Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Windows Goes Multi-Touch

I think this is the direction all things will eventually go, but not by making the screen multi-touch. It makes it too messy, and looking down isnt that natural.

I'd like to see multi-touch on the keyboard. Get rid of the keys, and replace it with an actual screen. This display can change depending on what you are doing. For typing, touch keyboard. For photo manipulation, a grid?? Not thought about it any great depth :p

On a slightly different note, despite it being nice to see Apple with a bit of real competition on the multi-touch front.... Microsoft??

In my head, PC's are used for the following:

-Word processing, spreadsheets etc
-education
-business
-internet
-gaming

Now I truly believe if mac did this they would put in pointless but awesome gimmicks (cover flow on iphone anyone?), which would be fine, because thats just what Mac does (and make things so much simpler and cleaner with the help of quicksilver ;) ). But what exactly would Microsoft do with it? except make the OS even pricier or provide even more options to further confuse those that are not of a technical mind.

Not convinced really.

Dan
 
I hope we get some details about the next version of the Mac operating system at WWDC. If so, I'd like to see a demo that includes multi-touch so we can see how Apple's and Microsoft's products compare with each other.
 
I haven't read the entire thread so some of this may be repeated.

I do NOT want to see Mac OS X go multitouch. Current implementations (at this time) are inefficient and will unnecessarily burden the CPU/GPU. Multi-touch, IMO, is only reasonable for MIDs and PMPs.

This is why I am interested in a bigger iPhone/Always-connected MID/PMP. Give me a 7" multi-touch slate that can connect over 3G/802.11n and has the same iPhone OS and I will be in heaven. That slate form-factor would replace my laptop in my living room and could just have my Mac Pro for real computing.

Hickman
 
NT1440 said:
i think jobs is more than aware that as it stands currently, touch as a MAIN feature for a computer is useless
Click to expand...

I'm sure once Apple announces it as a main feature you'll be raising it as the second coming of, Jesus.

All OS's are heading in this direction.
 
DMann said:
Yesterday, SP1. Still slower than XP, S-L-O-W boot time - way too bloated, period, UAC is pathetic, (yes, I am aware it can be disabled) a large number of apps which run on XP do not run properly on Vista - many compatibility issues. 90% of those 90% which have Vista pre-installed have been already well acclimated to having computer issues, and will thus put up with it. It is simply not true that consumers choose a PC because it has any incarnation of Windows on it - they do so to get on-line, buy what their friends and family already have, and to run software used at work. Incidentally, I do not recall seeing any lines outside of stores on the day Vista was released as we witness with OS X releases.
Click to expand...

Can I just say that I bought a £399/$787 Samsung laptop with Windows Vista Home Premium last week and after I installed a lot of applications e.g. CS3, Office 07 and lots of small apps the laptop was still fast and the boot-time was excellent. I think UAC is a good thing for security although I understand that it is a nagging tool. Most applications run fine on Vista over a year after it was released but I'm sure there are some that don't. I think Microsoft were wrong in the sense of the system requirements for Vista e.g. 128MB dedicated graphics, at least 1GB RAM when you actually need about 2GB for it to even start running smooth which is unacceptable, however, system requirements aside- I think it is an acceptable product, not exceptional- acceptable. I have never received any issues with Vista on the machines I have with it, no crashing, no viruses, no compatibility as the samsung laptop comes with a DVD full of Vista programs and drivers. Microsoft should have done better with Vista but it is not as bad as people are making out. I think Leopard is a great os and I use it daily, however, from looking around there are still people with problems e.g. airport problems but just because I don't suffer these problems it doesn't mean no-one else does as is evident from the Mac OS X section of these forums.
 
AidenShaw said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-touch

"Multi-touch technology dates back to 1982, when the University of Toronto developed the first finger pressure multi-touch display.

The same year, Bell Labs and Murray Hill published what is believed to be the first paper discussing touch-screen based interfaces.

In 1984 Bell Labs engineered a touch screen that could manipulate images. The same year Microsoft began research in the area.

A significant breakthrough occurred in 1991, when Pierre Wellner published a paper on his multi-touch “Digital Desk”, which supported multi-finger and pinching motions."​

25 years of multi-touch history, then the Iphone.
Click to expand...

It's not who does it first, but who does it right first.
 
I did not take the time to read all these posts.... Microsoft has always been working on the new operating system - they said that Vista is not the anticipated LongHorn we all hoped for (well, until I bought my mac - not hoping anymore). It was a far cry because of delays and the trade commission making them take stuff out.

Anyway, I worked for a lab company were we implemented touch monitors. the problems:

1. Software not written for touch screens (boxes to small to accurately click the one you want, especially if multiple boxes are presented in close proximity).

2. Some people though the stylus was a pen (ok, we shipped styluses that really looked like pens) and walked off with it.

3. Styluses were lost and people used a pen (gouged the heck out of the screen).

4. Eww in a lab - I hated to get one returned that was in a lab - you do not know if the screen was in a clean room or not, and trust me some did not come back clean.

there are only a few places I think touch screens are good, if the software is written with big enough boxes:

1. Mobile devices.
2. Resturant terminals.
3. Point of Sale Kiosks
4. tablet PC's where I hace to draw on the screen (circle, highlight, etc) during a presentation.
5. Artists & Architechs who draw alot.

Other than that I do not see much use for them. While my macbook has some touch built into the track pad (2 finger swipe, rest thumb on poad and click to simulate right click, and a few others) - I find it awkward to use. I am much more productive when I plug in a USB 2 button mouse.

I even have trouble working with my palm centrino when I temporarily misplace the stylus (and even with the stylus, smudges are a constant battle). I could not see using a touch screen for typing. I worked with a programmer who touched his screen alot, when I had to look at something on this monitor - I cleaned it first so that I could see what was on the screen.

I do see some uses if implemented correctly, but not on the main screen for laptops and desktops.
 
I agree with you shervieux! This seems useless for me too. Why would I want to manage my photos like that? I don't want to play. I need computer for work.
 
Eraserhead said:
True, I've never used Coverflow on my iPod Touch, or on my Mac...
Click to expand...

Indeed, I have 3 Leopard-equipped Macs, and I've *never* used Finder's Coverflow mode on any of them. I don't really use Coverflow in iTunes either.

I can honestly say that I perfer the traditional list view (vertical orientation) on my iPod Touch over the Coverflow orientation.
 
Syrus28 said:
To be fair, all those PC sales would be non-existent without Windows on it. People are buying the computers to run Windows, not to look at the pretty touchpad.
Click to expand...

I am not sure about the statement that people buy the computer to run windows.

While you could be right, I would say that 75% of those people purchased the computer to run MS Office because that is the same software than at work, 10% friends told them to get a windows system 15% are gamers.

They are not looking forward to run windows, so windows it self was not the dream feature that sold them on the system. It was office, having a system like others that know, and the Games that so happens to run only on windows.

Most people could care less about the OS. The computer is a tool people want to use it as a tool, even if windows Linux or OSX. However people are a bit afraid of buying something expensive like office and then finding that it does not work well in the particular OS they have so they have a tendency to stick to an OS they know will run it. BY the way most people do not know or use 15% of their OS capabilities.
 
goosnarrggh said:
Indeed, I have 3 Leopard-equipped Macs, and I've *never* used Finder's Coverflow mode on any of them. I don't really use Coverflow in iTunes either.

I can honestly say that I perfer the traditional list view (vertical orientation) on my iPod Touch over the Coverflow orientation.
Click to expand...

+1

But CoverFlow is so ubercool, you know...

I hate it.

And anyway, is it just me, or do we see the same stuff every day shown when someone demos multitouch. There was a real lag in touch and reaction, if you ask me.

Guess that's why the piano was not played multitouch.

And honestly, I personally think it's a gimmick, and in no way useful. The current GUI scheme is perfect, esp. when used with a Tablet.
 
dwd3885 said:
What's funny is if Apple had demoed the EXACT SAME THING, the majority of you would say this is the coolest thing ever, all positive ratings, etc. You know there is still jealousy, hatred towards Microsoft whenever they do something and it gets bad pub here. Doesn't make much sense to me. Fanboys, you all seem like
Click to expand...

Apple doesn't show off technology in demos or in videos, it does it in commercial products, so that you and me can buy in the next week. And let me tell you, that's a big difference. Remember when SJ was asked last sept about multi-touch in the Mac; he answered "it is not an issue to discuss at this moment". Of course, they are working on that, but they won't show it until it is ready. And whenever it comes it will be live, and not in a shixxy video. Gates and Ballmer are nothing but opportunists, pretenders.

What I am still wondering is on how MS is going to do the multitouch thing if they don't do hardware?! If every PC manufacturer provides their own hardware, with different performance (the picture dragging in the video is really 70's), lattency, problems, etc., will they be able to make it? I don't think so. But anyway, at least they confirm that Apple is doing good, which is the first time I hear that from Ballmer.
 
Multitouch is cool on the iPhone, but I don't think I would really like it on a 13" screen. I'm sure some people would find a need for it. It just isn't something that I think I would use.
 
EagerDragon said:
I am not sure about the statement that people buy the computer to run windows.
Click to expand...

They don't, however the wouldn't buy the computer if it didn't have an OS and the de facto standard OS is Windows. When Ballmer is saying MS sell 270 million PCs that's what he's referring to - there simply wouldn't be a PC market if Windows wasn't available.

Although it would be more honest of him to say "We'll sell 270 million copies of our OS compared to Apple's 10 million".

Most people could care less about the OS. The computer is a tool people want to use it as a tool, even if windows Linux or OSX.
Click to expand...

Absolutely true. Most people - and corporations - want something that works, is familiar, well supported and lets them do what they want to do. Like it or not Windows delivers this which is why it's so utterly dominant.

However people are a bit afraid of buying something expensive like office and then finding that it does not work well in the particular OS they have so they have a tendency to stick to an OS they know will run it. BY the way most people do not know or use 15% of their OS capabilities.
Click to expand...

Exactly - most people don't care about OSX or Linux because they can do everything they want on Windows at a cheaper price. Leopard may be slightly better than Vista, Apple machines may be a bit more reliable than, say, a Dell but hardly anyone cares because the differences aren't enough to make them switch from something that is comfortable and familiar.

As for W7, too early to say what it'll deliver although the ability to use different interfaces is a good idea.
 
I like that things are going in this direction. I think it will fuel the whole "dockable" tablet computer. Take your comp out, mess with it in the living room, get some pics from your friend's phone/camera without having to move rooms, book movie tickets and then slide it back in on the way out...
 
Brian Hickman said:
I do NOT want to see Mac OS X go multitouch. Current implementations (at this time) are inefficient and will unnecessarily burden the CPU/GPU. Multi-touch, IMO, is only reasonable for MIDs and PMPs.
Click to expand...

But, won't mobile/tablet comps be a lot more powerful in a few years when/if multi-touch comes out?
 
flopticalcube said:
I don't want fingerprints on my screen.
Click to expand...

I do :D

Better fingerprints on your screen than footprints on your back!

Seriously, the mouse was not universally accepted (even ridiculed by some) when it was broadly introduced.

MultiTouch will not just change how we do things, it will change the kinds of things we do.

Things like manipulation of 3D objects in space-- that would be difficult or impossible with conventional UIs.
 
Roller said:
Touch and VR will continue to work their way into computer operating systems, but in an evolutionary fashion. The ergonomics of interacting with an interface by touching objects on a screen are very different from the mouse-and-keyboard approach we've become used to. For one thing, the relatively small muscles used to manipulate a mouse or other pointing device are much more suited to fine manipulation than the larger ones used when moving objects on anything bigger than a small screen.

For text entry, a touch-based interface will be hard pressed to keep up with keyboards and related devices. And even the best current VR systems are flawed, and there are many situations where you don't want the din of multiple users talking to their computers.

Still, Apple and MS are to be applauded for continuing research and for looking for places where incorporating this technology makes sense.
Click to expand...

Agreed. But I do think that we have to think outside the box and not try to apply our thoughts on how voice or touch will work with current UI as I think UI will radicly change in the next 50 years.
 
maybe what they would do is keep a hybrid option. like in desktops, u can use the touch and use it with the keyboard and mouse as well. graphic design apps and others which require more precision can be used the old fashioned way.
or maybe they would make a slate. A touch slate replicating the desktop on it and we can do all the touch stuff which would perform the actions on the main screen. And like the iPhone, the keyboard pops up on the slate when required. It would have to have some sort of tactile feedback IMO. Maybe haptic.
Maybe this is what the 'electric computers' are.
:rolleyes:
 
I'd like to see multi-touch on the keyboard. Get rid of the keys, and replace it with an actual screen. This display can change depending on what you are doing. For typing, touch keyboard. For photo manipulation, a grid?? Not thought about it any great depth :p
Click to expand...
If I recall, Apple has a patent in multi touch keyboard but the details is sketchy.

Anyway, after reading people comment, I came to agreement that multi touch screen on notebook or PC is useless unless its a 12" screen (maybe 13?). Cause think about it, do you want to constantly touch your 15" screen and drag applications around or such, Its a hassle to control window if you have a big monitor.

Besides, some notebook screens are flimsy, what do you think will happen if people kept touching their flimsy screen to move things around?

I prefer if Apple do like Nintendo DS concept. It would be cool if you have the fully customize touch screen keyboard. Imagine if you have all the photoshop palettes on the tip of your finger.

Overall, multi touch screen on notebook or large monitor is a gimmick and not a function :cool:
 
I'd like to see multi-touch on the keyboard. Get rid of the keys, and replace it with an actual screen. This display can change depending on what you are doing. For typing, touch keyboard. For photo manipulation, a grid?? Not thought about it any great depth :p
Click to expand...
If I recall, Apple has a patent in multi touch keyboard but the details is sketchy.

Anyway, after reading people comment, I came to agreement that multi touch screen on notebook or PC is useless unless its a 12" screen (maybe 13?). Cause think about it, do you want to constantly touch your 15" screen and drag applications around or such, Its a hassle to control window if you have a big monitor.

Besides, some notebook screens are flimsy, what do you think will happen if people kept touching their flimsy screen to move things around?

I prefer if Apple do like Nintendo DS concept. It would be cool if you have the fully customize touch screen keyboard. Imagine if you have all the photoshop palettes on the tip of your finger.

Come to think of it, if you have a fully customize keyboard, meaning you will have more screen space for your illustration or design cause all of the palettes can be placed on the tip of your finger :D

Overall, multi touch screen on notebook or large monitor is a gimmick and not a function :cool:

I remember that MS says that they will remove the traditional start menu button in Longhorn but look what Vista shows.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back