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.
So why no iMac touch?
- Thread starter fusionid
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
can't find the reference right now, but Jobs said something to the effect that they prototyped it and it was just uncomfortable using a touch screen on a screen like that. Holding up your arms, etc...
arn
arn
I'm using a 27" display and habitually have it just about at arm's length away, so it would be very uncomfortable to use as a touchscreen.
Maybe, with retina displays (that would stand closer viewing), you could re-think the way you used it - have the screen closer, and maybe flat on the desk. like a giant laptop.
However, although touch screens a great for handhelds, I've never felt the need for one on a desktop or laptop, apart from a few niche uses (a Wacom-style stylus might be good for graphics work). I think the whole touchscreen push on PCs was part of Microsoft's failed Windows 8 experiment to use the same UI on tablet and touchscreen.
Frankly, I would find a touch screen even on my MacBook to be cumbersome.
I have an easy to show this doesn't work, especially something the size of the 27" iMac. Try going to a Best Buy and trying an HP TouchSmart AIO(or whatever they call it now) and see how long your arm lasts before falling off.
think of the cleaning, the fingerprint marks! *dies*
The ergonomics of a touch screen iMac would suck; as would all the fingerprints.
I use touch screens at work to operate equipment using Windows. It is impossible to keep clean, the screens show wear with time and sometimes you have to hit the screen 2-3 times to get it to respond. Would never want it for a Mac.
I'm not sure if there's a "5k" version yet, but I've tried the Troll Touch TrollCover and TrollFrame on "normal" iMacs and they were pretty slick - and since they're overlays, they're user-removable - touch screen solutions IMHO. I'm not a customer, but one of my fabricators has one in his shop, under a dust hood, and he seems pretty happy with it. The maker is in Weed, and I just like the name of that town... 
This subject has "come and gone" several times over the past several years.
Apple -has- a line of "touch devices".
I suspect the iMac is never going to be one of them.
Apple -has- a line of "touch devices".
I suspect the iMac is never going to be one of them.
I don't hope so and I'm certainly not interested. A desktop with a touchscreen is crazy and is a recipe for RSI. Apple has a Magic Trackpad for people who want some touch control.
And he also said that using a stylus with a tablet was 'yuk'
And here's a few more:
Opinions can change, especially with advances in technology. Jobs was a genius, and part of that was he was willing to change his mind. His words should not be taken as gospel.
I happen to like using a touchscreen Windows 10 device for certain tasks. Not all the time for sure, but it has its place. Everybody is different and have their own particular preferences.
I couldn't imagine anyone using a 21 to 27 inch screen as their desktop, smudging the crap out of it and being happy with it, coupled with tired arms just to do a few cute swipes and points here and there. Get a trackpad.
Think gesture more than touch (Minority report stylee), so you would keep your hands close and natural and made small movements to control what's happening onscreen. Everything else is (reliably) voice controlled.
This would be my vision for the iMac within 10 years, keyboards and mice are just so Victorian.
This would be my vision for the iMac within 10 years, keyboards and mice are just so Victorian.
I doubt most creative artists would use a touch screen on a desktop machine. They often use a Wacom tablet over a mouse because of the extra control, force touch and good ergonomics. So many prefer the digitizer tablet to a mouse, which itself is ergonomically much better than a touch screen for sustained work. Going to a touch screen would be two steps backward for production artistic work.
There are a few cases where a touch screen would be OK but much more is involved than the screen itself. The entire existing OS X software and API system is designed for keyboard and mouse event handling. The existing OS X app catalog are all designed for that. All that would require redesign for touch to work properly, then a delay to get new touch-aware OS X apps out -- just to benefit a few edge cases.
It's true you can crudely remap some touch events to keyboard and mouse actions, e.g, use touch on a Windows tablet to run a Win32 "desktop" app which wasn't designed for touch. However it is stopgap measure for an app which wasn't designed for that style of interaction and it does not present a refined user experience.
If they offered an iMac with a touchscreen at a remotely reasonable price, I would buy one the day it came out. And I don't EVER buy computer equipment, iPhones, or anything when it comes out.
The amount of productivity I would gain and options that would open up would be astounding. Mice, trackpads, even the magic trackpad, are not a replacement for a touchscreen.
I work in entertainment lighting. Pretty much every major console these days is built around a touch interface. I've been using them for years and years. Both on the consoles themselves and using PC all-in-one systems. My arm never wore out from using a touchscreen too much. I never got extremely annoyed by fingerprints. I'm looking to build my own system right now, and want an iMac to be at the heart of it so that I can have two external monitors (which no PC all-in-one has to my knowledge), and so that I can boot in either PC or Mac. But, without buying expensive external hardware, that option is pretty much dead. So, it looks like I will have to use a PC and settle for one external.
It honestly baffles me how many people are fighting against a touchscreen iMac. it often seems like they think that if you have a touchscreen, then you can't have a keyboard or a mouse, which is simply ludicrous. But, it often comes back to "if Apple says no, then that must be the way!"
The amount of productivity I would gain and options that would open up would be astounding. Mice, trackpads, even the magic trackpad, are not a replacement for a touchscreen.
I work in entertainment lighting. Pretty much every major console these days is built around a touch interface. I've been using them for years and years. Both on the consoles themselves and using PC all-in-one systems. My arm never wore out from using a touchscreen too much. I never got extremely annoyed by fingerprints. I'm looking to build my own system right now, and want an iMac to be at the heart of it so that I can have two external monitors (which no PC all-in-one has to my knowledge), and so that I can boot in either PC or Mac. But, without buying expensive external hardware, that option is pretty much dead. So, it looks like I will have to use a PC and settle for one external.
It honestly baffles me how many people are fighting against a touchscreen iMac. it often seems like they think that if you have a touchscreen, then you can't have a keyboard or a mouse, which is simply ludicrous. But, it often comes back to "if Apple says no, then that must be the way!"
Personally I don't want the compromise in UI for touch and cursor. Microsoft is finally getting it down with Windows 10. If OS X went through that I would just switch to Windows.
I don't care if they change OS X at all. It's been pretty much the same for 14 years as it is. I just want the ability to use touch on the screen in apps that are designed for it. And no, an iPad is not the answer.