Thoughts on Multi-Touch from a Desktop Perspective

[Kaido]

I'm a big fan of touchscreens and definitely love my iPhone. Touchscreens have gotten more popular lately and multi-touch screens are becoming increasingly popular (iPhone, Palm Pre, Microsoft Surface, Dell Studio One 19). I've had some thoughts rolling around my head and wanted to see what you guys think about multi-touch applications for the desktop (laptops included). Most recently, I saw an advertising video for Dell's new 19" touchscreen iMac-style computer:

http://www.engadget.com/2009/0...-in-the-us-and-europe/

I have to question the validity of touchscreens for regular computers - I mean, every single promo video I see features the same dull functionality:

-Write an illegible note on a virtual Post-It
-Draw a bad doodle in Microsoft Paint
-Rearrange photos on the screen
-etc.

Initially I was very excited about touchscreen technology coming to the desktop, but now, honestly, I can't see any practical applications for it. I think that touchscreens are better suited for pocket devices that lack a full hardware interface (keyboard & mouse) and for speciality applications like in-wall or in-car touchscreens for homes, kitchens, music players, and cell phones.

I mean, what are you really going to do with a touchscreen on your desktop? It's a pain in the neck to type on a full-sized virtual keyboard. Your arms get tired after lifting your hands to touch the screen after like 10 minutes of use. You can't effectively surf the web with a touchscreen that large either - you need to be able to type in web address, log into websites, and so on and so forth. Yeah, you could rely on bookmarks and login software like 1Password, but I don't always limit my web explorations to the same sites every day. Plus instant messaging would be a real pain, haha.

The Dell 19 is an iMac-style design that comes with a regular keyboard and mouse for typing, but doesn't that kind of negate the point of a having a touchscreen monitor? I mean, what exactly are you going to USE it for? I'm not going to spend $700 just to let the kids doodle on the screen, especially when their hands are probably covered in sticky food - crayons and a paper are so much more effective (and cheaper) than an expensive touch-sensitive computer is.

The only thing I can really think of is that it would be useful for kid's games, but even then it would be a pain because the screen would constantly be messy from fingerprints. I mean, I'm not going to use Photoshop with a touchscreen - my keyboard, mouse, and Wacom tablet are 1000x more effective for that type of work. Web surfing is difficult with it. Word processing would be just plain stupid on it. Maybe, maybe non-technical users would find a touchscreen version of Picasa useful, but everyone already knows how to use a mouse - it's just so much faster too!

This is where I think Apple would have a really good product niche - a 7" or 10" iTablet, some kind of giant iPhone, would really be ideal. The iPhone is great because it's easy to use - it's very intuitive and very simple, just press a button and the program opens. Cake! Safari is actually pretty nice for a mobile device, and bringing that to a larger screen that isn't quite the size of a laptop would be ideal. Other touchscreen applications I can think of would be a kitchen recipe/meal-planning computer, in-wall touchscreens for Smart Homes and whole-house music players, and in-car media jukeboxes/GPS navigation devices.

But for a desktop? I have no idea. I really can't think of anything that would actually be useful. Anyone care to share some thoughts here?

 

[randomlinh]

I think it'd be useful for kiosks.. as it'd be easier to bolt down than a tablet (and cheaper probably). Or a PC-as-home-automation-control panel. but otherwise, i don't see the point. i work so much faster from the keyboard.

tho, i see MS's Surface as a real desk... and you'd have your papers laid out like a real desk, grab what you need, quickly read through them... then toss what you need into word to really work on it.

 

[TheStu]

I could see a selling point for a multi-touch trackpad (very large though, like 4x the size of what is on the MacBook Pro) that you could use in place of, or in compliment to a mouse. Honestly, for 99% of what I do on a computer anymore, a trackpad will be just fine, and if I could rotate, zoom, and do all kinds of other crazy things with it, I think I would get it (assuming it wasn't $Texas)

 

[Kaido]

Originally posted by: randomlinh
I think it'd be useful for kiosks.. as it'd be easier to bolt down than a tablet (and cheaper probably). Or a PC-as-home-automation-control panel. but otherwise, i don't see the point. i work so much faster from the keyboard.

tho, i see MS's Surface as a real desk... and you'd have your papers laid out like a real desk, grab what you need, quickly read through them... then toss what you need into word to really work on it.

Right. For application-specific usage, touchscreens really shine. Other than that...I dunno. I could see them being everywhere - in homes, in cars, in medical facilities, in my pocket - but beyond that, I just can't think of any realistic applications for the technology on a desktop or laptop system.

 

[Kaido]

Originally posted by: TheStu
I could see a selling point for a multi-touch trackpad (very large though, like 4x the size of what is on the MacBook Pro) that you could use in place of, or in compliment to a mouse. Honestly, for 99% of what I do on a computer anymore, a trackpad will be just fine, and if I could rotate, zoom, and do all kinds of other crazy things with it, I think I would get it (assuming it wasn't $Texas)

http://www.everythingusb.com/d...i-touch-pad-16508.html

 

[ViRGE]

Desktop touchscreens have not and continue to not make sense. HP tried this in the 80s (although I think this was with lightpens), and all they got out of it was a new term: The Gorilla Arm Problem. What HP discovered is that you can't make a touchscreen sit up like a monitor, human arms aren't meant to be held up like that for extended periods of time. It's why we have the mouse, so that we can keep our arms down while manipulating the screen in a manner similar to just touching the thing.

Touch screens make sense on devices where you can put your arms down and look down (Surface) or portable devices which by their nature effectively allows for the same thing. But for upright desktop computers, they're not viable for extended use. ATMs seem to be about as long as most people can comfortably hold their arms up.

 

[Kaido]

Originally posted by: ViRGE
Desktop touchscreens have not and continue to not make sense. HP tried this in the 80s (although I think this was with lightpens), and all they got out of it was a new term: The Gorilla Arm Problem. What HP discovered is that you can't make a touchscreen sit up like a monitor, human arms aren't meant to be held up like that for extended periods of time. It's why we have the mouse, so that we can keep our arms down while manipulating the screen in a manner similar to just touching the thing.

Touch screens make sense on devices where you can put your arms down and look down (Surface) or portable devices which by their nature effectively allows for the same thing. But for upright desktop computers, they're not viable for extended use. ATMs seem to be about as long as most people can comfortably hold their arms up.

Boy I can only imagine the ergonomic problems that would occur from using the Surface for extended periods of time...you'd develop "Microsoft Neck" from tilting your head down all the time :laugh: