The iPad is different because one tends to use it as a mobile device (move around al ot while using it). Few people sit 8 hours at a stretch in front of an iPad. And yes, I have one. From an ergonomical standpoint a laptop is not a great tool for spending all day looking at, hence all the various devices and solutions for raising the screen to eye level. I imagine the same thing would happen to a horizontally angled iMac. The other issue with laying a screen flat is the reflections from ceiling lights. Neither of these points would necessarily be a deal breaker if the imac could also be used with another input device - which I think you are implying will / would happen.
Really? Both? As a matter of fact from the moment I saw the iPad I have been a firm believer in the future of IOS and the widespread adoption of the iPad and have argued the case here since day one. I'm not sure why you are so grumpy.
You're funny. But no, I always had a mouse.
I'm grumpy because I've heard all of these arguments numerous times before, and always, those making the arguments have been proven wrong. I would think that by now, people would stop being so pessimistic about new elements, and at least think that they might succeed.
So yes, I firmly believe that this will work on regular computers as well. It's not the fact of touch, but the implementation of it that will determine whether it will succeed on a big desk bound machine. I haven't read a single argument that changes that for me.
Wouldn't a simple, elegantly designed mechanical lock on one side solve this though? Slide the screen to desired position and press or rotate lock. Press to release.
Your suggestion plus the use of materials that are less prone to wear and tear can do the job (perhaps LiquidMetal???), if this is the direction that Apple will take the Mac.
As to the initial concern, if Apple engineers have looked at, or have familiarity with precision devices in research sciences and biomedicine, they include devices that could move in three dimensions. They even have those in operating rooms. And, they last for ages,, not just a few years.
Three-dimensional motions are also common in heavy duty industries -- in construction, moving of goods in shipyard docks, etc.
They just have to ask the correct questions: How did others do it?
If Apple can make the iMac or similar devices even lighter, the issue would be moot.
Certainly don't dispute that. The great thing about touch screen input, whether through the monitor itself or as a peripheral, is that it is software driven. Anybody who works with Avid (or similar) editing, know that the keyboard is not the greatest controller. I can see all sorts of uses in industry, stores, warehousing as well. But for the vast majority of people I think that reaching out and touching your 27" screen across the table, or spread out across the desk would be a major pain (eventually becoming physical reaching the neck and shoulders)
We're not talking about a MS table here, just a monitor. And it doesn't have to only use touch. no reason why a keyboard can't be used as well. Apple understands this, which is why they even sell a dock with one.
Having different ways to interact is the best way to go. we all use things differently, and we all learn differently. some people might prefer the touch features, and others they keyboard/mouse method.
I see developers writing one program that will run across all iterations of hardware. On a full power hi rez machine, all features will become available. On an iPad, less will be there, and on an iPhone, it will be even less. but it will still be the same program. This will be a big advantage for developers. People will become used to using touch. I would love to have FCS use touch right now. There are a number of areas in which it would be very useful. But that doesn't mean that every feature would need it.
And don't forget that a stylus does work on Apple's touch devices for more flexibility.
And you have thay problem with your iPad, and thus giving it away? Correct.
I am sure, you have faith that the non-Apple tablets that you praised (???) will find a solution to finger smudge?
CGC
That's right!! The iPad is just a a ten inch iPod!! The iMac can be a twenty seven inch iPod!
Remember in the eighties when people walked around with boom boxes on their shoulders? Now they can walk around with iMacs! And if Steve Jobs tells you to do it then you will and you will think you're cool! Ahhh hahahahahahah!
I've found that the web on the iPad is much more fun than on my MacPro. not that using the desktop isn't better at times. But's that's much more a function of the large screen so I can have Safari open on the left, and Mail open on the right.It's not really a function of touch based vs keyboard based.
And of course, the iPad is in the first generation. We have to give it some time. There are already cases with keyboards for it, if you really need to use one heavily. Logitech has one coming out that even remaps touch functions to the keyboard, so things are getting interesting quickly.
But we really have to give this at least another two years to see where it's going. It's never fair to judge a new technology the first time it's out.
I don't disagree with what you write. In fact, for general web stuff, I much prefer the iPad to the iMac. It's only when I need to get "stuff done" that I wish I were on the iMac instead. Adding a keyboard would not change my opinion. It has more to do with speed of movement, access to multiple windows, fast scrolling, more dexterity (for me) with the magic mouse. When I get to robust OS X apps like inDesign, it's hard to even imagine them on a touchscreen. But I also agree with you that the technology is new and we need to see how it evolves. Anywyay, like I wrote, I'd buy the iPad all over again. So I am a fan for sure.
It boggles the mind how Americans can be so egocentric in their view of the world and technology.
One innovation that Apple was able to integrate successfully with the "touchscreen" innovation is the digital keyboard. This was one of the most criticized features when the first iPhone was introduced -- a criticism made infamous by the mocking smile and smirk of Ballmer -- "No keyboard?".
In fact, the digital keyboard may have revolutionized computing for the rest of the world and even in the United States.
Many Americans so focused on the alphabet and numeric system forget that more people in the world, do not use those alphanumeric characters -- China, India, Japan, Arab states, even many European countries. Science and technology, and thus also biomedicine also use many characters and scitech symbols and notations that would not be done easily with the alphanumeric characters of the English language.
The digital keyboard have made all the above possible, acceassible and easily interchangeable at the touch of a screen icon, in the iPhone, that were soon standard in all the iterations of the Apple iOS operating system.
If you couple the digital keyboard, with the growing precision of "language translators" -- you can literally have access to all and may have some understanding to all the archives of information in the world, and in any language.
If Apple can integrate all the above iOS features in their other non-iOS devices, e.g., the iMac, notebooks, desktops, etc., Apple will have done a more enduring service to the advancement of technology, business and industry; and thus to mankind -- well beyond the focus of gadget consumerism.
Considering what I do, the direction that Apple has started with the iPad is promising. The "touchsceen" navigation is ideal for many actions, the keyboard (when needed) is also just as vital. In fact, if they could also re-integrate precision pointing (possible with the mouse), that would be ideal.
And yeah, more wireless interconnectivity -- not those plug in technologies, like USB, and all those odd sizes and shapes to connect devices. Apple, if they move to more wireless interconnectivity though must rethink the use of those batteries. Spent batteries are not good for the environment. as well as the cost of replacement could be significant during the lifetime of the system.
All the above may require a closer look of the features of the Mac OSX and the iOS, so that they would work in more powerful machines, or even in future iPads and mobile devices.
I don't disagree with what you write. In fact, for general web stuff, I much prefer the iPad to the iMac. It's only when I need to get "stuff done" that I wish I were on the iMac instead. Adding a keyboard would not change my opinion. It has more to do with speed of movement, access to multiple windows, fast scrolling, more dexterity (for me) with the magic mouse. When I get to robust OS X apps like inDesign, it's hard to even imagine them on a touchscreen. But I also agree with you that the technology is new and we need to see how it evolves. Anywyay, like I wrote, I'd buy the iPad all over again. So I am a fan for sure.
But nothing you mentioned is a factor of the iPad being touch. Most of it is screen size, and speed of the processors. I find touch to be much faster at a lot of things.
Would I want to run inDesign on a touch device? Well, if I could move graphic elements around that way, it could be easier. Lord knows, I've used a mouse with it since it first came out, and it's not the most precise thing to use. A keyboard would be required, and would be part of what I'm talking about anyway. Remember, I doubt Apple would make this one or the other, but a blending. Some things work better with keyboard and mouse, and some with touch. We should be able to choose.
Even a thing as the "Submit Reply" and the "Preview Post" buttons here would be easier to use touch on. We have to lift our hand from the keyboard anyway. It's actually faster to reach out with a finger than to grab the mouse, begin to move it towards the button, and then to click when we get it there.
It boggles the mind how Americans can be so egocentric in their view of the world and technology.
One innovation that Apple was able to integrate successfully with the "touchscreen" innovation is the digital keyboard. This was one of the most criticized features when the first iPhone was introduced -- a criticism made infamous by the mocking smile and smirk of Ballmer -- "No keyboard?".
In fact, the digital keyboard may have revolutionized computing to the rest of the world and even in the United States.
Many Americans so focused on the alphabet and numeric system forget that more people in the world, do not use those alphanumeric characters -- China, India, Japan, Arab states, even many European countries. Science and technology, and thus also biomedicine also use many characters and scitech symbols and notations that would not be done easily with the alphanumeric characters of the English language.
The digital keyboard have made all the above possible, acceassible and easily interchangeable at the touch of a screen icon, in the iPhone, that were soon standard in all the iterations of the Apple iOS operating system.
If you couple the digital keyboard, with the growing precision of "language translators" -- you can literally have access to all and may have some understanding to all the archives of information in the world, and in any language.
If Apple can integrate all the above iOS features in their other non-iOS devices, e.g., the iMac, notebooks, desktops, etc., Apple will have done a more enduring service to the advancement of technology, business and industry; and thus to mankind -- well beyond the focus of gadget consumerism.
Considering what I do, the direction that they have started with the iPad is promising. The "touchsceen" navigation is ideal for many actions, the keyboard (when needed) is also just as vital. In fact, if they could also re-integrate precision pointing (possible with the mouse), that would be ideal.
All the above may require a closer look of the features of the Mac OSX and the iOS, so that they would work in more powerful machines, or even in future iPads and mobile devices.
CGC
I agree completely. That's why both will be used. It's awfully easy to call up a keyboard in any language of method of entry with a digital keyboard. Even the number of keys can vary, or with a touch, change to others.
How could they not go touchscreen after going to market with first the iPhone then iPad? The only issue I see is that there are simply going to be certain tasks that will still require a keyboard, so I don't see this as being all or nothing but both.
If anyone out there is considering a laptop, I'd hold off. It's going to likely be touchscreen as well. Picture it... On the surface it appears to be your typical Apple Lap, but whoa, the screen detaches and can be used in more mobile environments (perhaps in front of the fire at your favorite local cafe?).
But when serious typing needs to get done, you dock it back on the main body and have your traditional laptop setup.
Trust me it's coming.. People want power and mobility and this sort of design is in keeping with that need. Simplicity, Power & Freedom!
But nothing you mentioned is a factor of the iPad being touch. Most of it is screen size, and speed of the processors. I find touch to be much faster at a lot of things.
Would I want to run inDesign on a touch device? Well, if I could move graphic elements around that way, it could be easier. Lord knows, I've used a mouse with it since it first came out, and it's not the most precise thing to use. A keyboard would be required, and would be part of what I'm talking about anyway. Remember, I doubt Apple would make this one or the other, but a blending. Some things work better with keyboard and mouse, and some with touch. We should be able to choose.
Even a thing as the "Submit Reply" and the "Preview Post" buttons here would be easier to use touch on. We have to lift our hand from the keyboard anyway. It's actually faster to reach out with a finger than to grab the mouse, begin to move it towards the button, and then to click when we get it there.
Well, I can't agree with you there. Touchscreen is not as fast and efficient for me...at least not as it is currently implemented.. For example, a simple thing like shift or command click to select is very powerful and fast and I find it easy to do without looking away from the screen--the same way I don't have to look away from the road to operate the clutch, brake, and gas pedals (or shifter) when I drive. Maybe it's just that I'm used to working this way. I dunno. I will concede that as technology progresses, I may change my mind and come around to your way of thinking.
I have no doubt that if Apple releases a Mac with a touch display will be designed for a specific purpose with the HW and SW to go with it (as I’ve previously stated), but I can’t see in what way a Mac with a vertical display would be as useful as one with a near-horizontal display or one that requires constant physical maneuvering to use as a touch display (as I’ve also previously stated).
I’ve asked for ways 1) a vertical display would make sense for consumers for prolonged use, and 2) how effective it would be to move a display monitor constantly to switch between modes.I don’t recall reading anything that details how this could advantage the consumer and Apple, or examples of apps or tasks that would benefit from this. I, however, did give examples how adding a touch-based UI to Macs would be useful, but because mine was with the touchpad already at ones fingertips, not the entire display you’re deeming me negative, terrible and an “old fogerty”? It sounds like you are trying to bait me.
Quote:
But you just have to let yourself go. don't just buy the apps you think you NEED. Buy ones that look interesting. They're cheap enough. I'm happy you're going to finally get one. Think positively.
I do buy apps that are interesting. Why would you think differently? My favorite app for the iPad (and one I frankly miss) from when I last owned one is a game. What I don’t do is buy HW products I don’t feel I need or don’t keep HW products I no longer need. Thus, my previous returning of the iPad.
On another forum I saw someone suggesting that in vertical mode you have OS X and in horizontal mode iOS - nice idea!
Apple seems not only to be eager to revolutionise the phone or for the first time successfully introduce a new device category - they want to revolutionise our entire digital life. I can't really see that a desktop computer can really benefit from a touch sensitive screen. I would rather prefer a keyboard that gets a large additional touch sensitive pad. There have been numerous studies on the net that I really liked. But let's see.
Have you ever used a light table, made a collage of photos, rotoscoped/masked/tracked an object in a video, used a synthesizer with multiple slide switches, used a telestrator, a piano, dulcimer, guitar...
Have you done any CAD design, drafting, paintings, drawings, flowcharts, story boards, white-board brain storming, sand drawings, landscape layout, interior design, calligraphy, written any music, done video editing where you maneuver cameras through 3D space...
There are so many possibilities...
Not everything can be done better with a touch screen (than with a mouse/kb)-- but there are plenty of things that can be done better with direct touch.
I suspect that OS X and iOS will converge at some point-- I don't believe the tilt of the display should (necessarily) be the determinate to switch OSes.
We have. The new part is the rumour about the touchscreens, not the patent.
I’m not so sure about this tech. I don’t think Apple is like others and will introduce any expensive touchscreen display that adds more complexity without a solid reason for usability and without having an OS rewrite that takes advantage of this HW feature.
That makes me this is something more inclined for new Macs after 10.7 gets demoed to us with some new touchscreen features that are coming right from iOS. Note: I’m aware that any OS can be used with a touchscreen but having a UI that designed for fingers is different than one designed for a mouse pointer.
You're probably correct. I expect we'll se a gradual migration of iOS elements and presentation formats to OS X -- things like bigger controls, more-focused windows (less busy, less detail-distraction), better content reflow/resizing,detail pointing, better hovering/mouseovers (iOS needs work in these areas).
Someday, sooner, rather than later, you'll be able to "BackToMy Mac" from an iPad-like device, and there will be little difference in the way the desktop looks or is manipulated.
An interesting experiment or proof-of-concept would be to port the iTunes app to the iPad -- and then back to the Mac.
Wouldn't a simple, elegantly designed mechanical lock on one side solve this though? Slide the screen to desired position and press or rotate lock. Press to release.
I like the idea of a handcrank with great levers, gears and cables binding everything together!
It's a natural evolution of Apple, iMacs and a big-ass screen. You want to reach out and touch it. Sure, it's gimmicky, but imagine them touch visual interfaces and apps Apple and others will come out with. It'll sell, if only for the novelty factor, it'll get more people to Macs. You gotta have at least one touchscreen model. But Apple will do the UI right and everyone else will be like... Damnnnn
If they could keep the price point as it is and have a 21" touchscreen model, that would be cool.
There's a fortune to be made in after-market screen wipes... now, if they could only do something for TecHemorrhoids!
I?d much rather have the glass multitouch trackpad visually output as needed. Certain types of apps would be greatly benefited by this, like the calculator. As it stands now I often will just grab my iPhone because typing on the touch screen is better than using a mouse or keyboard for inputting on a desktop OS calculator.
Comments
1) How did Blackintosh get off my ignore list.
I ask the same then I see I forgot to log in. DOH!
I ask the same then I see I forgot to log in. DOH!
Log on your mind! Listen to ME!
Great idea. A 27 inch glossy screen full of fingerprints is going to look terrific.
And you have thay problem with your iPad, and thus giving it away? Correct.
I am sure, you have faith that the non-Apple tablets that you praised (???) will find a solution to finger smudge?
CGC
The iPad is different because one tends to use it as a mobile device (move around al ot while using it). Few people sit 8 hours at a stretch in front of an iPad. And yes, I have one. From an ergonomical standpoint a laptop is not a great tool for spending all day looking at, hence all the various devices and solutions for raising the screen to eye level. I imagine the same thing would happen to a horizontally angled iMac. The other issue with laying a screen flat is the reflections from ceiling lights. Neither of these points would necessarily be a deal breaker if the imac could also be used with another input device - which I think you are implying will / would happen.
Really? Both? As a matter of fact from the moment I saw the iPad I have been a firm believer in the future of IOS and the widespread adoption of the iPad and have argued the case here since day one. I'm not sure why you are so grumpy.
You're funny. But no, I always had a mouse.
I'm grumpy because I've heard all of these arguments numerous times before, and always, those making the arguments have been proven wrong. I would think that by now, people would stop being so pessimistic about new elements, and at least think that they might succeed.
So yes, I firmly believe that this will work on regular computers as well. It's not the fact of touch, but the implementation of it that will determine whether it will succeed on a big desk bound machine. I haven't read a single argument that changes that for me.
Wouldn't a simple, elegantly designed mechanical lock on one side solve this though? Slide the screen to desired position and press or rotate lock. Press to release.
Your suggestion plus the use of materials that are less prone to wear and tear can do the job (perhaps LiquidMetal???), if this is the direction that Apple will take the Mac.
As to the initial concern, if Apple engineers have looked at, or have familiarity with precision devices in research sciences and biomedicine, they include devices that could move in three dimensions. They even have those in operating rooms. And, they last for ages,, not just a few years.
Three-dimensional motions are also common in heavy duty industries -- in construction, moving of goods in shipyard docks, etc.
They just have to ask the correct questions: How did others do it?
If Apple can make the iMac or similar devices even lighter, the issue would be moot.
CGC
Certainly don't dispute that. The great thing about touch screen input, whether through the monitor itself or as a peripheral, is that it is software driven. Anybody who works with Avid (or similar) editing, know that the keyboard is not the greatest controller. I can see all sorts of uses in industry, stores, warehousing as well. But for the vast majority of people I think that reaching out and touching your 27" screen across the table, or spread out across the desk would be a major pain (eventually becoming physical reaching the neck and shoulders)
We're not talking about a MS table here, just a monitor. And it doesn't have to only use touch. no reason why a keyboard can't be used as well. Apple understands this, which is why they even sell a dock with one.
Having different ways to interact is the best way to go. we all use things differently, and we all learn differently. some people might prefer the touch features, and others they keyboard/mouse method.
I see developers writing one program that will run across all iterations of hardware. On a full power hi rez machine, all features will become available. On an iPad, less will be there, and on an iPhone, it will be even less. but it will still be the same program. This will be a big advantage for developers. People will become used to using touch. I would love to have FCS use touch right now. There are a number of areas in which it would be very useful. But that doesn't mean that every feature would need it.
And don't forget that a stylus does work on Apple's touch devices for more flexibility.
And you have thay problem with your iPad, and thus giving it away? Correct.
I am sure, you have faith that the non-Apple tablets that you praised (???) will find a solution to finger smudge?
CGC
That's right!! The iPad is just a a ten inch iPod!! The iMac can be a twenty seven inch iPod!
Remember in the eighties when people walked around with boom boxes on their shoulders? Now they can walk around with iMacs! And if Steve Jobs tells you to do it then you will and you will think you're cool! Ahhh hahahahahahah!
I've found that the web on the iPad is much more fun than on my MacPro. not that using the desktop isn't better at times. But's that's much more a function of the large screen so I can have Safari open on the left, and Mail open on the right.It's not really a function of touch based vs keyboard based.
And of course, the iPad is in the first generation. We have to give it some time. There are already cases with keyboards for it, if you really need to use one heavily. Logitech has one coming out that even remaps touch functions to the keyboard, so things are getting interesting quickly.
But we really have to give this at least another two years to see where it's going. It's never fair to judge a new technology the first time it's out.
I don't disagree with what you write. In fact, for general web stuff, I much prefer the iPad to the iMac. It's only when I need to get "stuff done" that I wish I were on the iMac instead. Adding a keyboard would not change my opinion. It has more to do with speed of movement, access to multiple windows, fast scrolling, more dexterity (for me) with the magic mouse. When I get to robust OS X apps like inDesign, it's hard to even imagine them on a touchscreen. But I also agree with you that the technology is new and we need to see how it evolves. Anywyay, like I wrote, I'd buy the iPad all over again. So I am a fan for sure.
One innovation that Apple was able to integrate successfully with the "touchscreen" innovation is the digital keyboard. This was one of the most criticized features when the first iPhone was introduced -- a criticism made infamous by the mocking smile and smirk of Ballmer -- "No keyboard?".
In fact, the digital keyboard may have revolutionized computing for the rest of the world and even in the United States.
Many Americans so focused on the alphabet and numeric system forget that more people in the world, do not use those alphanumeric characters -- China, India, Japan, Arab states, even many European countries. Science and technology, and thus also biomedicine also use many characters and scitech symbols and notations that would not be done easily with the alphanumeric characters of the English language.
The digital keyboard have made all the above possible, acceassible and easily interchangeable at the touch of a screen icon, in the iPhone, that were soon standard in all the iterations of the Apple iOS operating system.
If you couple the digital keyboard, with the growing precision of "language translators" -- you can literally have access to all and may have some understanding to all the archives of information in the world, and in any language.
If Apple can integrate all the above iOS features in their other non-iOS devices, e.g., the iMac, notebooks, desktops, etc., Apple will have done a more enduring service to the advancement of technology, business and industry; and thus to mankind -- well beyond the focus of gadget consumerism.
Considering what I do, the direction that Apple has started with the iPad is promising. The "touchsceen" navigation is ideal for many actions, the keyboard (when needed) is also just as vital. In fact, if they could also re-integrate precision pointing (possible with the mouse), that would be ideal.
And yeah, more wireless interconnectivity -- not those plug in technologies, like USB, and all those odd sizes and shapes to connect devices. Apple, if they move to more wireless interconnectivity though must rethink the use of those batteries. Spent batteries are not good for the environment. as well as the cost of replacement could be significant during the lifetime of the system.
All the above may require a closer look of the features of the Mac OSX and the iOS, so that they would work in more powerful machines, or even in future iPads and mobile devices.
CGC
I don't disagree with what you write. In fact, for general web stuff, I much prefer the iPad to the iMac. It's only when I need to get "stuff done" that I wish I were on the iMac instead. Adding a keyboard would not change my opinion. It has more to do with speed of movement, access to multiple windows, fast scrolling, more dexterity (for me) with the magic mouse. When I get to robust OS X apps like inDesign, it's hard to even imagine them on a touchscreen. But I also agree with you that the technology is new and we need to see how it evolves. Anywyay, like I wrote, I'd buy the iPad all over again. So I am a fan for sure.
But nothing you mentioned is a factor of the iPad being touch. Most of it is screen size, and speed of the processors. I find touch to be much faster at a lot of things.
Would I want to run inDesign on a touch device? Well, if I could move graphic elements around that way, it could be easier. Lord knows, I've used a mouse with it since it first came out, and it's not the most precise thing to use. A keyboard would be required, and would be part of what I'm talking about anyway. Remember, I doubt Apple would make this one or the other, but a blending. Some things work better with keyboard and mouse, and some with touch. We should be able to choose.
Even a thing as the "Submit Reply" and the "Preview Post" buttons here would be easier to use touch on. We have to lift our hand from the keyboard anyway. It's actually faster to reach out with a finger than to grab the mouse, begin to move it towards the button, and then to click when we get it there.
It boggles the mind how Americans can be so egocentric in their view of the world and technology.
One innovation that Apple was able to integrate successfully with the "touchscreen" innovation is the digital keyboard. This was one of the most criticized features when the first iPhone was introduced -- a criticism made infamous by the mocking smile and smirk of Ballmer -- "No keyboard?".
In fact, the digital keyboard may have revolutionized computing to the rest of the world and even in the United States.
Many Americans so focused on the alphabet and numeric system forget that more people in the world, do not use those alphanumeric characters -- China, India, Japan, Arab states, even many European countries. Science and technology, and thus also biomedicine also use many characters and scitech symbols and notations that would not be done easily with the alphanumeric characters of the English language.
The digital keyboard have made all the above possible, acceassible and easily interchangeable at the touch of a screen icon, in the iPhone, that were soon standard in all the iterations of the Apple iOS operating system.
If you couple the digital keyboard, with the growing precision of "language translators" -- you can literally have access to all and may have some understanding to all the archives of information in the world, and in any language.
If Apple can integrate all the above iOS features in their other non-iOS devices, e.g., the iMac, notebooks, desktops, etc., Apple will have done a more enduring service to the advancement of technology, business and industry; and thus to mankind -- well beyond the focus of gadget consumerism.
Considering what I do, the direction that they have started with the iPad is promising. The "touchsceen" navigation is ideal for many actions, the keyboard (when needed) is also just as vital. In fact, if they could also re-integrate precision pointing (possible with the mouse), that would be ideal.
All the above may require a closer look of the features of the Mac OSX and the iOS, so that they would work in more powerful machines, or even in future iPads and mobile devices.
CGC
I agree completely. That's why both will be used. It's awfully easy to call up a keyboard in any language of method of entry with a digital keyboard. Even the number of keys can vary, or with a touch, change to others.
I'm convinced this is the future.
How could they not go touchscreen after going to market with first the iPhone then iPad? The only issue I see is that there are simply going to be certain tasks that will still require a keyboard, so I don't see this as being all or nothing but both.
If anyone out there is considering a laptop, I'd hold off. It's going to likely be touchscreen as well. Picture it... On the surface it appears to be your typical Apple Lap, but whoa, the screen detaches and can be used in more mobile environments (perhaps in front of the fire at your favorite local cafe?).
But when serious typing needs to get done, you dock it back on the main body and have your traditional laptop setup.
Trust me it's coming.. People want power and mobility and this sort of design is in keeping with that need. Simplicity, Power & Freedom!
Ramin
Chicago, IL
www.monkpak.com
But nothing you mentioned is a factor of the iPad being touch. Most of it is screen size, and speed of the processors. I find touch to be much faster at a lot of things.
Would I want to run inDesign on a touch device? Well, if I could move graphic elements around that way, it could be easier. Lord knows, I've used a mouse with it since it first came out, and it's not the most precise thing to use. A keyboard would be required, and would be part of what I'm talking about anyway. Remember, I doubt Apple would make this one or the other, but a blending. Some things work better with keyboard and mouse, and some with touch. We should be able to choose.
Even a thing as the "Submit Reply" and the "Preview Post" buttons here would be easier to use touch on. We have to lift our hand from the keyboard anyway. It's actually faster to reach out with a finger than to grab the mouse, begin to move it towards the button, and then to click when we get it there.
Well, I can't agree with you there. Touchscreen is not as fast and efficient for me...at least not as it is currently implemented.. For example, a simple thing like shift or command click to select is very powerful and fast and I find it easy to do without looking away from the screen--the same way I don't have to look away from the road to operate the clutch, brake, and gas pedals (or shifter) when I drive. Maybe it's just that I'm used to working this way. I dunno. I will concede that as technology progresses, I may change my mind and come around to your way of thinking.
Peace.
You're a terrible person to talk to about this…
I have no doubt that if Apple releases a Mac with a touch display will be designed for a specific purpose with the HW and SW to go with it (as I’ve previously stated), but I can’t see in what way a Mac with a vertical display would be as useful as one with a near-horizontal display or one that requires constant physical maneuvering to use as a touch display (as I’ve also previously stated).
I’ve asked for ways 1) a vertical display would make sense for consumers for prolonged use, and 2) how effective it would be to move a display monitor constantly to switch between modes.I don’t recall reading anything that details how this could advantage the consumer and Apple, or examples of apps or tasks that would benefit from this. I, however, did give examples how adding a touch-based UI to Macs would be useful, but because mine was with the touchpad already at ones fingertips, not the entire display you’re deeming me negative, terrible and an “old fogerty”? It sounds like you are trying to bait me.
But you just have to let yourself go. don't just buy the apps you think you NEED. Buy ones that look interesting. They're cheap enough. I'm happy you're going to finally get one. Think positively.
I do buy apps that are interesting. Why would you think differently? My favorite app for the iPad (and one I frankly miss) from when I last owned one is a game. What I don’t do is buy HW products I don’t feel I need or don’t keep HW products I no longer need. Thus, my previous returning of the iPad.
On another forum I saw someone suggesting that in vertical mode you have OS X and in horizontal mode iOS - nice idea!
Apple seems not only to be eager to revolutionise the phone or for the first time successfully introduce a new device category - they want to revolutionise our entire digital life. I can't really see that a desktop computer can really benefit from a touch sensitive screen. I would rather prefer a keyboard that gets a large additional touch sensitive pad. There have been numerous studies on the net that I really liked. But let's see.
Have you ever used a light table, made a collage of photos, rotoscoped/masked/tracked an object in a video, used a synthesizer with multiple slide switches, used a telestrator, a piano, dulcimer, guitar...
Have you done any CAD design, drafting, paintings, drawings, flowcharts, story boards, white-board brain storming, sand drawings, landscape layout, interior design, calligraphy, written any music, done video editing where you maneuver cameras through 3D space...
There are so many possibilities...
Not everything can be done better with a touch screen (than with a mouse/kb)-- but there are plenty of things that can be done better with direct touch.
I suspect that OS X and iOS will converge at some point-- I don't believe the tilt of the display should (necessarily) be the determinate to switch OSes.
.
We have. The new part is the rumour about the touchscreens, not the patent.
I’m not so sure about this tech. I don’t think Apple is like others and will introduce any expensive touchscreen display that adds more complexity without a solid reason for usability and without having an OS rewrite that takes advantage of this HW feature.
That makes me this is something more inclined for new Macs after 10.7 gets demoed to us with some new touchscreen features that are coming right from iOS. Note: I’m aware that any OS can be used with a touchscreen but having a UI that designed for fingers is different than one designed for a mouse pointer.
You're probably correct. I expect we'll se a gradual migration of iOS elements and presentation formats to OS X -- things like bigger controls, more-focused windows (less busy, less detail-distraction), better content reflow/resizing,detail pointing, better hovering/mouseovers (iOS needs work in these areas).
Someday, sooner, rather than later, you'll be able to "BackToMy Mac" from an iPad-like device, and there will be little difference in the way the desktop looks or is manipulated.
An interesting experiment or proof-of-concept would be to port the iTunes app to the iPad -- and then back to the Mac.
.
Wouldn't a simple, elegantly designed mechanical lock on one side solve this though? Slide the screen to desired position and press or rotate lock. Press to release.
I like the idea of a handcrank with great levers, gears and cables binding everything together!
.
It's a natural evolution of Apple, iMacs and a big-ass screen. You want to reach out and touch it. Sure, it's gimmicky, but imagine them touch visual interfaces and apps Apple and others will come out with. It'll sell, if only for the novelty factor, it'll get more people to Macs. You gotta have at least one touchscreen model. But Apple will do the UI right and everyone else will be like... Damnnnn
If they could keep the price point as it is and have a 21" touchscreen model, that would be cool.
There's a fortune to be made in after-market screen wipes... now, if they could only do something for TecHemorrhoids!
.
I?d much rather have the glass multitouch trackpad visually output as needed. Certain types of apps would be greatly benefited by this, like the calculator. As it stands now I often will just grab my iPhone because typing on the touch screen is better than using a mouse or keyboard for inputting on a desktop OS calculator.
Yes... maybe We are the hybrids!
.
Great idea. A 27 inch glossy screen full of fingerprints is going to look terrific.
What makes you think that all of those are fingerprints...
Think of it as a big, touch-sensitive, Xerox machine!
It could be a new category the first real, Big-Ass Tush display!