Phil Schiller Says Apple Tested and Rejected Touch Screen Macs, Finding It 'Absurd' on a Desktop

[jtrauscht]

I'm not buying Schiller's excuses here. Microsoft just embarrassed them by doing exactly what he's saying couldn't be done. All the elements have been there for them to beat them to the punch. Not just iOS, but pro-level users have been using Wacom Cintiq tablets for years. So they were either too unimaginative to put it together or they're too stuck in their own echo chamber.

 

[farewelwilliams]

Schiller has seen the surface studio, right?

you did read the entire article, right?

He also explains that such a move would mean totally redesigning the menu bar for fingers, in a way that would ruin the experience for those using pointer devices like the touch or mouse. “You can’t optimize for both,” he says. “It’s the lowest common denominator thinking.”

 

[Roobun]

I'm pretty sure it wouldn't be absurd if touch screen macs had a stylus and could operate like a wacom cintiq.

 

[smirking]

The thought of interfaces having a mixed screen touch and mouse/touch pad interface makes my shoulders and neck hurt thinking about it. BTW: I have used some Win10 interfaces where the mouse/touch interfaces are mixed. PAINFUL.

The Win10 mixed touch/input device interface is also confusing for people who aren't computer savvy. I'm sure that could improve with some refinement... well maybe a lot of refinement.

Before I saw my elderly aunt interact with a Win10 touch screen, I found it fascinating and potentially useful. When I tried to coach her through how to file her taxes on her new laptop, I left with a totally different impression. She kept getting confused as to whether she should touch the screen or reach for the mouse and she quickly gravitated to using only the touch screen. The only problem is that there were some things you can't do on the touch screen so it got really confusing. I eventually had to advise her to use the mouse only.

I do think the touchscreen has some limited appeal, but there are tradeoffs in usability that increase the interaction cost of using the machine. It'd also be only useful for smaller screens like laptops and the one the MS Surface uses. I can't live without a max sized monitor.

Heh, on a funny note, I went to the Surface pages on the Microsoft site and they have a page selling the Surface Book for students. Wow, these are some old students... they're certainly not college freshmen.
https://www.microsoft.com/surface/en-us/for-students

 

[Wowereit]

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.

What exactly do you think Touch Bar is?
Apple looked desperately for a way to "innovate" again without doing what everybody else does and including a touch screen. I'm not an advocate of touch screen laptops either, but Touch Bar is way more ridiculous.

The distance between my hands and the Touch Bar is pretty much the same as between my hands and the screen, with the key difference that I have to look down to the Touch Bar instead of looking directly onto the display.

There is a reason that traditionell keyboards survived for decades now and that's not because everybody was too stupid to develop a Touch Bar. We want to look at our content while manipulating it and not down to our keyboard, which is possible due to the mechanical feedback provided by keys.

Both the traditional laptop concept and touch screen laptops provide better input methods than Touch Bar. Apple didn't change for making something better, they changed it for making something different, because they want to look like they are still creative innovators.

 

[Komiidian]

Wrong.

Apple already did this and rejected the idea, and HERE's the Patent from SIX YEARS AGO to prove it:

http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2010/08/the-mother-lode-welcome-to-the-imac-touch.html

Yeah, and during the time of that patent Apple was ahead of its game and Jobs was still alive. So what? It isn't the iMac that's the problem here, it's Apple's general attitude toward future possibilities and the thing that they are indicating in issuing these kinds of statements. If the future of apple touch devices is not the full implementation of osx, then what is it? Are we to infer that the future, according to apple, is ios and icloud? It's just bad publicity to issue these kinds of statements. They should just block these questions by saying something like: "At the moment, we have no plans to introduce touch on osx devices like the imac, but we are open to different possibilities in the future". That would've been better than dismissing it completely.

 

[ForkHandles]

ok how about a little bit of truth, instead of apple's lies. here's what's ACTUALLY going on:

1. if apple releases touch screen macbooks, there will be an immediate need/demand for keyboards that fold over so that the screen itself can become the interface (ie: it turns into a tablet). The key is that , unlike other demands (such as more ram) the outcry for this will be far and wide and impossible for apple to ignore.
2. Once apple takes this step, as they inevitably will have to given the significant demand that will be generated for it, it will eat into ipad sales.
3. Because: the product that apple refuses to make , the one that the market is craving for, is a super high end ipad that can double as a laptop. These are WILDLY popular on the windows side. It's what saved the surface from being a dinosaur relegated to history to actually being a viable competitor to the macbook/ipad.

But what comes next is the REAL reason apple refuses to make a touchscreen macbook:

4. But here's the end game that's the even bigger picture that apple is desperately hoping people don't figure out: if a mobile mac ever becomes touch ready, and especially if the screen folds over and it starts to generate an ipad like feel, it will immediately become painfully obvious to the masses that they have full access/root access to their device if they buy a mac, but very limited access to their device and its hard drive if they buy an ipad, which will only further diminish ipad sales. It will also create painfully uncomfortable questions for apple, by both the media and the public at large, about why it's necessary to prevent root access to a mobile touch screen device like an ipad, but allow it on a macbook.

Schiller is a complete and total liar. He always has been. This has nothing to do with whether or not a touch screen is viable. It has everything to do with perpetuating this ridiculous ruse that you should not have root access to your ipad or mobile device.

And with this move, along with the stupidity of a "pro" laptop that doesn't go beyond 16 gigs of ram (and with the removal of 17" laptops, the devaluation of the pro line in general, the removal of the xServe, the demotion of osX server and so much more...), people are finally starting to ask, in large quantities: who the hell does apple think they are to decide what is right for us or what we need?

indeed, apple, who the hell do you think you are?

I'm with Phil.

I can see the advantages of a touchscreen MacBook Pro but.....eeeeuuuugh...... those fingerprints all over that beautiful screen would kill the experience for me.

If you are a Wacom type guy then carry on with that or buy an iPad Pro.

I understand your point about competing with its own product line but if iPad sales are dying then Apple would be keener still to supersede it with a MacBook Touch Screen Pro line.

I guess ultimately the market will decide whether apples choices for what we need are correct.

 

[diipii]

Apple's in a hole and still digging.

 

[asiga]

Come on, Phil, you are trying to divert attention from the true point: Apple interest in iOS dominance. The point isn't that the Mac has a touch screen or not. The point is that Apple wants the future of computers to be an iPad in laptop-like position with a portable keyboard. Now that's the true point, and if you really want to explain us why the Mac cannot have a touch screen, please do it in context, tell us who believes an iPad in vertical position is ergonomic, tell us why do you want the future of computers to be the iPad, and then it will become obvious that this "the Mac cannot have a touch screen" thing is just a distraction while you phase out the Mac.

 

[Lancer]

I see touch screen on the iMac and MacBooks as another way to interact with the device, it doesn't mean you ditch the KB or mouse. Look at it this way, there is loads I do with my KB I can also do with my touch pad, it doesn't mean I use the KB short cuts for everything it just means I have the option to use the KB the save a file (which is quicker) or the touch pad and go up to the File menu and such.

 

[niun]

So everyone who buys an iMac should have to buy a touchscreen as well?

iMac Pro?
[doublepost=1479202541][/doublepost]

If you are a Wacom type guy then carry on with that or buy an iPad Pro.

You do realise there is an alternative now right.. Users now have a third option which breaks them away from Apple entirely.
Once you're out there is very little point in going back.

 

[MisterK]

Why does it have to be compromised? Compromised how, exactly? We're not talking about taking away functionality here (like Apple often does in some way, shape, or form). Were talking about adding another option. Imagine swiping between desktops from the screen (where your eyes are), or zooming in precisely where you want to, instead of having to move your hand to the trackpad, postition the cursor on the right location, then zoom in. There's no need to turn macOS into iOS, but you can build in some multitouch functionality where it would be useful.


The problem is that (almost) EVERYBODY using Windows 10 is using touchscreens. And what you call "impractical", and a "compromised experience", is now the norm on the PC side. Good luck bringing these people to the Mac. Microsoft is bringing in the future, now.



Well, we already know. Phil and Tim have been clear: More of the same, but thinner and in Pink, I mean, Rose-Gold.

This'll hurt Apple in the long-term. Not with its fans, so much, but switchers will be in decline.

The compromise is mostly with touch targets. If you're building for touch, the entire OS needs to be chunkier. You lose the productivity gains that you get when the system is built around the precision of a cursor. What about mouse-overs and tool tips? There are no over-states with touch.

The only useful implementation of touch on a laptop I've seen is scrolling. I have a feeling that most of the fawning over that is because PC makers make such awful trackpads. How much are people zooming in on their laptops on a regular basis?

I get what you're saying but I don't think touch screen laptops are the future. Microsoft is throwing everything they can at the PC, but it's because they lost the mobile war. Apple has a very healthy PC business and a very healthy Touch business. They can be more selective about what the optimal experience on both is.

Apple builds covetable luxury devices. The thinness and the finish is absolutely a selling point. When you imagine the future, do you picture thicker devices with ports or do you imagine wireless thin pieces of glass?

 

[niun]

When you imagine the future, do you picture thicker devices with ports or do you imagine wireless thin pieces of glass?

I imagine AR and VR.

 

[2457248]

Pro users don't want a touch bar, at least give us a 15" option with no touch bar.

i'd buy one immediately
[doublepost=1479206372][/doublepost]

You've never used the touch bar on the new MacBook Pro have you... I have and I'm already seeing some of the benefits and potential applications in the future.

you don't know how i use my laptop, you can't speak for everyone.

 

[artistef]

Can you imagine a 27-inch iMac where you have to reach over the air to try to touch and do things?
Can you imagine a digital drawing board? I've been waiting for Apple to come up with one since I bought my first Quadra - and now Microsoft gets there first with the Surface Studio - not thinking different enough Schiller! They killed off the versatility of the MacPro, and iMac design has been static for ages. Depressingly a Surface Studio Hackintosh looks like the best way forward right now.

 

[MacBH928]

I think instead of substituting the touch screen as the main input method, just like the keyboard and mouse there might be some things that are done better through touch screen. So you have 3 options, I don't currently use just my mouse or just my keyboard.

Am sorry to say Apple actually made the lamp iMac with adjustable screen a decade before the surface, it was amazing! They should bring it back!

 

[Digital Dude]

Exactly. I played with this at the microsoft store. It seems like Microsoft did an excellent job with it, and the dial is just icing on the cake.

Agreed! I had the full-up version in the online shopping cart but held off. If provisioned with an SSD, I would have purchased it.

I do agree with Apple that a touch screen on a conventional laptop screen (non-removable display) would be a pain after a few minutes. I don't agree with the ports on the MBP. It was a colossal marketing screw-up and could've been mitigated had they included a couple of dongle's, and explained their logic during the event. When I read Apple's response, it comes across (to me) as petulant and condescending.

 

[christian_koehler]

Au contraire... the problem with the Surface Pro 4 is Windows 10. It is a pain to navigate with touch controls. The touch keyboard is awful compared to any of the mobile OS solutions. .... I think it is more likely that we will see better software become available for iOS (Such as the Affinity programs) before we'll see hardware and OS become ideal for said form factor. Currently the iPad Pro is a far superior tablet and the Macbook or Surfacebook are far superior laptops. I would have a hard time recommending the SP4 to anyone unless they
need a "premium" pen-enabled Windows tablet (speaking of niche...).

No, developers can create Windows applications with any user interface they want.
But iOS has limitations no third party developer can overcome.

Because of forced sandboxing Photoshop for iOS could not support third party plugins.
While that would be OK for some users, a digitl audio workstation that cannot use external plugins would be very limited.

You can drag a diagram from a spreadsheet into a desktop publishing program without turining it into a static, non editable image on Windows 3.1. You still cannot on iOS.

The closed nature of iOS prohibits developer tools, while Visual Studio runs well on the SP4.

Multitasking is still limited in iOS as is multi monitor use etc.

Its ok for phones or "consumer" tablets, but not for enthusiast/professional tools. An iPad that deserves the name "pro" should be based on OSX, not iOS. Of course OSX needs to be changed to be touch and pen friendly. But Apple had many years to do it.

I am not saying, Windows 10 or the Surface pro 4 are perfect. Nothing on earth is. But Apple does not offer a better solution.

 

[Victor Mortimer]

Phil is right.

While there are limited applications where a touchscreen is useful, the only place I've ever seen it be useful in a desktop computer is point of sale systems. There are a lot of Windoze laptops that have one, and do you know what happens with those? Most users will point at the screen, and sometimes they touch it. It confuses them when something happens, because they're just trying to point out something on the screen to somebody. Touchscreens aren't used on laptops, they aren't used on desktops, they're used on phones and tablets.

MicroSloth has come out with a gimmick touchscreen desktop, and it's stupid. People will buy a few of them, play with the touchscreen for a few days, and then go back to the mouse and keyboard.

Where Phil is wrong is not having new iMacs, Mac Pros, and Mac minis ready by now. We should have had three revisions of the Mac Pro since the trash can model was released, we've had none. That's unacceptable. The Mac mini has been around for two years, and is still crappier than the 2012 model, you can't even get a quad core or two hard drive model now. My clients need new servers, and I really don't want to have to build Hackintoshes for them, but if Apple doesn't do something soon, that's exactly what I'm going to have to do.

 

[kdarling]

Just as Android phones went massive* to accommodate LTE and combat poor battery life...

Not to take away from the rest of your thoughts, but just wanted to note that this was always a myth.

It was a bogus theory started by blogger John Gruber back in January 2012.

His resulting flawed prediction that by 2014 everyone would drop the idea of bigger screens, is humorous in retrospect, especially after Apple went big as well:

"If I’m right, we will start seeing smaller LTE Android handset sets a year or so from now, and the tech press will collectively forget the “bigger is inherently better” mindset that pervades phone reviews today."

 

[fred_el_capitan]

I think Apple should start considering macbook as an mobile device. It has almost same size screen as ipad pro 12,9. Therefore bring touch to all macbooks. Whereas continue to support non touch devices as imac and mac pro.

yes, i ever remember the first time, i showed my MacBookAir to different family members.
the first thing they did was each time : they put their fingers on the screen.

sometimes i take my MacBookAir in the train instead of my iPad mini,
(when my wife needs the Jamie Oliver app at home)
and i really miss the touchscreen when i look/scroll/resize/move at my pictures in "Photos"
(pictures of pages of my foreign language lessons, the most easy way to have them on "Photos")

yes, Apple, simply provide the last great MacBook ( www.apple.com/macbook ) running iOS and touchscreen.
that would be great.

and my wife could use at home on the MacBook the Jamie Oliver application...
and all the other nice iOS apps...

 

[peter2]

Heh, on a funny note, I went to the Surface pages on the Microsoft site and they have a page selling the Surface Book for students. Wow, these are some old students... they're certainly not college freshmen.
https://www.microsoft.com/surface/en-us/for-students

You might have missed that the text actually says: "Students, faculty, and staff" ;-)

And indeed, the Surface is hugely popular not only with students but also researchers I know. Somehow, it just makes sense to be able to take handwritten notes on a mobile device (without having to carry a notebook (for normal apps which do not exist on iOS) and an extra tablet just for handwriting).

No one (except Phil) is suggesting to remake OS X/macOS to a multi touch based OS like the iOS. Just add basic touch (primarily for stylus handwriting input) to the Mac hardware. And yes, at that point it makes sense to make the screen detachable and perhaps the whole ios could be run as a full-screen app. BTW, this could make sense even on a normal mac laptop - often times I would like to use an iOS app within OS X/macOS because simply the iOS app is better or an equivalent does not exist on macOS.

 

[ThunderMasterMind]

If I can use my Mac remotely on my iPad and get a perfect experience on a touch screen, there really isn't an excuse for a touch Mac. This really sounds quite ignorant, because they apparently didn't consider, ergonomics of the machine, touch friendliness of macOS (I've tested this and some concepts, and concluded that MacOS would be just fine as a touch OS), and expansion app devs could make to create the ultimate experience.

The only thing I could see people get annoyed about is the title bar buttons, and window action buttons being too small, but with the touch bar, I think that could be fixed easily. Think about that, using the touch screen on the Mac, performing gestures, then adjusting things and performing actions on the touch bar. It makes perfect sense to me. The touch bar would be like an alternative to the Microsoft dial on the Surface Studio.

 

[yegon]

Not to take away from the rest of your thoughts, but just wanted to note that this was always a myth.

It was a bogus theory started by blogger John Gruber back in January 2012.

His resulting flawed prediction that by 2014 everyone would drop the idea of bigger screens, is humorous in retrospect, especially after Apple went big as well:

"If I’m right, we will start seeing smaller LTE Android handset sets a year or so from now, and the tech press will collectively forget the “bigger is inherently better” mindset that pervades phone reviews today."

I'm totally with you on Grubers myopia, but is there any evidence that suggest they didn't need larger batteries for LTE though? My Note 1 had great battery life (except for drain) but was HSDPA+, so wasn't a suitable point of comparison.

Not saying I disagree with you given it's something I'd only read about, but Id always assumed larger batteries would be needed given the power requirements of LTE combined with pretty bad Android battery drain*.

*My work phones have all been Android and common to all is really poor battery usage in sleep. My current Samsung S5 barely gets used throughout the day yet is at 50% remaining regularly. Tried all the usual tricks, nothing helps.

 

[jerry16]

What exactly do you think Touch Bar is?
Apple looked desperately for a way to "innovate" again without doing what everybody else does and including a touch screen. I'm not an advocate of touch screen laptops either, but Touch Bar is way more ridiculous.

The distance between my hands and the Touch Bar is pretty much the same as between my hands and the screen, with the key difference that I have to look down to the Touch Bar instead of looking directly onto the display.

There is a reason that traditionell keyboards survived for decades now and that's not because everybody was too stupid to develop a Touch Bar. We want to look at our content while manipulating it and not down to our keyboard, which is possible due to the mechanical feedback provided by keys.

Both the traditional laptop concept and touch screen laptops provide better input methods than Touch Bar. Apple didn't change for making something better, they changed it for making something different, because they want to look like they are still creative innovators.

Haven't used the touch bar yet, so I'll reserve judgement until then. I have used touch screen laptops however and felt free to state my opinion. Excuse me for not forming an opinion on things I have no idea about. I'll try harder to be like the rest of the internet next time.