Samsung Introduces New 'Haptic' Touch Phone

[winterspan]

I don't like haptic feedback- it doesn't seem right sometimes. Maybe if the click sensation is more subtle, but on my bosses Alpine GPS head unit, it feels like my finger is being shocked when I press the screen.

I completely agree. I've used this "haptic" tech before on an Verizon LG Voyager. It just feels like a little zing on your finger when you hit a button. I find it rather annoying actually. Now, I don't believe the LG Voyager implementation could change the vibration depending on the command/button, that would make it slightly more appealing in my mind, but still nothing I miss on my iPod Touch.

Now I'm also not sure this is the same technology as the Voyager, it sounds as if this is more advanced. Honestly, though, I think this vibration-on-touch is a really weak implementation of a haptic system for touch screens. I'm would imagine Apple could and probably will in the future pull off something truly extraordinary in the "haptic-touch" area.

By the way, wasn't there an article on one of the tech sites (or maybe here on MR) about a flat display based haptic technology that replicated the "click" sensation of a plastic button?

 

[csimmons]

Haptic feedback would be useful for no looking operation as well. It would be good to get some confirmation that you did something without having to look at the screen. *glares at wife looking at phone while driving*

Please explain how haptic feedback would be useful for no-look operation on a device with a smooth surface (the touchscreen) and a dynamic (always changing) UI.

 

[sjo]

Please explain how haptic feedback would be useful for no-look operation on a device with a smooth surface (the touchscreen) and a dynamic (always changing) UI.

the same way most people learn to type without looking at the keyboard, they feel it.

a haptic device has different feedback for different actions. so you don't have to look at the device to know where to press. neither would you need to look at the device to see what the press caused.

 

[dernhelm]

the same way most people learn to type without looking at the keyboard, they feel it.

a haptic device has different feedback for different actions. so you don't have to look at the device to know where to press. neither would you need to look at the device to see what the press caused.

A keyboard is a static device. The keys don't move around depending upon which app you happen to be in.

Haptic might be useful in the cases when you pick up your iPhone and KNOW what state it was going to be in. For instance, when the phone is ringing, a way to no-look sending the call on to voice mail and turn off the ringer all at once would be very nice.

I suppose you could argue that you generally know what state you're in when you've pressed the home button (although that doesn't always have immediate response). But haptic for the home screen? I'm supposed to feel around hoping to stumble upon the right feel for an app button? Doesn't seem all that valuable to me. But who knows, maybe I'd love it.

-R

 

[sdds]

iBrator

At the risk of being labeled immature: The pr0n industry might just take this technology up and make it marketable for the masses

Vibra Chat® - the favourite tool of travelling businessmen's wifes or the next level of juicy video chats...

 

[diamond.g]

Please explain how haptic feedback would be useful for no-look operation on a device with a smooth surface (the touchscreen) and a dynamic (always changing) UI.

The feedback could be used to let you know you clicked something. I am just trying to think of ways to get my wife to not look at the iPhone while driving.

Now just imagine living in a state where there are no hands free laws and having thousands of people with iPhone and trying to drive an talk (or even drive and text). Some sort of feedback should be better than none.

The only other cool thing I could think of is assigning a different kind of vibration for certain people. Kinda like how you can assign different ringtones.

 

[network23]

"One type of vibrate should be enough for anyone."

 

[radio893fm]

Sure, but in most cases, Apple tends to take an idea like this and put that additional layer of spit and polish on it that really turns it from a neat idea or a novelty into something indispensible. That's really all the iPod was. They took the mp3 player, which had been made by many others at that point and was barely more than a niche market, and did it the way it should have been done.

That additional layer is called fanboyism. Nothing more.

 

[JetStar]

The feedback could be used to let you know you clicked something.

That's obvious. But on a device where you constantly need to be looking at the screen to even know where the buttons are, haptic technology doesn't make sense.

 

[TheSlush]

Um, yeah but...

Yeah, and the iPhone would not have appeared if this thing didn't appear first:

That doesn't that make the iPhone a copy. Its called technology.

Point taken. But you cannot seriously be comparing the MAJOR (24-year) advancements between the FIRST cell phone and the iPhone, with the MINOR (1-year) differences between the iPhone and that Samsung phone which is an obvious knockoff. I mean, painfully obvious. (I hardly think one can even use the term "advancement" here.)

Take note, people: The only thing less rational than fanboyism is anti-fanboyism.

 

[sleepingworker]

... with the MINOR (1-year) differences between the iPhone and that Samsung phone which is an obvious knockoff. I mean, painfully obvious. (I hardly think one can even use the term "advancement" here.)

I'm just happy that Apple raised the bar with the iP and that other companies are now having to push their design/tech people to try and keep up (or maybe one day surpass) the iPhone. It is only a good thing when other companies compete with Apple - both for those that love Apple and for those that hate Apple. Almost all great design, ideas, and art look both backwards and forwards IMHO.

 

[mogzieee]

since i cant afford an iPhone this one looks good...

 

[Harmless Abuse]

Actually, if this were available in the States, I'd buy it., or perhaps I'll get an unlocked one.

I'm kind of sick of the "Oooooh it's an iPhone rip-off!" BS, because Apple wasn't the first one to make a touch-screen smartphone.

I like the iPhone, and think it's a nice phone, but for the price, you don't get what you pay for in this case.

The phone just looks good. The phone isn't quite a smartphone, and it's sad when my RAZR can do more than the iPhone... All it's missing is an oversized touchscreen.

If this is quad-band, I think I might ask my cousin living in Korea to find me an unlocked one honestly. Samsung can make nice phones, and the haptic feedback can really make a difference. With haptic, you have more of a response when tapping a command. I like the sensation of a physical button, but aesthetically speaking, a physical button is not always as appealing.

 

[Intarweb]

That's obvious. But on a device where you constantly need to be looking at the screen to even know where the buttons are, haptic technology doesn't make sense.

Different vibrations for different buttons. What's so hard to comprehend? It's perfectly viable for hands free operation where as the iPhone is impossible to use sans looking, a hap device will make it a possibility.

Don't worry, Apple will copy it and you'll praise it as the second coming of Jesus.

 

[sleepingworker]

The phone just looks good. The phone isn't quite a smartphone, and it's sad when my RAZR can do more than the iPhone... All it's missing is an oversized touchscreen.

I've had a RAZR for about 3 years and although I love the design as far as cell phones go, I find the interface old and unintuitive. I don't own an iP (yet) but have loved searching the web, watching videos, etc. on my friends iP's. I don't think of the iP as just a phone, but more as an ultra mini computer and web device.

Since I own the RAZR, if you would, please enlighten me as to all the things it can do that the iP can't and why you prefer it. Thank you in advance.

 

[diamond.g]

That's obvious. But on a device where you constantly need to be looking at the screen to even know where the buttons are, haptic technology doesn't make sense.

I would find it surprising that people don't have a good idea of where the buttons are on the phone. It isn't like every time you use the phone.app the buttons rearrange themselves.

But I will concede that it may not be possible.

 

[DaveGee]

The million dollar question... Will it vibrate to let me know its vibrating?!

Big battery drain if you ask me... (yea I know, nobody asked me).

Dave

 

[gwangung]

Remember, it's features and the system to use those features that's important. That's ALWAYS been Apple's strategy.

This stuff is useless if there's isn't a clean, consistent way to use 'em. That takes skull work. And if Apple does it well, the paens they garner will be totally justified.

 

[Intarweb]

But I will concede that it may not be possible.

Yes it is and I stated how above. Don't concede, he's wrong and/or unable to look at how the technology can, and is, being used. I guess since it's not in the iPhone it can't be possible.....*rolleyes*

 

[Syrus28]

Point taken. But you cannot seriously be comparing the MAJOR (24-year) advancements between the FIRST cell phone and the iPhone, with the MINOR (1-year) differences between the iPhone and that Samsung phone which is an obvious knockoff. I mean, painfully obvious. (I hardly think one can even use the term "advancement" here.)

Take note, people: The only thing less rational than fanboyism is anti-fanboyism.

Actually, people are calling it a Prada knock-off.

It has features the iPhone doesn't: 3G, MMS, video recording, etc that would qualify it as an advancement [however little].

I just don't get this mentality that anything that comesafter an Apple product is reduced to a knock-off. Heck, the Prada came out 4 months before the iPhone. The idea of an all-touch phone were indeed out there before Apple.

 

[benpatient]

only read the first couple of pages worth of comments about this, but guys, you're missing the point completely.

when you put your finger on the iphone, you have to look at it to make sure your finger is in the right spot.

a haptic display can tell you, just like a real-life keyboard does, through your fingers, that you have your finger on a button instead of on say a photo.

the vibrations trick your skin into sensing things like texture and pressure. For example, a solid screen that when you put your finger on it and rub, feels (if you close your eyes) like a piece of sand paper. These are very, very tiny vibrations that simulate various non-vibration "feelings." This isn't a glorified dual-shock controller...there's an article about haptics, and haptic displays, in the current Popular Mechanics. I was just reading about it a couple of days ago and thinking how much it was going to change the way we do things...

 

[benpatient]

Point taken. But you cannot seriously be comparing the MAJOR (24-year) advancements between the FIRST cell phone and the iPhone, with the MINOR (1-year) differences between the iPhone and that Samsung phone which is an obvious knockoff. I mean, painfully obvious. (I hardly think one can even use the term "advancement" here.)

Take note, people: The only thing less rational than fanboyism is anti-fanboyism.

Haptics will have more of an impact on your life in the next 20 years than Apple computer ever will...

Guess what a youtube video can't show you...what it feels like to touch fur or water or leather or brushed aluminum...

 

[sleepingworker]

only read the first couple of pages worth of comments about this, but guys, you're missing the point completely.

when you put your finger on the iphone, you have to look at it to make sure your finger is in the right spot.

a haptic display can tell you, just like a real-life keyboard does, through your fingers, that you have your finger on a button instead of on say a photo.

the vibrations trick your skin into sensing things like texture and pressure. For example, a solid screen that when you put your finger on it and rub, feels (if you close your eyes) like a piece of sand paper. These are very, very tiny vibrations that simulate various non-vibration "feelings." This isn't a glorified dual-shock controller...there's an article about haptics, and haptic displays, in the current Popular Mechanics. I was just reading about it a couple of days ago and thinking how much it was going to change the way we do things...

Would you post the article if online? Then in a virtual keyboard for example, where we have bumps for the f and j keys. there would be some subtle feedback for finger placement?

 

[elcid]

So how long do you sit there to wait for the feedback?
Having to discern the specific vibration combination from 22 possible ones may take longer than practical.

Not True. Less then a second or two.

My cell phone does a dash dash dash, lasts shorter than a ring tone and its done before I can get it out of my pocket.

 

[TheSlush]

Haptics will have more of an impact on your life in the next 20 years than Apple computer ever will...

Oh good, well if you could also let me know what stocks to invest in, what lottery numbers to pick, and the date of my own death then I'll be all set.