It's GOT to do more. That just doesn't seem to be enough.
It has to be a good book reader. It has to do Word and Excel editing, in a more than phone basic way. It must read PDFs. At least, it must do everything the iPhone does, but better, and more sophisticatedly.
But how does the iPhone interface translate to a device this size? I don't know. It was designed for a small screen. OS X's GUI was designed for a large screen.
Somehow, the two must meld.
The problem I see is that Apple will then have a third GUI, and possibly a third set of app specs. That's not good.
However, OS X does have a simple interface as well. Maybe that could be used. But which programs would it run? Could it run both?
Sigh. Too many questions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Olternaut
Why would an Apple security specialist, of all people, risk his job by telling you about the tablet? And why would Apple send out a "blast" to all employees when not even the majority of Apple employees would usually know about a major new Apple product until it is officially unveiled?
Hey Melgross! You didn't answer the question. Is Apple throwing out their famed security out the window at the last second or what?
I had a very interesting conversation with an Apple security specialist this morning.
I had my itunes account broken into, and two $50 gift certificates were bought. I got all of that straightened out through Apple's IM service a week ago, though they said a security specialist in fraud will contact me.
He did so this morning.
In the course of discussion, and checking our accounts, I mentioned that my daughter in England used a Toshiba netbook. He said that he could see that she had a Windows machine. I said that she only wanted something light for internet, Skype, IM and such, as well as being able to use iTunes for her iPhone.
Then he asked me if I knew that Apple was coming out with a small machine for primarily net use. I asked which device that was, and if he meant the rumored tablet. He said yes.
I asked if he meant that he knew that Apple was coming out with that, and again, he said yes.
I asked him how he knew, and he said that Apple had sent out a BLAST to employees. I said that it sounded odd that they would do that now. but he seemed convinced. He said that it was partly in response to some Dell tablet-like device that was supposed to be out, or coming out for about $399, but he agreed Apple's would cost more.
Honestly, I don't know what to make of that. I was in partial shock at his statements.
I have two long time friends at Apple. One is in software engineering management, and the other is in hardware engineering management. Sometimes, they will give me some hints of a product or service, but will never tell me directly, even though I promise I won't write about it, and they know I wouldn't. So this was a particular shock.
I've asked them, and have not gotten even a hint. Now I'll have to contact them again.
While on the one hand, I hope this guy knows, I'm not so sure he's gotten his information correct, though he insisted. He said that Apple sent the BLST out in the form of an RSS. He really did sound like he knew.
What's more interesting is that he mentioned this "information" to you unprompted... I think the Apple Bureau of Investigations has your number.
Hmm, an Apple Cintiq type tablet would be interesting. It would have to have a wider audience than "it's for artists" though. But if it was for this purpose, are you seeing it as a remote graphics tablet for your desktop Mac, or as a single device that you would install Adobe CS4 onto? The minimum system for CS4 is a G5 with 1GB RAM and 10GB of disk space, if this tablet is a low energy Atom or ARM device, is it going to be able to run CS4 (or CS5 when that comes out) well enough?
I do think a graphics tablet Mac is a good idea, maybe it would be more possible with some combination of Inkwell, Wacom drivers if they can get them as standard, and Back To My Mac remote services.
Who would such a device serve best?
-Artists, designers
-Musicians (as a control surface)
-Students (replacement for textbooks and other computer)
-Medical professionals (replacement for paper-based forms, and possibly even iPod touches)
-Anyone needing a web-connected pad-sized computer with no moving parts
I know a bit about iPhone development and in the case of the emulator you are building x86 binaries.
In any event if they go to a larger device you wouldn't need emulation because the apps that follow Apples guide lines should work fine on a device with a larger viewing area. Now that does not mean the app wouldn't waste pixels on the bigger screen just that it would run.
It is impractical to run iPhone/iPod touch apps on a larger screen in emulation, even if that screen is multi-touch capable. For one thing, current App Store apps are designed and built to run optimally on small devices. We're not just talking about the screen representation here, we're talking about ergonomics. Try to use a small screen within a larger screen running these apps... it would be suboptimal and thus, completely un-Apple. Not happening. If Apple does anything close to this, I'll eat my tennis shoes. And I don't anticipate having to replace my footwear any time soon.
Are their artists or designeres here that have experience using a finger-operated capacitance-based touch screens as the tool for creative work? Wacom products have had non-trivial success. But they've never really been mainstream even among artsists, mostly because of how divorced the input is from feedback. Cheap touch sensitive screens and GUIs tailored for them have the potential to revolutionize the manner in which people tend to use things like Adobe CS.
However, I'm not sure that finger based touch-screens will offer enough precision on a tablet sized screen. It seems likely that a stylus would still be more desirable in the same manner that painters tend to use brushes instead of their fingers. In other words, I see multi-touch as more useful for widget interaction and crude manipulation of onscreen objects, not so much as a precise tool for photoshop or illustrator users. That is unless the touch screen in question is huge enough that our fingers are precise in comparison to the total screen area.
Not to discount your daughter's desire for a tablet Melgross. But was she envisioning stylus or finger based interaction? If finger based, do you see this as an appropriate fit, the right tool for the job?
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).
Why would an Apple security specialist, of all people, risk his job by telling you about the tablet? And why would Apple send out a "blast" to all employees when not even the majority of Apple employees would usually know about a major new Apple product until it is officially unveiled?
I have no idea. That's why I said I was shocked by what he said.
But I can't simply ignore it either in light of the almost daily revelations we're getting from reliable news sources that are even giving us specific parts from specific suppliers.
It's too much for developers, and too much for consumers.
Do you really want to deal with three GUIs? I don't. If you're a developer, do you want to have to develop yet another front end? I doubt it.
Apple has always been about simplicity. This would surely mess that concept up.
It doesn't mean they wouldn't do it.
Rest assured, the guy you talked to probably got all of his info from AppleInsider. There's no reason for him to get an internal e-mail outlining future product releases and strategy unless they're trying to catch him leaking information. UNLESS... Steve really is no longer in charge of the company and they are starting to become more open about these things due to their own jockeying for position within the company... never a good thing, and it will only lead to position and titles being more important than the work being done.
I know a bit about iPhone development and in the case of the emulator you are building x86 binaries.
In any event if they go to a larger device you wouldn't need emulation because the apps that follow Apples guide lines should work fine on a device with a larger viewing area. Now that does not mean the app wouldn't waste pixels on the bigger screen just that it would run.
Yeah I'd complain for sure. For one why would you mix two profoundly different user interfaces? Second there has yet to be a sound argument leveled to justify Mac OS/X on the device. Third it wouldn't be yet another OS, rather it is just an enhanced vesion of Touch. Functionally it would be like Mac OS/X and Mac OS/X Server edition, same core OS but with additional software thrown in. On an iPhone based tablet this could be additional APIs for printing, new controls or multitasking support. This additional stuff is entirely up to Apple and their desire to control the product.
In any event since iPhone OS, as we know it today, was derived from development work for a tablet type device it can be assumed that the tablets interface will look a lot like iPhone.
Dave
One question would be where Apple wants to take this. Is it an extention of the computer line, or the handheld line?
I think thats a difficult thing to decide. Obviously, the market for Apple's handheld devices is much bigger in an individual device sales way. But extending Apple's computer sales down through this device would also be a good bet.
For one, it would raise their marketshare for OS x and computer sales significantly. It would extend their OS X sales profits, as they could actually sell OS X to this device as an upgrade instead of giving it away if they wanted to.
Then also, their iLife and iWork software would also run (assuming it was x86 compatible of course).
I can think of lots of advantage to doing it this way, and also allowing the handheld apps to also work.
Sure, Apple may have something entirely different in mind, but this is what a lot of people would want.
I've spoken to a bunch of people (including myself, my daughter, and surprisingly, my wife) who would just love to have an Apple netbook type of device, tablet or not, even if it costs more.
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).
I completely agree, but was trying to frame the topic in a less know-it-all kind of manner. But what the hell... here it goes.
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.
Granted, the tablets we're discussing here are touch-screens, not just drawing tablets. Yet I'm still of the mindset that multi-touch and updated GUIs won't do much to change the human factors involved with the manipulation of on-screen objects. Third parties have long offered services to convert powerbooks or macbook pros to touch screen capable. Yet they've never caught on because using a mouse is simpler for most tasks, including those in Adobe and CAD programs which already integrate reasonably well with stylus based interaction.
What are those human factors I vaguely referred to? For multi-touch, the first that comes to mind is the fact that human visual acuity is much higher than the precision possible via a finger directly on a touch screen. Things will always be displayed at a resolution finer than can be manipulated via finger tips.
If Intel are involved, you can bet it will use Atom. Interestingly, they said it would be about 5 inches and compete with Amazon's Kindle.
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.
Quote:
I hope Apple will target the higher end tablet market where you get products like the XT2:
That would be nice, but I don't think Apple will go that far. At least not yet.
Quote:
Concerning drawing ability, I don't think it has to be nor should it be a feature of the screen itself but the pen. The pen should have a spring-loaded nib that has a sensor to detect as many levels of pressure. It can have a magnetic holder on the side of the device for charging or have its own dock.
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.
Are their artists or designeres here that have experience using a finger-operated capacitance-based touch screens as the tool for creative work? Wacom products have had non-trivial success. But they've never really been mainstream even among artsists, mostly because of how divorced the input is from feedback. Cheap touch sensitive screens and GUIs tailored for them have the potential to revolutionize the manner in which people tend to use things like Adobe CS.
However, I'm not sure that finger based touch-screens will offer enough precision on a tablet sized screen. It seems likely that a stylus would still be more desirable in the same manner that painters tend to use brushes instead of their fingers. In other words, I see multi-touch as more useful for widget interaction and crude manipulation of onscreen objects, not so much as a precise tool for photoshop or illustrator users. That is unless the touch screen in question is huge enough that our fingers are precise in comparison to the total screen area.
Not to discount your daughter's desire for a tablet Melgross. But was she envisioning stylus or finger based interaction? If finger based, do you see this as an appropriate fit, the right tool for the job?[/QUOTE]
Check out this Google page I linked to. It's very interesting, and to those who aren't familiar with what was done, amazing:
I didn't ask about what she thought, but I would imagine that it was for a stylus as with the Wacom.
But as we can see from the work done for the New Yorker with a really tiny iPhone, this is doable.
With a screen four or more times larger in area and hopefully, at least four time more pixels, this could work.
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.
What this would do is to allow us to see exactly where the work was being done. The software would simply translate our finger touch to that offset spot. Then we could use all the tools we would otherwise use with a stylus.
The screen could move as it does in PS when we reach the edge of the window if we set it to do so.
This should solve all the problems of using a finger.
Maybe I should have kept that to myself.
But hey, in the spirit of openness, and all my friends here and everywhere, I hope someone can take this idea and figure out how to work it out.
Hey Melgross! You didn't answer the question. Is Apple throwing out their famed security out the window at the last second or what?
This was so unexpected. I really don't know if this was just him musing, but he was sure sounding. And when he stated how he received the BLAST over RSS, I practically dropped the phone.
I really don't know what to make of it.
He also said that at least some developers were told something about it at the ADC.
What's more interesting is that he mentioned this "information" to you unprompted... I think the Apple Bureau of Investigations has your number.
It's weird.
I never make statements like this here. Never! There were a couple of times over the years where I did get some advance info from sources that couldn't be directly traced back to Apple, and I did mention it, but this is unprecedented for me.
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).
I don't agree with that. It depends on hard you press, for one thing. My idea, which I put in a post shortly before this one, would work.
What I've found, and I'm certain that other artists have found the same thing to be true, is that we can adapt our sense of touch readily to compensate for whatever "squishiness" that can appear in a device. It's not that difficult. It just takes a short bit of practice. The biggest problem with the finger is that you can't see beneath it.
The general public is not as inclined to try. But as can be seen by people typing on the vertical screen, high typing rates are possible with some practice, even with a hidden point of contact. And it is reliable. Given that a key in the vertical mode is only about 25 pixels wide, the 50 pixel minimum accuracy number you gave goes out the window. I don't even know where that number would come from or how someone decided it to be true, because it certainly isn't. You can actually affect one pixel every time, if you can hit it. This is just like the Wacom Cintiq. That just uses a stylus to do it. My idea would allow the same precision.
Rest assured, the guy you talked to probably got all of his info from AppleInsider. There's no reason for him to get an internal e-mail outlining future product releases and strategy unless they're trying to catch him leaking information. UNLESS... Steve really is no longer in charge of the company and they are starting to become more open about these things due to their own jockeying for position within the company... never a good thing, and it will only lead to position and titles being more important than the work being done.
I'm not assured, and he certainly didn't sound that way. Don't think that what everyone says is from a rumors site, because it isn't.
I see no reason why he would have said it the way he did if he just read it in a rumors site. Why say that Apple sent aBLAST out. Why mention it was done using RSS?
It makes no sense if he just read some rumors here. He could have said that.
I completely agree, but was trying to frame the topic in a less know-it-all kind of manner. But what the hell... here it goes.
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.
Granted, the tablets we're discussing here are touch-screens, not just drawing tablets. Yet I'm still of the mindset that multi-touch and updated GUIs won't do much to change the human factors involved with the manipulation of on-screen objects. Third parties have long offered services to convert powerbooks or macbook pros to touch screen capable. Yet they've never caught on because using a mouse is simpler for most tasks, including those in Adobe and CAD programs which already integrate reasonably well with stylus based interaction.
What are those human factors I vaguely referred to? For multi-touch, the first that comes to mind is the fact that human visual acuity is much higher than the precision possible via a finger directly on a touch screen. Things will always be displayed at a resolution finer than can be manipulated via finger tips.
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.
One question would be where Apple wants to take this. Is it an extention of the computer line, or the handheld line?
I think thats a difficult thing to decide. Obviously, the market for Apple's handheld devices is much bigger in an individual device sales way. But extending Apple's computer sales down through this device would also be a good bet.
For one, it would raise their marketshare for OS x and computer sales significantly. It would extend their OS X sales profits, as they could actually sell OS X to this device as an upgrade instead of giving it away if they wanted to.
Then also, their iLife and iWork software would also run (assuming it was x86 compatible of course).
I can think of lots of advantage to doing it this way, and also allowing the handheld apps to also work.
Sure, Apple may have something entirely different in mind, but this is what a lot of people would want.
I've spoken to a bunch of people (including myself, my daughter, and surprisingly, my wife) who would just love to have an Apple netbook type of device, tablet or not, even if it costs more.
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.
Comments
I want one right now!!!
It's GOT to do more. That just doesn't seem to be enough.
It has to be a good book reader. It has to do Word and Excel editing, in a more than phone basic way. It must read PDFs. At least, it must do everything the iPhone does, but better, and more sophisticatedly.
But how does the iPhone interface translate to a device this size? I don't know. It was designed for a small screen. OS X's GUI was designed for a large screen.
Somehow, the two must meld.
The problem I see is that Apple will then have a third GUI, and possibly a third set of app specs. That's not good.
However, OS X does have a simple interface as well. Maybe that could be used. But which programs would it run? Could it run both?
Sigh. Too many questions.
Why would an Apple security specialist, of all people, risk his job by telling you about the tablet? And why would Apple send out a "blast" to all employees when not even the majority of Apple employees would usually know about a major new Apple product until it is officially unveiled?
Hey Melgross! You didn't answer the question. Is Apple throwing out their famed security out the window at the last second or what?
I had a very interesting conversation with an Apple security specialist this morning.
I had my itunes account broken into, and two $50 gift certificates were bought. I got all of that straightened out through Apple's IM service a week ago, though they said a security specialist in fraud will contact me.
He did so this morning.
In the course of discussion, and checking our accounts, I mentioned that my daughter in England used a Toshiba netbook. He said that he could see that she had a Windows machine. I said that she only wanted something light for internet, Skype, IM and such, as well as being able to use iTunes for her iPhone.
Then he asked me if I knew that Apple was coming out with a small machine for primarily net use. I asked which device that was, and if he meant the rumored tablet. He said yes.
I asked if he meant that he knew that Apple was coming out with that, and again, he said yes.
I asked him how he knew, and he said that Apple had sent out a BLAST to employees. I said that it sounded odd that they would do that now. but he seemed convinced. He said that it was partly in response to some Dell tablet-like device that was supposed to be out, or coming out for about $399, but he agreed Apple's would cost more.
Honestly, I don't know what to make of that. I was in partial shock at his statements.
I have two long time friends at Apple. One is in software engineering management, and the other is in hardware engineering management. Sometimes, they will give me some hints of a product or service, but will never tell me directly, even though I promise I won't write about it, and they know I wouldn't. So this was a particular shock.
I've asked them, and have not gotten even a hint. Now I'll have to contact them again.
While on the one hand, I hope this guy knows, I'm not so sure he's gotten his information correct, though he insisted. He said that Apple sent the BLST out in the form of an RSS. He really did sound like he knew.
What's more interesting is that he mentioned this "information" to you unprompted... I think the Apple Bureau of Investigations has your number.
Hmm, an Apple Cintiq type tablet would be interesting. It would have to have a wider audience than "it's for artists" though. But if it was for this purpose, are you seeing it as a remote graphics tablet for your desktop Mac, or as a single device that you would install Adobe CS4 onto? The minimum system for CS4 is a G5 with 1GB RAM and 10GB of disk space, if this tablet is a low energy Atom or ARM device, is it going to be able to run CS4 (or CS5 when that comes out) well enough?
I do think a graphics tablet Mac is a good idea, maybe it would be more possible with some combination of Inkwell, Wacom drivers if they can get them as standard, and Back To My Mac remote services.
Who would such a device serve best?
-Artists, designers
-Musicians (as a control surface)
-Students (replacement for textbooks and other computer)
-Medical professionals (replacement for paper-based forms, and possibly even iPod touches)
-Anyone needing a web-connected pad-sized computer with no moving parts
Still, I don't think it's gonna happen.
I know a bit about iPhone development and in the case of the emulator you are building x86 binaries.
In any event if they go to a larger device you wouldn't need emulation because the apps that follow Apples guide lines should work fine on a device with a larger viewing area. Now that does not mean the app wouldn't waste pixels on the bigger screen just that it would run.
It is impractical to run iPhone/iPod touch apps on a larger screen in emulation, even if that screen is multi-touch capable. For one thing, current App Store apps are designed and built to run optimally on small devices. We're not just talking about the screen representation here, we're talking about ergonomics. Try to use a small screen within a larger screen running these apps... it would be suboptimal and thus, completely un-Apple. Not happening. If Apple does anything close to this, I'll eat my tennis shoes. And I don't anticipate having to replace my footwear any time soon.
Are their artists or designeres here that have experience using a finger-operated capacitance-based touch screens as the tool for creative work? Wacom products have had non-trivial success. But they've never really been mainstream even among artsists, mostly because of how divorced the input is from feedback. Cheap touch sensitive screens and GUIs tailored for them have the potential to revolutionize the manner in which people tend to use things like Adobe CS.
However, I'm not sure that finger based touch-screens will offer enough precision on a tablet sized screen. It seems likely that a stylus would still be more desirable in the same manner that painters tend to use brushes instead of their fingers. In other words, I see multi-touch as more useful for widget interaction and crude manipulation of onscreen objects, not so much as a precise tool for photoshop or illustrator users. That is unless the touch screen in question is huge enough that our fingers are precise in comparison to the total screen area.
Not to discount your daughter's desire for a tablet Melgross. But was she envisioning stylus or finger based interaction? If finger based, do you see this as an appropriate fit, the right tool for the job?
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).
Why would an Apple security specialist, of all people, risk his job by telling you about the tablet? And why would Apple send out a "blast" to all employees when not even the majority of Apple employees would usually know about a major new Apple product until it is officially unveiled?
I have no idea. That's why I said I was shocked by what he said.
But I can't simply ignore it either in light of the almost daily revelations we're getting from reliable news sources that are even giving us specific parts from specific suppliers.
There's too much going on here to ignore.
Not necessarily. A third GUI isn't a big deal for Apple to deal with. It's all the same OS anyway.
It's too much for developers, and too much for consumers.
Do you really want to deal with three GUIs? I don't. If you're a developer, do you want to have to develop yet another front end? I doubt it.
Apple has always been about simplicity. This would surely mess that concept up.
It doesn't mean they wouldn't do it.
It's too much for developers, and too much for consumers.
Do you really want to deal with three GUIs? I don't. If you're a developer, do you want to have to develop yet another front end? I doubt it.
Apple has always been about simplicity. This would surely mess that concept up.
It doesn't mean they wouldn't do it.
Rest assured, the guy you talked to probably got all of his info from AppleInsider. There's no reason for him to get an internal e-mail outlining future product releases and strategy unless they're trying to catch him leaking information. UNLESS... Steve really is no longer in charge of the company and they are starting to become more open about these things due to their own jockeying for position within the company... never a good thing, and it will only lead to position and titles being more important than the work being done.
I know a bit about iPhone development and in the case of the emulator you are building x86 binaries.
In any event if they go to a larger device you wouldn't need emulation because the apps that follow Apples guide lines should work fine on a device with a larger viewing area. Now that does not mean the app wouldn't waste pixels on the bigger screen just that it would run.
Yeah I'd complain for sure. For one why would you mix two profoundly different user interfaces? Second there has yet to be a sound argument leveled to justify Mac OS/X on the device. Third it wouldn't be yet another OS, rather it is just an enhanced vesion of Touch. Functionally it would be like Mac OS/X and Mac OS/X Server edition, same core OS but with additional software thrown in. On an iPhone based tablet this could be additional APIs for printing, new controls or multitasking support. This additional stuff is entirely up to Apple and their desire to control the product.
In any event since iPhone OS, as we know it today, was derived from development work for a tablet type device it can be assumed that the tablets interface will look a lot like iPhone.
Dave
One question would be where Apple wants to take this. Is it an extention of the computer line, or the handheld line?
I think thats a difficult thing to decide. Obviously, the market for Apple's handheld devices is much bigger in an individual device sales way. But extending Apple's computer sales down through this device would also be a good bet.
For one, it would raise their marketshare for OS x and computer sales significantly. It would extend their OS X sales profits, as they could actually sell OS X to this device as an upgrade instead of giving it away if they wanted to.
Then also, their iLife and iWork software would also run (assuming it was x86 compatible of course).
I can think of lots of advantage to doing it this way, and also allowing the handheld apps to also work.
Sure, Apple may have something entirely different in mind, but this is what a lot of people would want.
I've spoken to a bunch of people (including myself, my daughter, and surprisingly, my wife) who would just love to have an Apple netbook type of device, tablet or not, even if it costs more.
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).
I completely agree, but was trying to frame the topic in a less know-it-all kind of manner. But what the hell... here it goes.
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.
Granted, the tablets we're discussing here are touch-screens, not just drawing tablets. Yet I'm still of the mindset that multi-touch and updated GUIs won't do much to change the human factors involved with the manipulation of on-screen objects. Third parties have long offered services to convert powerbooks or macbook pros to touch screen capable. Yet they've never caught on because using a mouse is simpler for most tasks, including those in Adobe and CAD programs which already integrate reasonably well with stylus based interaction.
What are those human factors I vaguely referred to? For multi-touch, the first that comes to mind is the fact that human visual acuity is much higher than the precision possible via a finger directly on a touch screen. Things will always be displayed at a resolution finer than can be manipulated via finger tips.
There is a rumor about Dell developing a tablet with Intel:
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/...-intel-tablet/
If Intel are involved, you can bet it will use Atom. Interestingly, they said it would be about 5 inches and compete with Amazon's Kindle.
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.
I hope Apple will target the higher end tablet market where you get products like the XT2:
http://configure.us.dell.com/dellsto...=MLB1484&s=biz
1.4GHz Core 2 Duo for $2,340 starting price.
That would be nice, but I don't think Apple will go that far. At least not yet.
Concerning drawing ability, I don't think it has to be nor should it be a feature of the screen itself but the pen. The pen should have a spring-loaded nib that has a sensor to detect as many levels of pressure. It can have a magnetic holder on the side of the device for charging or have its own dock.
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.
Read the articles:
http://www.deepapple.com/articles/25345.html , and http://www.deepapple.com/news/34814.html , in russian
The translation of these articles is decent, though not complete for some reason.
But what can be read is very interesting.
Are their artists or designeres here that have experience using a finger-operated capacitance-based touch screens as the tool for creative work? Wacom products have had non-trivial success. But they've never really been mainstream even among artsists, mostly because of how divorced the input is from feedback. Cheap touch sensitive screens and GUIs tailored for them have the potential to revolutionize the manner in which people tend to use things like Adobe CS.
However, I'm not sure that finger based touch-screens will offer enough precision on a tablet sized screen. It seems likely that a stylus would still be more desirable in the same manner that painters tend to use brushes instead of their fingers. In other words, I see multi-touch as more useful for widget interaction and crude manipulation of onscreen objects, not so much as a precise tool for photoshop or illustrator users. That is unless the touch screen in question is huge enough that our fingers are precise in comparison to the total screen area.
Not to discount your daughter's desire for a tablet Melgross. But was she envisioning stylus or finger based interaction? If finger based, do you see this as an appropriate fit, the right tool for the job?[/QUOTE]
Check out this Google page I linked to. It's very interesting, and to those who aren't familiar with what was done, amazing:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&c...iPhone&spell=1
I didn't ask about what she thought, but I would imagine that it was for a stylus as with the Wacom.
But as we can see from the work done for the New Yorker with a really tiny iPhone, this is doable.
With a screen four or more times larger in area and hopefully, at least four time more pixels, this could work.
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.
What this would do is to allow us to see exactly where the work was being done. The software would simply translate our finger touch to that offset spot. Then we could use all the tools we would otherwise use with a stylus.
The screen could move as it does in PS when we reach the edge of the window if we set it to do so.
This should solve all the problems of using a finger.
Maybe I should have kept that to myself.
But hey, in the spirit of openness, and all my friends here and everywhere, I hope someone can take this idea and figure out how to work it out.
Hey Melgross! You didn't answer the question. Is Apple throwing out their famed security out the window at the last second or what?
This was so unexpected. I really don't know if this was just him musing, but he was sure sounding. And when he stated how he received the BLAST over RSS, I practically dropped the phone.
I really don't know what to make of it.
He also said that at least some developers were told something about it at the ADC.
What's more interesting is that he mentioned this "information" to you unprompted... I think the Apple Bureau of Investigations has your number.
It's weird.
I never make statements like this here. Never! There were a couple of times over the years where I did get some advance info from sources that couldn't be directly traced back to Apple, and I did mention it, but this is unprecedented for me.
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).
I don't agree with that. It depends on hard you press, for one thing. My idea, which I put in a post shortly before this one, would work.
What I've found, and I'm certain that other artists have found the same thing to be true, is that we can adapt our sense of touch readily to compensate for whatever "squishiness" that can appear in a device. It's not that difficult. It just takes a short bit of practice. The biggest problem with the finger is that you can't see beneath it.
The general public is not as inclined to try. But as can be seen by people typing on the vertical screen, high typing rates are possible with some practice, even with a hidden point of contact. And it is reliable. Given that a key in the vertical mode is only about 25 pixels wide, the 50 pixel minimum accuracy number you gave goes out the window. I don't even know where that number would come from or how someone decided it to be true, because it certainly isn't. You can actually affect one pixel every time, if you can hit it. This is just like the Wacom Cintiq. That just uses a stylus to do it. My idea would allow the same precision.
Rest assured, the guy you talked to probably got all of his info from AppleInsider. There's no reason for him to get an internal e-mail outlining future product releases and strategy unless they're trying to catch him leaking information. UNLESS... Steve really is no longer in charge of the company and they are starting to become more open about these things due to their own jockeying for position within the company... never a good thing, and it will only lead to position and titles being more important than the work being done.
I'm not assured, and he certainly didn't sound that way. Don't think that what everyone says is from a rumors site, because it isn't.
I see no reason why he would have said it the way he did if he just read it in a rumors site. Why say that Apple sent aBLAST out. Why mention it was done using RSS?
It makes no sense if he just read some rumors here. He could have said that.
I completely agree, but was trying to frame the topic in a less know-it-all kind of manner. But what the hell... here it goes.
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.
Granted, the tablets we're discussing here are touch-screens, not just drawing tablets. Yet I'm still of the mindset that multi-touch and updated GUIs won't do much to change the human factors involved with the manipulation of on-screen objects. Third parties have long offered services to convert powerbooks or macbook pros to touch screen capable. Yet they've never caught on because using a mouse is simpler for most tasks, including those in Adobe and CAD programs which already integrate reasonably well with stylus based interaction.
What are those human factors I vaguely referred to? For multi-touch, the first that comes to mind is the fact that human visual acuity is much higher than the precision possible via a finger directly on a touch screen. Things will always be displayed at a resolution finer than can be manipulated via finger tips.
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.
One question would be where Apple wants to take this. Is it an extention of the computer line, or the handheld line?
I think thats a difficult thing to decide. Obviously, the market for Apple's handheld devices is much bigger in an individual device sales way. But extending Apple's computer sales down through this device would also be a good bet.
For one, it would raise their marketshare for OS x and computer sales significantly. It would extend their OS X sales profits, as they could actually sell OS X to this device as an upgrade instead of giving it away if they wanted to.
Then also, their iLife and iWork software would also run (assuming it was x86 compatible of course).
I can think of lots of advantage to doing it this way, and also allowing the handheld apps to also work.
Sure, Apple may have something entirely different in mind, but this is what a lot of people would want.
I've spoken to a bunch of people (including myself, my daughter, and surprisingly, my wife) who would just love to have an Apple netbook type of device, tablet or not, even if it costs more.
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.