What would you be compromising by having the option to use a touchscreen if/when you want to?
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
What would you be compromising by having the option to use a touchscreen if/when you want to?
If not a touch screen, then make the MacBook and iMac stylus enabled. Then again, if you are going to make them stylus enabled, why not throw in touch as well...
Many creative professionals live by Cintiq monitors. I do believe this functionality built in would be received with open arms, even with a $500 premium over standard models.
Many creative professionals live by Cintiq monitors. I do believe this functionality built in would be received with open arms, even with a $500 premium over standard models.
Respectfully, I think that the stock fall is more of a PRSI reason than a "we're not doing touch screens on macOS one."
Apple is usually ahead of the curve and maybe too ahead of the curve this time. However, in a few years this will all be moot. I have already gone cable less and so the whole issue of ports and dongles means nothing to me. In a year or two this will be the same for everyone I suspect.
No, the stock is bleeding (like all tech sector stocks) because the US election still.
I have a touchscreen laptop, and I'm genuinely curious how you found it PAINFUL. When I want to use the touchpad and keyboard, it behaves just like any other Windows 10 computer. When I tap the screen, the menus automagically enlarge to make larger touch targets and it "just works". Far from painful, it's actually pleasant to use touch.
Oh right, and iPads don't need a stylus. Can I tell Phil Schiller how many times when I'm looking at the external screen of my MBP that I've reached up to touch it to do something. They were wrong about the stylus, and they are wrong about this too. If I could afford to buy all the replacement software I'd need for a Windows machine, I'd be out of the Mac world. About the only way I could accept this was if I could use my iPad as an imput device for the Mac.
Then buy a Surface Studio. That's what everybody's been talking about here. Apple have made it clear that their computer OS will not be touchscreens. It's partly why their trackpad technology is so good and miles above the competition. The trackpad gestures are far quicker and more fluid than touching the screen.
To those of you with short memories: touchscreen laptops are nothing new. They've been in the consumer market since Windows XP, or maybe even earlier. Everybody has claimed it'll be the future, but it's never quite taken off, and for good reason. Apple will have had prototypes of touchscreen iMacs since before they moved to Intel. But it wouldn't have been quicker, or more intuitive.
TL;DR: if you're insisting Apple should have gone the MS route, buy something else. I for one am happy they haven't pandered to people who want touchscreens.
If I used Twitter I would tweet his account saying "A touch screen Mac is absurd, but so was removing the MacBooks best feature MagSafe for an inferiour USB C connector" . Anybody game to take a jab? 
Only the small screen, low-end iMac model costs 1/3 of the Surface Studio. If you want to compare those machines, then you can only compare the high-end 27" iMacs, and then the price difference looks "slightly" different. Furthermore, the iMac does NOT cater to that "niche user base" you mentioned, which makes it a very unattractive choice for the people who are interested in the Surface Studio and what the Surface Studio actually offers them.
On another note... Following Schiller's logic, touch-screen based POS systems, that have been around since the early 1980s, don't make sense and should never have been invented. And when I look at pictures from the bridge of Steve Jobs' yacht, all those large iMacs would probably make A LOT more sense if they had touch screens and wouldn't need mice and keyboard. And what about kiosk systems in public areas? Oh, right. Let's just activate Siri on them, since that software works so well.
There are use cases where a touch screen on a large screen makes sense, even if it's in an upright position, and you don't need much imagination to find them. The executives at Apple simply don't think about desktop machines anymore because their focus rests solely on the mobile devices - and it shows in a very bad way.
If I am willing to drop another $1000 to $2000 just for a new workspace AND be tweaking the environment all the time. Sounds like a wast for doing change for the sake of change.
I don't think you have actually contemplated using the Surface Studio in real life but you do like yelling over and over again "Have you seen the Surface Studio?" Yes, I have (at a MS store). It is a well design and very narrowly targeted niche device. It does not target any of my uses cases and I am not in the niche.
Enough of this. Apple's continuing insistence that desktops do not need touch is a hypocrisy given the iPad Pro and its docking keyboard.
Apple's is continuing trying to excuse the lack of innovation and foresight from their company, and it is getting tiresome and a bit worrisome.
I UNDERSTAND that touch on a desktop if it is forced as 100% the only user interaction is not ideal and horrible for user experience, but this belies why Apple insists that iPad Pro is a professional tool with its docking keyboard that requires a person to have to reach out and touch a vertical display in order to do anything with it as the ONLY option? Apple needs to stop sales of the iPad Pro docking keyboard if they think touch on a vertical desktop screen is absurd.
I work for a company and our software product allows the use of touch screens on a Windows Desktop because the customers want this. Period, end of story. Our customers value touch on a desktop because they have a specific use-case that promotes efficiency and good user experience. One could argue that why don't we offer an iPad solution, but our customers need higher performance than is possible in an iPad, even the "pro", along with a much larger screen. They use touch on a 24" or larger screen. It's a niche market, for sure, but obviously our customers can't use Mac's for this purpose, so Apple is losing thousands in possible Mac sales just from our customer base alone. I am positive there are numerous reasons to use touch on a desktop and millions of potential customers that would value a touch iMac.
Also consider the growing market of digital whiteboards, Microsoft and now Google have both adopted their operating systems to support touch AND digital inking on a large flat display. Microsoft can easily support any desktop application on this platform and it is highly usable as a digital whiteboard and presenter of other Microsoft and 3rd party desktop applications. Again a niche market, but this is a growing market of potentially millions of units.
Apple is pissing away a lot of new potential markets and being bullheaded about drawing a line in the sand they have already stepped over and failed at. iPad Pro is one of their worst selling products next to the Apple Watch.
Phil Schiller is an idiot of epic proportion, on par with Steve Ballmer, for being pig headed and narrow minded and limiting the potential of their customers out of some ridiculous spite for their competition. Tim Cook thought Surface Pro was a joke, the Surface brand continues to evolve and has taken a big chunk out of MacBooks sales. Apple is becoming a joke in the computer marketplace with these kinds of statements.
"We can't innovate so it is absurd that others are doing what WE CAN'T DO!", this is the message Apple is pushing out through Schiller. Apple refuses to invest serious money into the Mac and macOS brand and it should send shockwaves to investors that Apple is not a company for the future by hanging onto things they have done in the past.
"Shut up and innovate!", should be Apple's new business strategy, they obviously have **** all over their "Think Differently" origins.
Apple's is continuing trying to excuse the lack of innovation and foresight from their company, and it is getting tiresome and a bit worrisome.
I UNDERSTAND that touch on a desktop if it is forced as 100% the only user interaction is not ideal and horrible for user experience, but this belies why Apple insists that iPad Pro is a professional tool with its docking keyboard that requires a person to have to reach out and touch a vertical display in order to do anything with it as the ONLY option? Apple needs to stop sales of the iPad Pro docking keyboard if they think touch on a vertical desktop screen is absurd.
I work for a company and our software product allows the use of touch screens on a Windows Desktop because the customers want this. Period, end of story. Our customers value touch on a desktop because they have a specific use-case that promotes efficiency and good user experience. One could argue that why don't we offer an iPad solution, but our customers need higher performance than is possible in an iPad, even the "pro", along with a much larger screen. They use touch on a 24" or larger screen. It's a niche market, for sure, but obviously our customers can't use Mac's for this purpose, so Apple is losing thousands in possible Mac sales just from our customer base alone. I am positive there are numerous reasons to use touch on a desktop and millions of potential customers that would value a touch iMac.
Also consider the growing market of digital whiteboards, Microsoft and now Google have both adopted their operating systems to support touch AND digital inking on a large flat display. Microsoft can easily support any desktop application on this platform and it is highly usable as a digital whiteboard and presenter of other Microsoft and 3rd party desktop applications. Again a niche market, but this is a growing market of potentially millions of units.
Apple is pissing away a lot of new potential markets and being bullheaded about drawing a line in the sand they have already stepped over and failed at. iPad Pro is one of their worst selling products next to the Apple Watch.
Phil Schiller is an idiot of epic proportion, on par with Steve Ballmer, for being pig headed and narrow minded and limiting the potential of their customers out of some ridiculous spite for their competition. Tim Cook thought Surface Pro was a joke, the Surface brand continues to evolve and has taken a big chunk out of MacBooks sales. Apple is becoming a joke in the computer marketplace with these kinds of statements.
"We can't innovate so it is absurd that others are doing what WE CAN'T DO!", this is the message Apple is pushing out through Schiller. Apple refuses to invest serious money into the Mac and macOS brand and it should send shockwaves to investors that Apple is not a company for the future by hanging onto things they have done in the past.
"Shut up and innovate!", should be Apple's new business strategy, they obviously have **** all over their "Think Differently" origins.
Depends on use case I suspect. For example - my laptop was going to be my primary/only computer. Which means I needed to connect my iTunes external drive, my "misc" external drive, power cord and possibly external monitor.
I agree that in a few years it will matter less. But I needed to buy for "today."
Apple's senior vice president of worldwide marketing, Phil Schiller, recently continued the company's stance against turning its desktop and laptop devices into touch screen-enabled computers, which some customers believe could be advantageous additions to the macOS platform. With the new addition of the "Touch Bar" on the MacBook Pro line, seen by some as a potential step towards a full-on Mac touch screen, many Apple executives have come out saying this isn't the case.
Speaking with Backchannel, Schiller has now stated that a multi-touch display on a MacBook "wouldn't be enough," because it would begin a divide between MacBook and iMac. But, if the company implemented the same touch screen on a desktop it would "become absurd," due to the iMac's main source of user interaction -- the keyboard and mouse or trackpad -- residing too far away from where users would raise their hand to interact with the screen. Ultimately, Schiller said this line of thought is "lowest common denominator thinking."
All the same, Schiller confirmed that Apple has tried out touch screens on a Mac in its labs over the last few years and the company "absolutely come away with the belief that it isn't the right thing to do," he said. "Our instincts were correct." When asked whether the Touch Bar was the beginning of a larger influence by iOS on the macOS platform, Schiller said this was not the case.
In regards to the MacBook Pro's switch to Thunderbolt 3/USB-C ports, and the subsequent frustration by some users who fear needing to purchase and keep track of many dongles, Schiller said that "we're absolutely more sure than ever that we've done the right thing," because of the standard that USB-C is set to become. For context regarding the amount of cables available, MacRumors recently collected some USB-C adapters and dongles available from Apple and third-party accessory makers into a roundup.
Ultimately, Schiller said that the "fundamental difference" between the MacBook Pro's naysayers and fans is divided between those who have not yet interacted with the laptop, and those who have. Thankfully, many more will be able to get a chance to use the MacBook Pro and Touch Bar as the first round of shipments have begun arriving to pre-order customers today.
Article Link: Phil Schiller Says Apple Tested and Rejected Touch Screen Macs, Finding It 'Absurd' on a Desktop
Literally nothing I said had anything to do with my desire to buy a Studio. The entire point is that it can be done and it can be done well. Good grief.
And those didn't make sense until laptops like the Surface became available. And now the Surface Studio makes touch screen on a desktop make sense.
Buy something else isn't a conclusion or even logic. What's being discussed is Phil's comment. Microsoft has done it ... in a useable way. So the point is that it's very much possible, not that Apple should or shouldn't do it.
How do you charge your iphone?
How do you use all your pro equipment
Yes, this is what I see... macOS and iOS always being separate, but there's no reason they can't live on the same device. Separate the screen from the Mac laptop and it becomes an iOS device, with access to all of the same files, and becomes touch-screen enabled.
It doesn't "just work". When you have custom design enterprise apps with mixed metaphors of design, trust me, it is PAINFUL. When you mix things like mouse over and then HAVE to do swipe like gestures and pinch to zoom on a desktop IT IS PAINFUL. Not a LAPTOP but a DESKTOP.
Who cares if you don't need it? And again, the point isn't suggesting that Apple do anything ... the point is that it's possible to do in a useable way ... so Phil's comments are silly.
If a Surface is better for you, then get a Surface. Unless the discussion centres around the operating system. Then why can't a third party manufacturer create a touchable screen that folds down to that PERFECT angle, yet connects to a Mac? Why does Apple need to do everything? Contact some screen manufacturers.