Touchscreen Macs. Not a matter of "if" but "when"?

[Liquorpuki]

My wrist screamed in pain at just the THOUGHT of spending all day reaching towards a 27" vertical display! No, it is not just resistance to something new, it is idiotic from an ergonomics standpoint. Here I thought nothing could be worse than a mouse ...

Does your wrist scream in pain when you drive a car or change the radio station?

Reason why a vertical touchscreen will catch on is because some things are quicker using a touchscreen.

IE swiping left to right to go to the previous webpage
vs
shake my mouse because my pointer is camouflaged by the desktop and I can't find it and then once I find it I still have to aim it at a little icon and click to make something happen

 

[ApfelKuchen]

The longer Apple resists, the harder it will be for them to catch up.

Is Apple resisting? Do they have their collective heads in the sand? Probably not a safe assumption.

The comments in this thread assume that Apple's fortunes rise and fall with the desktop. Read my fingertips - 10% of Apple's sales. Today. What'll it be when tablet penetration rises to 80% or more?

By implementing touch in Windows, I don't see Microsoft as a leader, but a follower - an attempt to keep the desktop relevant for as long as possible - to delay the day when they finally have to cave in and sell Office for iOS in order to offset falling sales of desktops.

I agree with those who say touch can be awkward in a desktop environment - dragging a finger an inch or two across a control surface is a whole lot easier than extending an arm and dragging it across a 27" screen. In an office environment with overhead lighting, a horizontal or diagonal screen runs into problems with reflections. When the monitor's near-vertical, that same overhead lighting tends to highlight fingerprints.

But what does it matter if one is dragging a finger two inches or 20, or taps on a screen or a trackpad? It doesn't matter today whether one moves a mouse and clicks, drags finger and taps, uses pen and control tablet, or cursor keys and keystroke combinations. The end user's choice of interface is handled at the OS level, not the application. As long as there's an equivalent action, there's an appropriate reaction. A developer who ignores any of these (let's say, by failing to assign keystroke shortcuts) fails to serve Windows and Mac users alike.

The notion that Windows developers will abandon the Mac platform if it fails to support touch is ludicrous. An individual programmer can afford to be ideological. A corporation cannot ignore a market segment with a growing percentage of the (shrinking) desktop market, and cannot ignore a user base that, regardless of OS, is still likely to use legacy pointing methods for many years to come.

I agree with the folks who expect Apple to leapfrog touch (for OS X) and move to gesture-based controls. Gestures (with or without voice) will work effectively in iOS and OS X, regardless of screen position and size - one can use the same gesture, in the same range of motion. The identical gesture would work equally well whether one is using an eyeglass, in-car heads-up display, wristwatch, or 60" TV. Touch screens are an intermediate rung on the evolutionary ladder.

 

[Mad Mac Maniac]

I agree with the folks who expect Apple to leapfrog touch (for OS X) and move to gesture-based controls. Gestures (with or without voice) will work effectively in iOS and OS X, regardless of screen position and size - one can use the same gesture, in the same range of motion. The identical gesture would work equally well whether one is using an eyeglass, in-car heads-up display, wristwatch, or 60" TV. Touch screens are an intermediate rung on the evolutionary ladder.

This is something that doesn't really make sense to me. You attack touch for being gimmicky and ineffective... but you think air gestures are the way of the future?

I don't buy it... anything that you gain from not extending your arm out an extra few inches, you lose from the lack of precision from gesturing in the air. I mean sure, maybe you can perform some basic tasks like minimizing, switching applications, and other broad stroke concepts. I just don't see it... I mean yeah I guess potentially see it as being another complimentary interaction (arrow keys, mouse, touch, and gestures), but there does get to be a point where having so many forms of interactions becomes more a complexity than an aid. I see touch being a much more useful interaction on a computer than gestures.

Now that being said I think *maybe* gestures would be pretty good for a tv (like on xbox kinect) and then if that catches on, I could see it moving over to the desktop also. But still overall I'm not convinced. Have you seen the air gestures on the GS4? It seems most gimmicky.

 

[APlotdevice]

Here is the tragic flaw with your argument... you treat it as an all or nothing situation. Did the mouse completely replace the arrow keys? No. They compliment each other. There are times when it makes sense to use each. The touch interface will simply be another alternative.

It'll be an alternative at first. However it's likely that the mouse/trackpad will be absent from many machines in the future to cut down on size and cost.

 

[djtech42]

Anybody who thinks you would have to reach your arm out to touch the screen clearly didn't see Apple's patent for a touchscreen iMac.

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

The screen swivels down to an orientation that would be like touching a tablet. The computer could transition from mouse-based OS X to touch-based OS X or iOS that is synced up with OS X.

 

[ApfelKuchen]

This is something that doesn't really make sense to me. You attack touch for being gimmicky and ineffective... but you think air gestures are the way of the future?

Did I say that? "Gimmicky and ineffective?" Must have been someone else. I have an iPhone and iPad, and love them both, and think the touch screen works beautifully as a UI. I used to love my Palms. There's still a Newton kicking around in the basement somewhere. When I started, my "display" was a print-out on a TTY.

You want to quote me? "Touch screen control is not at all gimmicky - it can be incredibly effective. However, there are cases where it may be less effective than other methods."

I've been using computers since the early '70s, so I learned long ago that the difficult/impractical has a way of becoming commonplace. We're not going to have "perfected" air gestures tomorrow, but I think they're a whole lot closer than you think. Of course, neither of us can know for sure.

I have no problem if you think air gestures won't work - it's just a matter of opinion, just like my opinion about touchscreen PCs. We make our case, and others buy it, or not.

Let's see if I can make a better case this time around...

Touch screen gestures are, to a degree, scaled to the dimensions of the screen you're touching. Small motions on an iPhone, larger motions on iPad, even larger motions on a 27" monitor. If we do end up with iWatches, range of motion for touch-based gestures will be severely limited - it's not easy to pinch to zoom on a 1" screen, there could be only a few buttons on screen at a time, etc.

Say you have a button in the upper-right corner of the screen, and another button in the lower-right corner of the screen, and you need to touch both in succession. On an iPhone you move your finger 4", on a laptop your hand may move 13", and on a large monitor your arm may move 27". The dimensions of the touch surface determine which body parts are brought into play, and to what degree. Sure, eye-hand coordination being what it is, we're going to put our finger smack on those buttons in any case. In the case of a large screen? My shoulder aches just thinking about it (and that's not dependent on whether the screen is horizontal or vertical).

The mouse and track pad, however, are far more adaptive - the same movement that takes a pointer from one end of an 11" screen to the other can take the pointer from one end of a 27" screen to another. That principle transfers very well to air gestures. The difference? When we wave our fingers and hands around in the air like conjurors, interpreting those motions is far more challenging (to the computer) than interpreting the motion of a mouse.

The advantage I see in air gesture-based control is that I can use the same gestures - identical motions, identical range of motion, no matter what device I'm controlling. That allows for ultra-small and ultra-large displays. It allows for devices that may have little or no display at all. It allows for control of a projected image (heads-up displays, etc.). It allows for control from a distance. It may also allow for greater subtlety of control, as we will be refining existing motion rather than adapting to the device in front of us.

 

[JHUFrank]

I totally agree, air gesture is the way this technology is going to move forward. Hoping that soon we will have a hybrid input device, that combine keyboard, mouse, gestures that scales movement to screen size and just mirrors hand movement. Quick gesture turns it into a virtual keyboard, etc.

Did I say that? "Gimmicky and ineffective?" Must have been someone else. I have an iPhone and iPad, and love them both, and think the touch screen works beautifully as a UI. I used to love my Palms. There's still a Newton kicking around in the basement somewhere. When I started, my "display" was a print-out on a TTY.

You want to quote me? "Touch screen control is not at all gimmicky - it can be incredibly effective. However, there are cases where it may be less effective than other methods."

I've been using computers since the early '70s, so I learned long ago that the difficult/impractical has a way of becoming commonplace. We're not going to have "perfected" air gestures tomorrow, but I think they're a whole lot closer than you think. Of course, neither of us can know for sure.

I have no problem if you think air gestures won't work - it's just a matter of opinion, just like my opinion about touchscreen PCs. We make our case, and others buy it, or not.

Let's see if I can make a better case this time around...

Touch screen gestures are, to a degree, scaled to the dimensions of the screen you're touching. Small motions on an iPhone, larger motions on iPad, even larger motions on a 27" monitor. If we do end up with iWatches, range of motion for touch-based gestures will be severely limited - it's not easy to pinch to zoom on a 1" screen, there could be only a few buttons on screen at a time, etc.

Say you have a button in the upper-right corner of the screen, and another button in the lower-right corner of the screen, and you need to touch both in succession. On an iPhone you move your finger 4", on a laptop your hand may move 13", and on a large monitor your arm may move 27". The dimensions of the touch surface determine which body parts are brought into play, and to what degree. Sure, eye-hand coordination being what it is, we're going to put our finger smack on those buttons in any case. In the case of a large screen? My shoulder aches just thinking about it (and that's not dependent on whether the screen is horizontal or vertical).

The mouse and track pad, however, are far more adaptive - the same movement that takes a pointer from one end of an 11" screen to the other can take the pointer from one end of a 27" screen to another. That principle transfers very well to air gestures. The difference? When we wave our fingers and hands around in the air like conjurors, interpreting those motions is far more challenging (to the computer) than interpreting the motion of a mouse.

The advantage I see in air gesture-based control is that I can use the same gestures - identical motions, identical range of motion, no matter what device I'm controlling. That allows for ultra-small and ultra-large displays. It allows for devices that may have little or no display at all. It allows for control of a projected image (heads-up displays, etc.). It allows for control from a distance. It may also allow for greater subtlety of control, as we will be refining existing motion rather than adapting to the device in front of us.

 

[thekeyring]

Not sure why people think Apple will eventually do this. If the argument is they'll do it because everyone else is, then where is the blue-ray on Macs? Where is the SD slot on the iPhone/iPad?

Thank-you! Also: Where are the CD trays going? I don't see why Apple would copy what Microsoft and hardware makers are doing when their products and way of doing things are much more successful.

 

[turtle777]

Reason why a vertical touchscreen will catch on is because some things are quicker using a touchscreen.

IE swiping left to right to go to the previous webpage
vs
shake my mouse because my pointer is camouflaged by the desktop and I can't find it and then once I find it I still have to aim it at a little icon and click to make something happen

Seriously ?

I go back by pressing a button on my mouse.

You are telling me it's easier to stretch out my arm and swipe across a 27" screen ?

-t

 

[kdarling]

I think you (and others) have the wrong idea about touchscreens. I was thinking the same way too.

It's not an all or nothing thing... it can be used to complement existing input methods. The comment below yours gives a couple of handy examples. Most of your time would still be down on the keyboard... and for long periods of time you can use the trackpad.

But I can see it being really handy to just quickly reach up and press an icon in the dock (instead of moving to the trackpad.. finding the curser... moving it to the icon... and clicking). Touchscreen is a must faster interaction because it can directly touch whatever you want.

This.

As a touch developer for a couple of decades, our house has always had a lot of touch devices around, both portable and desktop. We enjoy them; my youngest born in 2002 grew up using touch.

So when my son-in-law was buying a new PC laptop for my oldest teacher daughter to replace her MacBook, and asked me about whether to get touch or not, I think he expected me to say yes.

I actually said it probably wasn't worth the extra cost, because my experience was that I rarely used it on a laptop. Partly because of the extra effort to reach out. Partly because it could make the screen messy

Still, he got one anyway. To my surprise, I watched as she often would reach out to quickly scroll an area of the screen, or to quickly click a large button, or to focus on an input field. Not always, but more often than I would ever have thought.

Anyway, as you say, it's a complementary input method. The more, the merrier!

 

[APlotdevice]

Seriously ?

I go back by pressing a button on my mouse.

You are telling me it's easier to stretch out my arm and swipe across a 27" screen ?

-t

And just to emphases, mice with dedicated back and forward buttons are practically a dime a dozen these days.

 

[djtech42]

OS X would have to be completely redesigned

 

[roadbloc]

Ow! Steve was right!

My wrist screamed in pain at just the THOUGHT of spending all day reaching towards a 27" vertical display! No, it is not just resistance to something new, it is idiotic from an ergonomics standpoint. Here I thought nothing could be worse than a mouse ...

There you go. You can now think of touching your screen without a pain in your wrist. Courtesy of Steve.

 

[Mad Mac Maniac]

OS X would have to be completely redesigned

I'm not sure it would have to be COMPLETELY redesigned. There are already a large portion of elements that are touch ready.

Additionally, Apple has been publicly applying touch/iOS-like interfaces onto OS X since 2010 (when Lion was announced). Would it be that hard to imagine that behind the scenes Apple has been redesigning the interface to be touch friendly? (if for no other reason, as a "just in case" possibility)

 

[Nunyabinez]

I initially thought that touch on a desktop or laptop would be difficult and inconvenient. However, the other day I was using my MBA and my iPad at the same time and I several times ended up trying to touch something on the MBA and wondering "why is this not working?" only to realize that I was touching the MBA.

I would purchase a touch enabled display because it would open up another way to interact with the computer that could be more convenient. Depending on what actions you have previously taken, where your hand is, where your cursor is, what windows are open, a touch might be easier than anything else.

If we could touch, then I'm sure we would adapt ourselves to do whatever happens to be the easiest movement at the moment. Since we are becoming more comfortable with touching the screen I think that it would add a level of convenience to Macs. But, obviously not everyone agrees.

My biggest issue has always been the fact that touching the screen is going to leave fingerprints, and I am anal-retentive about anything on my screens, so that will be a big issue for me.

 

[Carl Sagan]

The poor sales of Windows 8 and the Surface show that touch based desktop OS's aren't going to make it mainstream. It can work for some such as point of sale or kiosks, but the typical desktop user appears to be rejecting this technology.

Yep. I hope to god Apple aren't stupid enough to go down this route....

 

[djtech42]

I'm not sure it would have to be COMPLETELY redesigned. There are already a large portion of elements that are touch ready.

Additionally, Apple has been publicly applying touch/iOS-like interfaces onto OS X since 2010 (when Lion was announced). Would it be that hard to imagine that behind the scenes Apple has been redesigning the interface to be touch friendly? (if for no other reason, as a "just in case" possibility)

Final Cut Pro X and Logic Pro X are going in touchscreen UI directions, so I guess it's possible.

 

[teragramus]

not so much directly a reason for a touchscreen as...

i WOULD like to be able to rotate the screen orientation to vertical to make it read like a book (kindle)

Seems like if the screen rotated or flipped into touch mode, it would be obvious why this vertical mode is nice, same as with tablets

 

[Liquorpuki]

Seriously ?

I go back by pressing a button on my mouse.

You are telling me it's easier to stretch out my arm and swipe across a 27" screen ?

-t

It be easier if you don't have a programmable mouse. The driver for touchscreen PC's is tablet/PC convergence. Whatever you do on a PC you should be able to do the same thing w/ a tablet on the go. Most people don't use mice with their tablets.

 

[turtle777]

It be easier if you don't have a programmable mouse. The driver for touchscreen PC's is tablet/PC convergence. Whatever you do on a PC you should be able to do the same thing w/ a tablet on the go. Most people don't use mice with their tablets.

Again:

Are you seriously telling me it's easier to stretch out my arm and swipe across a 27" screen than using a mouse ?

I don't give a rip about convergence if it results in total non-sense or worse user experience. And I bet I'm not alone.

-t

 

[Liquorpuki]

Again:

Are you seriously telling me it's easier to stretch out my arm and swipe across a 27" screen than using a mouse ?

I don't give a rip about convergence if it results in total non-sense or worse user experience. And I bet I'm not alone.

-t

User experience is defined by the OS and the application

What do you think is easier? Clicking your mouse on a +/- slider to zoom into a map plus drag to scroll? Or pinch to zoom in/out and swipe to scroll?

 

[phrehdd]

Yes, there is nothing I want more than to run my fingers across a 24" or larger screen for hours on end. Maybe I can play some classical and go into a screen "fugue" a la Tom Cruise in the movie Minority Report.

I can't think of a dopier thing to do than have vertical screens dependent on touch. Ergonomically, it would be a nightmare.

Last - will it happen, maybe. I just hope the idiots who stuff it down the consumers' throats will also allow cursor control via device (mouse, touchpad, trackball, etc.) as an 'option.' If not, I'll be looking for a new OS.

 

[turtle777]

User experience is defined by the OS and the application

Not entirely, the the interaction of hardware with the software plays a big role in user experience.

Btw, there are touchscreen laptops out there, and they have been an overwhelming fail. I wonder why.

-t

 

[Liquorpuki]

Not entirely, the the interaction of hardware with the software plays a big role in user experience.

Btw, there are touchscreen laptops out there, and they have been an overwhelming fail. I wonder why.

-t

Well slate tablets were an overwhelming fail for years until Apple got the foundation right, which validated the idea.

Far as touchscreen laptops, for W7 and earlier, the UI was just a touch overlay on top of a desktop made for mouse. It didn't fit and the touch was an afterthough.

All the touchscreen laptops right now are W8 and there's a ton of reasons why they've failed that aren't directly related to touch - pricepoint, low W8 market penetration, OEM's hurt the brand, battery life, etc.

The Metro side of W8 is what a touch interface should be though. After learning Metro gestures on a Surface, I found myself wanting to swipe my monitor to do basic navigation tasks even though I had a mouse right in front of me. For all the talk about ergonomics and gorilla arm, some things are just quicker and require less brain power when interacting with the touchscreen directly.

 

[Michael Goff]

I really hope they don't go this route.