Its very difficult working on a screen with a mouse. I know very few designers or photographers who use mice or trackballs. Almost all use tablets, and almost all of them use Wacoms'.
It's very hard to trace a line with a mouse. It has a limited movement on the desk, and you almost always come to the end of its travel before you complete the line.
Don't compare CAD to photographic work or much design work. They are completely different. But even using CAD, most professional users use a tablet.
In fact, for the highest precision, we used 12 x 18 inch models.
I don't know who these people you speak of are, but I question their abilities if they're using mice for this work. I've never heard of that on a wide scale.
Could it be that you travel more in the upper echelon of these fields?
Perhaps i'm stuck in the trenches with the ditch-diggers. The vast majority of people that i've encountered in these fields, spend most of their time using a mouse. Tablets are busted out on occasion, for things like tracing or free-hand artistry. Unfortunately, most of these people don't get to do much free-hand artistry in their day to day work. They'd like to do more artistic work, work that benefits from tablets. But most of their time is spent doing page layout and simplistic compositing of existing images.
Granted, i'm no artist or designer. Maybe I should be pushing my company to install tablets in all our designers' offices.
But back to how this relates to the once-again rumored Apple Tablet...
It seems that a stylus would be best for this type of work, even with your excellent idea for an offset focus point. Initial positioning would still be error prone without a nib that could be tracked without actually clicking or dragging on the screen.
People in the above mentioned fields would be willing to use a stylus. General users probably wouldn't be though. The general userbase has never taken to stylus usage. They just don't have enough tasks for which a stylus is optimal.
I'm unfamiliar with the technology. Is a nib-equipped stylus possible on a capacitance-based touch-screen? If so, a bluetooth based stylus seems like a nice option.
As for touting good art or design accomplished on the iPhone... I'd say that's akin to saying paint brushes aren't needed because somebody did a great finger painting.
I really don't see it running full fledged OSX. Touch interface issues aside, I'm not sure that it would extend OSX market share as much as would be expected. I think it would canibalize macbook and macbook pro sales to a certain extent, especially the 13" model. Students for one are a huge market for the 13" macbooks, if this tablet was a fully featured OSX model that had superior note taking abilities (due to the touch screen) and possibly and ebook store, what would entice them to buy the (likely) higher margin macbooks?
With an OS based on iPhoneOS, you could still have fully featured (but touch optimized)word/pages (or anything else) Apps if someone decided to make them, but requiring itunes sync would mean there would still be a use for the 13" macbooks.
It would eat into MacBook sales somewhat. But I think the major buyers of MacBooks would still prefer the larger screen and keyboard. There's some overlap, but not enough so that it would matter. And remember Job's statement about the iPhone vs the iPod. They would prefer they cannibalized their own products as opposed to someone else doing it.
This would add to sales, not detract from them. I can't see schools replacing MacBooks with this in a large way.
As for MBP sales, no, I don't see this as having much of an effect at all. That's a totally different market and price category. I can see people with MBP's also getting this though, esp if it could be connected as an accessory as we've been saying.
It would eat into MacBook sales somewhat. But I think the major buyers of MacBooks would still prefer the larger screen and keyboard. There's some overlap, but not enough so that it would matter. And remember Job's statement about the iPhone vs the iPod. They would prefer they cannibalized their own products as opposed to someone else doing it.
This would add to sales, not detract from them. I can't see schools replacing MacBooks with this in a large way.
As for MBP sales, no, I don't see this as having much of an effect at all. That's a totally different market and price category. I can see people with MBP's also getting this though, esp if it could be connected as an accessory as we've been saying.
I was thinking of the 13" MBP, which I consider to be pro(fessional) in name only and I could see people going after that or this mythical tablet. I just don't see Apple eating into their own markets (even if it is minor like you suggest) if they can avoid it, and I think they could avoid it in this situation. I also feel that an iPhoneOS based tablet would actually provide a better user experience to the majority of customers than OSX. It may feel too restrictive to some, but I suspect they will be in the minority. I've read the arguments about how "terrible" iPhoneOS apps will look on a larger screen too, but I just don't buy it. A desktop app would be even worse on a (relatively small) touch screen.
Could it be that you travel more in the upper echelon of these fields?
We did commercial work for magazines, newspapers, Tv, movies, music videos, government etc.
Quote:
Perhaps i'm stuck in the trenches with the ditch-diggers. The vast majority of people that i've encountered in these fields, spend most of their time using a mouse. Tablets are busted out on occasion, for things like tracing or free-hand artistry. Unfortunately, most of these people don't get to do much free-hand artistry in their day to day work. They'd like to do more artistic work, work that benefits from tablets. But most of their time is spent doing page layout and simplistic compositing of existing images.
Page layout is different. You don't need a tablet using Quark or InDesign. But, if you have one, its a big time saver, esp. the newer models with the shortcut buttons.
Quote:
Granted, i'm no artist or designer. Maybe I should be pushing my company to install tablets in all our designers' offices.
It's a big help using Illustrator and other vector oriented programs as well. Any time you need to draw something that can't be done by a simple pull, and a click of a key to keep the angle at a specific one, and force a straight line, can use a tablet.
If all people are doing are drawing straight lines and circles, then a tablet isn't needed, though, even there, it's much easier a good deal of the time.
Quote:
But back to how this relates to the once-again rumored Apple Tablet...
It seems that a stylus would be best for this type of work, even with your excellent idea for an offset focus point. Initial positioning would still be error prone without a nib that could be tracked without actually clicking or dragging on the screen.
People in the above mentioned fields would be willing to use a stylus. General users probably wouldn't be though. The general userbase has never taken to stylus usage. They just don't have enough tasks for which a stylus is optimal.
A stylus is what we use of course. Why? Because there's been no other way to do it.
Amazing isn't it that just because we only can invent one way to do something that people think it's the only possible way.
Well, early painting only used fingers dipped in pigments. There was no other way. Then someone discovered using a soft colored rock and charcoal. Things advance.
A finger based tablet seems to be going back to the cavemen drawings. But it's not, because the technology is much different.
Moving a finger across a screen is a more natural way of drawing than holding a stylus. Is it the best way? Is it even as good? I don't know. My Cinteq doesn't work with fingers so I can't compare. But as long as you can see what you're focussed on, and can use the drawing controls, I believe that it will work very well. I'd love for someone here, and we have a lot of smart people here, to develop something to do that.
Quote:
I'm unfamiliar with the technology. Is a nib-equipped stylus possible on a capacitance-based touch-screen? If so, a bluetooth based stylus seems like a nice option.
Yes it is. I've also developed a magnetic stylus that works.
Quote:
As for touting good art or design accomplished on the iPhone... I'd say that's akin to saying paint brushes aren't needed because somebody did a great finger painting.
That's exactly what I'm talking about. It's finger painting. Now, if you can see the exact spot you're painting over, it's even better!
When I said it was for artists I meant using a stylus - you'd use fingers for browsing but stylus for drawing - kinda like a nintendo DS but much more precise and smooth.
I suppose that's a matter of opinion. But Apple upgraded it to be a MBP, and so it is. There are different levels of professional equipment.
I guess if I were asked to choose between the 13" MB and MBP, I would take the MBP in a heartbeat, so there is some truth in that. I had always just considered the dedicated graphics card to be the most compelling difference between the two lines.
I guess if I were asked to choose between the 13" MB and MBP, I would take the MBP in a heartbeat, so there is some truth in that. I had always just considered the dedicated graphics card to be the most compelling difference between the two lines.
It's a "eye of the beholder" sort of thing. If you insist that you need a certain feature for your pro work, then to you, a machine that doesn't have it isn't pro "enough".
To some people, eliminating the Express card slot in favor of the much more amateur oriented SD slot in all the machines except the 17", also eliminated them as pro machines for them.
When Apple earlier eliminated FW from some of the machines, that had the same effect. Of course, Apple added FW 800 to those new models.
I guess if I were asked to choose between the 13" MB and MBP, I would take the MBP in a heartbeat, so there is some truth in that. I had always just considered the dedicated graphics card to be the most compelling difference between the two lines.
I assume you considered the 12" Powerbook to be "Pro"? The 9400M is, I think, in the same class now as the low-end discrete GPUs Apple was using were back in the day.
Amazing isn't it that just because we only can invent one way to do something that people think it's the only possible way.
I'd like to address the above quote as it seems to be a common misconception or a sly debate tactic when discussing tablets. Just because someone points out shortcomings in an an interaction technique does not mean that the person is close minded. Nor does it mean that the person thinks the current way is the only possible way. It simply means that they are critiquing the value of that type of interaction.
The quote also suggests that not much thought has been given to the merits of various interaction techniques. This is insulting to the tens of thousands of computer scientists, psychologists, and human factors scientists that have devoted decades to that very subject. Rest assured, they're not only interested in the subject, but they have implemented and empirically studied just about everything ever mentioned on these forums. With that said, they fully acknowledge that there is plenty of work left to be done and nobody in the field thinks we've reached the pinnacle of interaction design.
So please everyone, when people like me offer critiques of tablets, styluses, and touch-interfaces, don't resort to calling us close-minded. It isn't that tablet critics are stuck in their ways. Many of us have given the subject much thought for many many years. There is a vast body of scientific research along with real-world precedence to build upon.
Plenty of research has been done on finger vs stylus based interaction... Nib-equipped thimble-styluses, redundant screens so that screen content can be viewed with or without the finger in the way, shifted point of focus (as you suggested), electro-static tactile feedback, audible feedback, relative vs absolute positioning devices, etc, etc.
While technology will advance, the human body will remain static. That is why a discussion of tablets/styluses/touch-interfaces revolves around human factors. It is well established that humans will only carry around objects of certain shapes and sizes unless unusually motivated. This dictates the form of everything in the constructed world around us, including books, keys, wallets, credit cards, weapons, types of food, etc. The same is true for tools and architecture. This is why for the past thousand years, writing instruments and door knobs have remained largely unchanged. Pockets, carrying straps, and luggage provide another category of constraints for the types of objects humans are willing to deal with.
In other words, a truly enlightened view on the potential of tablets would acknowledge that there are certain influences and constraints that will never change. These are imposed by the human physique along with limited sensory and mental faculties.
Despite being well aware of long held principles in the human factors field, interaction designers constantly stray into designing and implementing supposedly dead-end interaction techniques. That intellectual curiosity exists, flourishes, and occasionally leads to unexpected advances. I can't wait to see what they come up with next.
So please, don't suggest that tablet critics are just rejecting ideas on these boards simply because they are short sided. Quite the opposite can be true. Some, like myself, are obsessed with HCI and are simply pointing out the tradeoffs between computing form factors and their associated interaction techniques. It is my opinion that the utility of tablets is almost always overestimated outside of certain select applications such as free-hand shape definition. This is why I believe that tablets will forever remain auxiliary computers, supplementing other types of computers which are more optimal for the vast majority of tasks.
Woah, that was long. Obsessed, did I mention obsessed?
Please carry on though... I'd like to encourage discussion on the subject despite getting peeved when people assume that this is new territory. Apple has done amazing things with the iPhone's interface. But really it is their implementation and application of already well understood technologies and principles that makes the iPhone revolutionary. What Apple did was find productive ways of applying them.
Anyway, as per my usual style after posting such a manifesto, I'll bow out and let others have their say.
I assume you considered the 12" Powerbook to be "Pro"? The 9400M is, I think, in the same class now as the low-end discrete GPUs Apple was using were back in the day.
This is why I believe that tablets will forever remain auxiliary computers, supplementing other types of computers which are more optimal for the vast majority of tasks.
Wow that was quite the post, but I did want to highlight this part. While a tablet form factor obviously has some limitations, I think you may be missing the Apple's goal behind the tablet. I'm pretty sure an auxiliary computer is exactly what Apple wants it to be. If it runs iPhone OS it will have to be (unless they make a lot of changes). As with netbooks, it will be bought as a secondary computer with specific tasks in mind. Now I think it will be much more attractive than a netbook, but it will fill a similar niche.
That article was a good find. I've bookmarked it. If it runs Windows, as it looks to, then it must use the Atom. There is no way that MS has got another OS ready. Look how far behind the very minor update to Win Mobile 6.1 is taking, just going to 6.5. And then, the supposedly major reworking of ver 7 was pushed back by a year to get it to align with the iPhone OS.
That would be nice, but I don't think Apple will go that far. At least not yet.
The question is whether Apple would end their resistance to a pen. While I hope so, I'm not holding my breath. but the artist that did the New Yorker cover art with just his iPhone has shown that a small screen with a finger based program can do a lot.
I can't necessarily see myself working Photoshop with a finger, but who knows? If it's done right, it could work.
Well, if you like pain, you can hold your breath till Apple makes an official stylus for the tablet.
Or, you can simply get a 3rd party stylus which will undoubtedly be available from a 1000 different vendors soon after launch.
I'd like to address the above quote as it seems to be a common misconception or a sly debate tactic when discussing tablets. Just because someone points out shortcomings in an an interaction technique does not mean that the person is close minded. Nor does it mean that the person thinks the current way is the only possible way. It simply means that they are critiquing the value of that type of interaction.
The quote also suggests that not much thought has been given to the merits of various interaction techniques. This is insulting to the tens of thousands of computer scientists, psychologists, and human factors scientists that have devoted decades to that very subject. Rest assured, they're not only interested in the subject, but they have implemented and empirically studied just about everything ever mentioned on these forums. With that said, they fully acknowledge that there is plenty of work left to be done and nobody in the field thinks we've reached the pinnacle of interaction design.
So please everyone, when people like me offer critiques of tablets, styluses, and touch-interfaces, don't resort to calling us close-minded. It isn't that tablet critics are stuck in their ways. Many of us have given the subject much thought for many many years. There is a vast body of scientific research along with real-world precedence to build upon.
Plenty of research has been done on finger vs stylus based interaction... Nib-equipped thimble-styluses, redundant screens so that screen content can be viewed with or without the finger in the way, shifted point of focus (as you suggested), electro-static tactile feedback, audible feedback, relative vs absolute positioning devices, etc, etc.
While technology will advance, the human body will remain static. That is why a discussion of tablets/styluses/touch-interfaces revolves around human factors. It is well established that humans will only carry around objects of certain shapes and sizes unless unusually motivated. This dictates the form of everything in the constructed world around us, including books, keys, wallets, credit cards, weapons, types of food, etc. The same is true for tools and architecture. This is why for the past thousand years, writing instruments and door knobs have remained largely unchanged. Pockets, carrying straps, and luggage provide another category of constraints for the types of objects humans are willing to deal with.
In other words, a truly enlightened view on the potential of tablets would acknowledge that there are certain influences and constraints that will never change. These are imposed by the human physique along with limited sensory and mental faculties.
Despite being well aware of long held principles in the human factors field, interaction designers constantly stray into designing and implementing supposedly dead-end interaction techniques. That intellectual curiosity exists, flourishes, and occasionally leads to unexpected advances. I can't wait to see what they come up with next.
So please, don't suggest that tablet critics are just rejecting ideas on these boards simply because they are short sided. Quite the opposite can be true. Some, like myself, are obsessed with HCI and are simply pointing out the tradeoffs between computing form factors and their associated interaction techniques. It is my opinion that the utility of tablets is almost always overestimated outside of certain select applications such as free-hand shape definition. This is why I believe that tablets will forever remain auxiliary computers, supplementing other types of computers which are more optimal for the vast majority of tasks.
Woah, that was long. Obsessed, did I mention obsessed?
Please carry on though... I'd like to encourage discussion on the subject despite getting peeved when people assume that this is new territory. Apple has done amazing things with the iPhone's interface. But really it is their implementation and application of already well understood technologies and principles that makes the iPhone revolutionary. What Apple did was find productive ways of applying them.
Anyway, as per my usual style after posting such a manifesto, I'll bow out and let others have their say.
Well, after that long post, I have to tell you that I wasn't referring to anyone here at all.
It was a generalized observation about people on average. It had nothing to do with research. Or pretty much anything you brought up in your post.
So while your post is interesting, and stands on its own merits, your (sly) referrals to me can be removed, and it would be even more accurate then it is now.
Touch screens are woefully inadequate for precision work. A stylus would be necessary. The finger is far too "squishy" for accuracy below 50 or so pixels in diameter (and that's even according to Apple's own Human Interface Guidelines).
You can use the cursor though and just have your finger move it instead of the mouse. This is how some point and click games work on the iphone and how Wacoms work. You'd slide your finger over the screen and the cursor would follow then you just tap the screen to start doing a selection or action.
If anything, it's more precise than a mouse because you have more control over subtle movements and it's faster to move over the screen and hit the point you want.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich
I've seen quite a few artists/designers and wanna-be artists/designers pine away for a tablet. Upon getting one, they're gleeful and show everyone how great it is. A few weeks or months later, that same tablet is in a drawer, never to be used again. Turns out, a mouse is still optimal for most computer tasks that need precision 2D interaction.
That's why they are wannabe artists. Real artists get by just fine with a Wacom and a mouse is not superior for precision. Try drawing a smooth curve with a mouse in Photoshop vs a Wacom and you will see that's the case. Your wrist will also get sore very quickly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
The question is whether Apple would end their resistance to a pen. While I hope so, I'm not holding my breath. but the artist that did the New Yorker cover art with just his iPhone has shown that a small screen with a finger based program can do a lot.
I can't necessarily see myself working Photoshop with a finger, but who knows? If it's done right, it could work.
For positional accuracy, I think it will be ok because Wacom use the same setup in that the pen just moves the cursor. A finger can do the same. A finger will smudge the screen though and unless they rig the screen with sensors, it won't do pressure. I like the idea of finger painting though, it seems like a very natural thing to do and with the cursor accuracy, it shouldn't be much worse than pen interaction.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
I have an idea for this! It just came to me! Brilliant, if I say so myself.
There could be an area right above where the finger touches the screen, adjustable as to height and right/left offset from the finger where the actual point of interaction would occur.
Maybe I should have kept that to myself.
This is how the Wacom works I'm afraid.
I just remembered there is actually a 3rd party pen that will turn any display into a Wacom-like device. It only works up to a certain size of display and it's not as accurate but perhaps Apple can make something like it if as you say they get past the hang-ups about the pen. They could make money on both the pen and the tablet.
Gee guys, thank's for supplying the information I already supplied over a year ago.
The problem with those stylus's is that they aren't very good.
I've found that a magnet tip works better, but it's difficult to do for several reasons.
I don't know which ones you've used but the ones I've tried seem pretty good to me. You need to also take into account that you really don't know exactly what type of screen Apple may be using for this new product. It may be one of them brand new 10 point capacitive touchscreens with different surface layers.
We've so close now to the debut that it doesn't matter what we say. We simply need to wait for the debut then judge.
I just remembered there is actually a 3rd party pen that will turn any display into a Wacom-like device. It only works up to a certain size of display and it's not as accurate but perhaps Apple can make something like it if as you say they get past the hang-ups about the pen. They could make money on both the pen and the tablet.
No one does this for a "touch" screen. I've checked. The Wacom doesn't actually do what I'm suggesting either, though I've found the cursor to often lag the pen. This occurs even on my nice almost new now Mac Pro. The Cinteq will never be accused of being "fast".
I'm not familiar with this product you mention. Any idea who makes it, or how we can Google for it?
Comments
Its very difficult working on a screen with a mouse. I know very few designers or photographers who use mice or trackballs. Almost all use tablets, and almost all of them use Wacoms'.
It's very hard to trace a line with a mouse. It has a limited movement on the desk, and you almost always come to the end of its travel before you complete the line.
Don't compare CAD to photographic work or much design work. They are completely different. But even using CAD, most professional users use a tablet.
In fact, for the highest precision, we used 12 x 18 inch models.
I don't know who these people you speak of are, but I question their abilities if they're using mice for this work. I've never heard of that on a wide scale.
Could it be that you travel more in the upper echelon of these fields?
Perhaps i'm stuck in the trenches with the ditch-diggers. The vast majority of people that i've encountered in these fields, spend most of their time using a mouse. Tablets are busted out on occasion, for things like tracing or free-hand artistry. Unfortunately, most of these people don't get to do much free-hand artistry in their day to day work. They'd like to do more artistic work, work that benefits from tablets. But most of their time is spent doing page layout and simplistic compositing of existing images.
Granted, i'm no artist or designer. Maybe I should be pushing my company to install tablets in all our designers' offices.
But back to how this relates to the once-again rumored Apple Tablet...
It seems that a stylus would be best for this type of work, even with your excellent idea for an offset focus point. Initial positioning would still be error prone without a nib that could be tracked without actually clicking or dragging on the screen.
People in the above mentioned fields would be willing to use a stylus. General users probably wouldn't be though. The general userbase has never taken to stylus usage. They just don't have enough tasks for which a stylus is optimal.
I'm unfamiliar with the technology. Is a nib-equipped stylus possible on a capacitance-based touch-screen? If so, a bluetooth based stylus seems like a nice option.
As for touting good art or design accomplished on the iPhone... I'd say that's akin to saying paint brushes aren't needed because somebody did a great finger painting.
I really don't see it running full fledged OSX. Touch interface issues aside, I'm not sure that it would extend OSX market share as much as would be expected. I think it would canibalize macbook and macbook pro sales to a certain extent, especially the 13" model. Students for one are a huge market for the 13" macbooks, if this tablet was a fully featured OSX model that had superior note taking abilities (due to the touch screen) and possibly and ebook store, what would entice them to buy the (likely) higher margin macbooks?
With an OS based on iPhoneOS, you could still have fully featured (but touch optimized)word/pages (or anything else) Apps if someone decided to make them, but requiring itunes sync would mean there would still be a use for the 13" macbooks.
It would eat into MacBook sales somewhat. But I think the major buyers of MacBooks would still prefer the larger screen and keyboard. There's some overlap, but not enough so that it would matter. And remember Job's statement about the iPhone vs the iPod. They would prefer they cannibalized their own products as opposed to someone else doing it.
This would add to sales, not detract from them. I can't see schools replacing MacBooks with this in a large way.
As for MBP sales, no, I don't see this as having much of an effect at all. That's a totally different market and price category. I can see people with MBP's also getting this though, esp if it could be connected as an accessory as we've been saying.
It would eat into MacBook sales somewhat. But I think the major buyers of MacBooks would still prefer the larger screen and keyboard. There's some overlap, but not enough so that it would matter. And remember Job's statement about the iPhone vs the iPod. They would prefer they cannibalized their own products as opposed to someone else doing it.
This would add to sales, not detract from them. I can't see schools replacing MacBooks with this in a large way.
As for MBP sales, no, I don't see this as having much of an effect at all. That's a totally different market and price category. I can see people with MBP's also getting this though, esp if it could be connected as an accessory as we've been saying.
I was thinking of the 13" MBP, which I consider to be pro(fessional) in name only and I could see people going after that or this mythical tablet. I just don't see Apple eating into their own markets (even if it is minor like you suggest) if they can avoid it, and I think they could avoid it in this situation. I also feel that an iPhoneOS based tablet would actually provide a better user experience to the majority of customers than OSX. It may feel too restrictive to some, but I suspect they will be in the minority. I've read the arguments about how "terrible" iPhoneOS apps will look on a larger screen too, but I just don't buy it. A desktop app would be even worse on a (relatively small) touch screen.
Could it be that you travel more in the upper echelon of these fields?
We did commercial work for magazines, newspapers, Tv, movies, music videos, government etc.
Perhaps i'm stuck in the trenches with the ditch-diggers. The vast majority of people that i've encountered in these fields, spend most of their time using a mouse. Tablets are busted out on occasion, for things like tracing or free-hand artistry. Unfortunately, most of these people don't get to do much free-hand artistry in their day to day work. They'd like to do more artistic work, work that benefits from tablets. But most of their time is spent doing page layout and simplistic compositing of existing images.
Page layout is different. You don't need a tablet using Quark or InDesign. But, if you have one, its a big time saver, esp. the newer models with the shortcut buttons.
Granted, i'm no artist or designer. Maybe I should be pushing my company to install tablets in all our designers' offices.
It's a big help using Illustrator and other vector oriented programs as well. Any time you need to draw something that can't be done by a simple pull, and a click of a key to keep the angle at a specific one, and force a straight line, can use a tablet.
If all people are doing are drawing straight lines and circles, then a tablet isn't needed, though, even there, it's much easier a good deal of the time.
But back to how this relates to the once-again rumored Apple Tablet...
It seems that a stylus would be best for this type of work, even with your excellent idea for an offset focus point. Initial positioning would still be error prone without a nib that could be tracked without actually clicking or dragging on the screen.
People in the above mentioned fields would be willing to use a stylus. General users probably wouldn't be though. The general userbase has never taken to stylus usage. They just don't have enough tasks for which a stylus is optimal.
A stylus is what we use of course. Why? Because there's been no other way to do it.
Amazing isn't it that just because we only can invent one way to do something that people think it's the only possible way.
Well, early painting only used fingers dipped in pigments. There was no other way. Then someone discovered using a soft colored rock and charcoal. Things advance.
A finger based tablet seems to be going back to the cavemen drawings. But it's not, because the technology is much different.
Moving a finger across a screen is a more natural way of drawing than holding a stylus. Is it the best way? Is it even as good? I don't know. My Cinteq doesn't work with fingers so I can't compare. But as long as you can see what you're focussed on, and can use the drawing controls, I believe that it will work very well. I'd love for someone here, and we have a lot of smart people here, to develop something to do that.
I'm unfamiliar with the technology. Is a nib-equipped stylus possible on a capacitance-based touch-screen? If so, a bluetooth based stylus seems like a nice option.
Yes it is. I've also developed a magnetic stylus that works.
As for touting good art or design accomplished on the iPhone... I'd say that's akin to saying paint brushes aren't needed because somebody did a great finger painting.
That's exactly what I'm talking about. It's finger painting. Now, if you can see the exact spot you're painting over, it's even better!
I was thinking of the 13" MBP, which I consider to be pro(fessional) in name only.
I suppose that's a matter of opinion. But Apple upgraded it to be a MBP, and so it is. There are different levels of professional equipment.
I suppose that's a matter of opinion. But Apple upgraded it to be a MBP, and so it is. There are different levels of professional equipment.
I guess if I were asked to choose between the 13" MB and MBP, I would take the MBP in a heartbeat, so there is some truth in that. I had always just considered the dedicated graphics card to be the most compelling difference between the two lines.
I guess if I were asked to choose between the 13" MB and MBP, I would take the MBP in a heartbeat, so there is some truth in that. I had always just considered the dedicated graphics card to be the most compelling difference between the two lines.
It's a "eye of the beholder" sort of thing. If you insist that you need a certain feature for your pro work, then to you, a machine that doesn't have it isn't pro "enough".
To some people, eliminating the Express card slot in favor of the much more amateur oriented SD slot in all the machines except the 17", also eliminated them as pro machines for them.
When Apple earlier eliminated FW from some of the machines, that had the same effect. Of course, Apple added FW 800 to those new models.
I guess if I were asked to choose between the 13" MB and MBP, I would take the MBP in a heartbeat, so there is some truth in that. I had always just considered the dedicated graphics card to be the most compelling difference between the two lines.
I assume you considered the 12" Powerbook to be "Pro"? The 9400M is, I think, in the same class now as the low-end discrete GPUs Apple was using were back in the day.
Amazing isn't it that just because we only can invent one way to do something that people think it's the only possible way.
I'd like to address the above quote as it seems to be a common misconception or a sly debate tactic when discussing tablets. Just because someone points out shortcomings in an an interaction technique does not mean that the person is close minded. Nor does it mean that the person thinks the current way is the only possible way. It simply means that they are critiquing the value of that type of interaction.
The quote also suggests that not much thought has been given to the merits of various interaction techniques. This is insulting to the tens of thousands of computer scientists, psychologists, and human factors scientists that have devoted decades to that very subject. Rest assured, they're not only interested in the subject, but they have implemented and empirically studied just about everything ever mentioned on these forums. With that said, they fully acknowledge that there is plenty of work left to be done and nobody in the field thinks we've reached the pinnacle of interaction design.
So please everyone, when people like me offer critiques of tablets, styluses, and touch-interfaces, don't resort to calling us close-minded. It isn't that tablet critics are stuck in their ways. Many of us have given the subject much thought for many many years. There is a vast body of scientific research along with real-world precedence to build upon.
Plenty of research has been done on finger vs stylus based interaction... Nib-equipped thimble-styluses, redundant screens so that screen content can be viewed with or without the finger in the way, shifted point of focus (as you suggested), electro-static tactile feedback, audible feedback, relative vs absolute positioning devices, etc, etc.
While technology will advance, the human body will remain static. That is why a discussion of tablets/styluses/touch-interfaces revolves around human factors. It is well established that humans will only carry around objects of certain shapes and sizes unless unusually motivated. This dictates the form of everything in the constructed world around us, including books, keys, wallets, credit cards, weapons, types of food, etc. The same is true for tools and architecture. This is why for the past thousand years, writing instruments and door knobs have remained largely unchanged. Pockets, carrying straps, and luggage provide another category of constraints for the types of objects humans are willing to deal with.
In other words, a truly enlightened view on the potential of tablets would acknowledge that there are certain influences and constraints that will never change. These are imposed by the human physique along with limited sensory and mental faculties.
Despite being well aware of long held principles in the human factors field, interaction designers constantly stray into designing and implementing supposedly dead-end interaction techniques. That intellectual curiosity exists, flourishes, and occasionally leads to unexpected advances. I can't wait to see what they come up with next.
So please, don't suggest that tablet critics are just rejecting ideas on these boards simply because they are short sided. Quite the opposite can be true. Some, like myself, are obsessed with HCI and are simply pointing out the tradeoffs between computing form factors and their associated interaction techniques. It is my opinion that the utility of tablets is almost always overestimated outside of certain select applications such as free-hand shape definition. This is why I believe that tablets will forever remain auxiliary computers, supplementing other types of computers which are more optimal for the vast majority of tasks.
Woah, that was long. Obsessed, did I mention obsessed?
Please carry on though... I'd like to encourage discussion on the subject despite getting peeved when people assume that this is new territory. Apple has done amazing things with the iPhone's interface. But really it is their implementation and application of already well understood technologies and principles that makes the iPhone revolutionary. What Apple did was find productive ways of applying them.
Anyway, as per my usual style after posting such a manifesto, I'll bow out and let others have their say.
I assume you considered the 12" Powerbook to be "Pro"? The 9400M is, I think, in the same class now as the low-end discrete GPUs Apple was using were back in the day.
Sadly, I was in a Windows world then.
This is why I believe that tablets will forever remain auxiliary computers, supplementing other types of computers which are more optimal for the vast majority of tasks.
Wow that was quite the post, but I did want to highlight this part. While a tablet form factor obviously has some limitations, I think you may be missing the Apple's goal behind the tablet. I'm pretty sure an auxiliary computer is exactly what Apple wants it to be. If it runs iPhone OS it will have to be (unless they make a lot of changes). As with netbooks, it will be bought as a secondary computer with specific tasks in mind. Now I think it will be much more attractive than a netbook, but it will fill a similar niche.
That article was a good find. I've bookmarked it. If it runs Windows, as it looks to, then it must use the Atom. There is no way that MS has got another OS ready. Look how far behind the very minor update to Win Mobile 6.1 is taking, just going to 6.5. And then, the supposedly major reworking of ver 7 was pushed back by a year to get it to align with the iPhone OS.
That would be nice, but I don't think Apple will go that far. At least not yet.
The question is whether Apple would end their resistance to a pen. While I hope so, I'm not holding my breath. but the artist that did the New Yorker cover art with just his iPhone has shown that a small screen with a finger based program can do a lot.
I can't necessarily see myself working Photoshop with a finger, but who knows? If it's done right, it could work.
Well, if you like pain, you can hold your breath till Apple makes an official stylus for the tablet.
Or, you can simply get a 3rd party stylus which will undoubtedly be available from a 1000 different vendors soon after launch.
Well, if you like pain, you can hold your breath till Apple makes an official stylus for the tablet.
Or, you can simply get a 3rd party stylus which will undoubtedly be available from a 1000 different vendors soon after launch.
You can already get them.
http://www.songtak.com.tw/product.php?mode=list&cid=34
You can already get them.
http://www.songtak.com.tw/product.php?mode=list&cid=34
There you go Melgross.
I'd like to address the above quote as it seems to be a common misconception or a sly debate tactic when discussing tablets. Just because someone points out shortcomings in an an interaction technique does not mean that the person is close minded. Nor does it mean that the person thinks the current way is the only possible way. It simply means that they are critiquing the value of that type of interaction.
The quote also suggests that not much thought has been given to the merits of various interaction techniques. This is insulting to the tens of thousands of computer scientists, psychologists, and human factors scientists that have devoted decades to that very subject. Rest assured, they're not only interested in the subject, but they have implemented and empirically studied just about everything ever mentioned on these forums. With that said, they fully acknowledge that there is plenty of work left to be done and nobody in the field thinks we've reached the pinnacle of interaction design.
So please everyone, when people like me offer critiques of tablets, styluses, and touch-interfaces, don't resort to calling us close-minded. It isn't that tablet critics are stuck in their ways. Many of us have given the subject much thought for many many years. There is a vast body of scientific research along with real-world precedence to build upon.
Plenty of research has been done on finger vs stylus based interaction... Nib-equipped thimble-styluses, redundant screens so that screen content can be viewed with or without the finger in the way, shifted point of focus (as you suggested), electro-static tactile feedback, audible feedback, relative vs absolute positioning devices, etc, etc.
While technology will advance, the human body will remain static. That is why a discussion of tablets/styluses/touch-interfaces revolves around human factors. It is well established that humans will only carry around objects of certain shapes and sizes unless unusually motivated. This dictates the form of everything in the constructed world around us, including books, keys, wallets, credit cards, weapons, types of food, etc. The same is true for tools and architecture. This is why for the past thousand years, writing instruments and door knobs have remained largely unchanged. Pockets, carrying straps, and luggage provide another category of constraints for the types of objects humans are willing to deal with.
In other words, a truly enlightened view on the potential of tablets would acknowledge that there are certain influences and constraints that will never change. These are imposed by the human physique along with limited sensory and mental faculties.
Despite being well aware of long held principles in the human factors field, interaction designers constantly stray into designing and implementing supposedly dead-end interaction techniques. That intellectual curiosity exists, flourishes, and occasionally leads to unexpected advances. I can't wait to see what they come up with next.
So please, don't suggest that tablet critics are just rejecting ideas on these boards simply because they are short sided. Quite the opposite can be true. Some, like myself, are obsessed with HCI and are simply pointing out the tradeoffs between computing form factors and their associated interaction techniques. It is my opinion that the utility of tablets is almost always overestimated outside of certain select applications such as free-hand shape definition. This is why I believe that tablets will forever remain auxiliary computers, supplementing other types of computers which are more optimal for the vast majority of tasks.
Woah, that was long. Obsessed, did I mention obsessed?
Please carry on though... I'd like to encourage discussion on the subject despite getting peeved when people assume that this is new territory. Apple has done amazing things with the iPhone's interface. But really it is their implementation and application of already well understood technologies and principles that makes the iPhone revolutionary. What Apple did was find productive ways of applying them.
Anyway, as per my usual style after posting such a manifesto, I'll bow out and let others have their say.
Well, after that long post, I have to tell you that I wasn't referring to anyone here at all.
It was a generalized observation about people on average. It had nothing to do with research. Or pretty much anything you brought up in your post.
So while your post is interesting, and stands on its own merits, your (sly) referrals to me can be removed, and it would be even more accurate then it is now.
Well, if you like pain, you can hold your breath till Apple makes an official stylus for the tablet.
Or, you can simply get a 3rd party stylus which will undoubtedly be available from a 1000 different vendors soon after launch.
You can already get them.
http://www.songtak.com.tw/product.php?mode=list&cid=34
There you go Melgross.
Gee guys, thank's for supplying the information I already supplied over a year ago.
The problem with those stylus's is that they aren't very good.
I've found that a magnet tip works better, but it's difficult to do for several reasons.
Touch screens are woefully inadequate for precision work. A stylus would be necessary. The finger is far too "squishy" for accuracy below 50 or so pixels in diameter (and that's even according to Apple's own Human Interface Guidelines).
You can use the cursor though and just have your finger move it instead of the mouse. This is how some point and click games work on the iphone and how Wacoms work. You'd slide your finger over the screen and the cursor would follow then you just tap the screen to start doing a selection or action.
If anything, it's more precise than a mouse because you have more control over subtle movements and it's faster to move over the screen and hit the point you want.
I've seen quite a few artists/designers and wanna-be artists/designers pine away for a tablet. Upon getting one, they're gleeful and show everyone how great it is. A few weeks or months later, that same tablet is in a drawer, never to be used again. Turns out, a mouse is still optimal for most computer tasks that need precision 2D interaction.
That's why they are wannabe artists. Real artists get by just fine with a Wacom and a mouse is not superior for precision. Try drawing a smooth curve with a mouse in Photoshop vs a Wacom and you will see that's the case. Your wrist will also get sore very quickly.
The question is whether Apple would end their resistance to a pen. While I hope so, I'm not holding my breath. but the artist that did the New Yorker cover art with just his iPhone has shown that a small screen with a finger based program can do a lot.
I can't necessarily see myself working Photoshop with a finger, but who knows? If it's done right, it could work.
For positional accuracy, I think it will be ok because Wacom use the same setup in that the pen just moves the cursor. A finger can do the same. A finger will smudge the screen though and unless they rig the screen with sensors, it won't do pressure. I like the idea of finger painting though, it seems like a very natural thing to do and with the cursor accuracy, it shouldn't be much worse than pen interaction.
I have an idea for this! It just came to me! Brilliant, if I say so myself.
There could be an area right above where the finger touches the screen, adjustable as to height and right/left offset from the finger where the actual point of interaction would occur.
Maybe I should have kept that to myself.
This is how the Wacom works I'm afraid.
I just remembered there is actually a 3rd party pen that will turn any display into a Wacom-like device. It only works up to a certain size of display and it's not as accurate but perhaps Apple can make something like it if as you say they get past the hang-ups about the pen. They could make money on both the pen and the tablet.
Gee guys, thank's for supplying the information I already supplied over a year ago.
The problem with those stylus's is that they aren't very good.
I've found that a magnet tip works better, but it's difficult to do for several reasons.
I don't know which ones you've used but the ones I've tried seem pretty good to me. You need to also take into account that you really don't know exactly what type of screen Apple may be using for this new product. It may be one of them brand new 10 point capacitive touchscreens with different surface layers.
We've so close now to the debut that it doesn't matter what we say. We simply need to wait for the debut then judge.
This is how the Wacom works I'm afraid.
I just remembered there is actually a 3rd party pen that will turn any display into a Wacom-like device. It only works up to a certain size of display and it's not as accurate but perhaps Apple can make something like it if as you say they get past the hang-ups about the pen. They could make money on both the pen and the tablet.
No one does this for a "touch" screen. I've checked. The Wacom doesn't actually do what I'm suggesting either, though I've found the cursor to often lag the pen. This occurs even on my nice almost new now Mac Pro. The Cinteq will never be accused of being "fast".
I'm not familiar with this product you mention. Any idea who makes it, or how we can Google for it?