPhone will be an actual, working product with a clear function and comes tomarket in less than a month and your average, middle class professional can afford one. (And will provide a fourth revenue stream to Apple's bottom line.
iPhone leverages Mac OS X in a handheld device with less than 4 gigs memory. Surface leverages Vista in a device the size of your kitchen sink and more cameras and projectors than your local Best Buy keeps in it's inventory.

B. Buehler said on Monday, 11 June 2007

Let's microsucks ship the product first. That would be a miracle in itself. Seeing how well they implemented Zune... well thought out, amazing colors... oh stop it the laughing hurts too much. One thing that did impress is microsoft copied the entire iPod look for surface. No one ever siad they were an innovator

dorian said on Monday, 11 June 2007

I agree with jMan. I don't see where MS has beat Apple at anything. The software barrows tremendously from the iPhone so thats that. And the 5 camera system doesn't seem to efficient. As another reader mentioned, how are they going to place 5 cameras into an LCD? Vistas if full of bugs and Surface is probably the same. I actually have to see this thing to believe it. The idea that MS has released Vista, a second rate OS at the same time are realeasing this futuristing item, doesn't jive. Something is not right.

I say, Apple will most likely have something with the elegance of the iPhone and loaded with Core Animation sooner than MS will have a realiable product that can be used in anything that is not 3' tall.