Sure, sure... give it few more years and then it will be the best thing they've ever created.
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.
Phil Schiller Says Apple Tested and Rejected Touch Screen Macs, Finding It 'Absurd' on a Desktop
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Really am not sure what the obsession is with touch screen on a Mac. A feature just to have a feature, maybe? I have an XPS15 and can count on one hand how many times I've used the touch interface. Leave touch to mobile. Point and click makes too much sense on a desktop.
Just change for the sake of change.
Just change for the sake of change.
It's odd to me that there continues to be so much "controversy" about this. I own a laptop with a touch screen; that aspect sucks. I never use it. The last thing I want to do is smudge up my screen, and hold up my arm in front of me for extended periods. It doesn't make sense and they are absolutely correct on this.
Everyone said the same thing to Steve Jobs when he released a smartphone with only a touchscreen. Executives like Cook and Schiller have no creativity, vision, or taste.
maybe Apple desktops in their current form factor he has a point. But the Apple laptops do not fit that position. It makes perfect sense to have a touchscreen Macbook and Macbook Pro. I mean the same effort it takes to touch the new Touch Bar....I could touch my Macbook Pros screen too. A touchscreen Macbook pro would offer more features than the Touch Bar does....
And buy all new desks, chairs and work spaces. I think a $9 dongle sounds down right cheap.
Really want to see those gimmicks touch bars getting lag after 2 or 3 updates
I disagree, to a degree. The touch bar somewhat makes sense when the display is further away from your hands, thus requiring more effort to reach (like say, when using an iMac).
But a touch bar that is mm away from the screen is a BS reason to have it. I believe the real reason for it is that they did not want to do the (enormous) work it would take to add touch to macOS. And understandably so.
There are already products which let you do that. Products like the Cintiq which works with a Mac. But for that to be the mainstream way computers work?
Aside from drawing (a fairly niche aspect of computers which accessories account for), no one has ever come up with an example of why touchscreens are better than mice. Quick, light interactions like turning the page of a book, flicking through photos etc have already been solved by the multi-touch trackpad.
What is it that Steve Jobs said about marketing people running companies?
I seriously am weary of Schiller at the moment.
I seriously am weary of Schiller at the moment.
whereas a touch bar on a laptop makes perfect sense
It actually does. I'm sure if you look at extensive user experience studies that touchscreen laptops suffer in the cost-benefit analysis.
What if a sort-of iPad would be the touch-input for a Mac in the future?
No touch screen in front of you (I get that) but more of a fully programmable interface with touch that replaces keyboard, mouse and trackpad?
So, imaging a Mac with Final Cut Pro on a 5K screen in front of you, and a sort-of 12.9" iPad which acts as a smart input device (3D Touch and everything)?
No touch screen in front of you (I get that) but more of a fully programmable interface with touch that replaces keyboard, mouse and trackpad?
So, imaging a Mac with Final Cut Pro on a 5K screen in front of you, and a sort-of 12.9" iPad which acts as a smart input device (3D Touch and everything)?
Maybe it's just my work flow, I don't know, but it really doesn't bother me to choose whether I am going to grab my iPad or MacBook on the way out the door. They both have specific jobs that they do well and that is okay with me. I'd rather them do their jobs well and have two devices than start making compromises.
Again, just my opinion.
Apple left the display business. There are already third-party displays which let you draw directly on your screen. For Apple to build something in at system level, or integrate it into the iMac, it's got to have hit the level of being such a feature it's simply the way computers are.
"Of course there are pictures on the screen." "Of course there are windows displaying content." "Of course there's a touch screen." Apple doesn't believe the third statement is true.
The only reason to add a touch screen to a Mac is the question "Why not?" Well, Apple thought the same, tested it and discovered why not.
Adding more moving parts to a physical product adds more places and opportunities for failure. This is a tried and true design principle, one that Apple has adopted for many years.
It's like Schiller is being deliberately disingenuous. People don't want a touchscreen Mac so they can lean over the keyboard and touch it while it's on their lap/table. That is indeed uncomfortable, though it must be pointed out that is what Apple tells iPad Pro users they should do (that keyboard desperately needs a trackpad).
People want a touchscreen Mac so they can fold the keyboard out of the way/detach it and use it as a tablet, so they don't have to cart two devices around if they want to read in portrait mode.
Or does he really understand customers so badly? Well, that would explain the Macbook keyboard debacle.
People want a touchscreen Mac so they can fold the keyboard out of the way/detach it and use it as a tablet, so they don't have to cart two devices around if they want to read in portrait mode.
Or does he really understand customers so badly? Well, that would explain the Macbook keyboard debacle.
Surface Studio is a super-tiny-niche machine aimed at a tiny subset of illustrators; it's a classic example of what Apple could have done but ultimately rejected as a very bad idea.
Adding a layer of touch control means more complexity, bugs and costs, and the absurd sticker price of Microsoft's machine shows it.
"Apple tested and rejected Phil Schiller, finding him absurd"
Crazy how other companies (*cough* Microsoft *cough*) have been able to pull this off, yet Apple... hmmmm... they just can't seem to do it. Those goofs.
This is how you get chronic neck pain. Ask that to graphic designers who work on Wacom Cintiq.
Yes sir. This is evidence that the design of one thing simply cannot satiate all needs and wants.