I can understand the reasons for not implementing a touchscreen but I think they don't outweigh the reasons for having the option available for users on some models.
Over the years one of the big differences I've noticed between Mac a PC users is that PC screens are always full of fingerprint smudges. Their fingers do end up touching the screen a lot when pointing to things. Conversely, Mac users often point to things on the screen - without actually touching it. And that's what I've always done. As the screens are not touch capable I never wanted those smudges all over the place.
However, if I truly had a reason to touch it I probably would - in spite of smudging.
Take this as an example which seems quite similar to what this patent is aiming for:
I wonder if younger users would use the touchscreen for this or the trackpad.
Cool vid except doesn’t Apple already have essentially that functionality in iOS 13/Catalina? Dragging & dropping various files & text into specific apps? Seems like I saw them demo that at one point in the last 12-24mo.
Touch screen MB? YES PLEASE. I have never met anyone who hates a touch screen on a laptop. Mouse for iPad? YES PLEASE. I doubt i'll ever meet anyone hating it when one day it is implemented properly.
I can understand the reasons for not implementing a touchscreen but I think they don't outweigh the reasons for having the option available for users on some models.
Over the years one of the big differences I've noticed between Mac a PC users is that PC screens are always full of fingerprint smudges. Their fingers do end up touching the screen a lot when pointing to things. Conversely, Mac users often point to things on the screen - without actually touching it. And that's what I've always done. As the screens are not touch capable I never wanted those smudges all over the place.
However, if I truly had a reason to touch it I probably would - in spite of smudging.
Take this as an example which seems quite similar to what this patent is aiming for:
I wonder if younger users would use the touchscreen for this or the trackpad.
Cool vid except doesn’t Apple already have essentially that functionality in iOS 13/Catalina? Dragging & dropping various files & text into specific apps? Seems like I saw them demo that at one point in the last 12-24mo.
No idea about that. I won't be on Catalina any time soon but I saw some support documents that made it seem like the functionality was tethered via USB and used the Finder.
I included the video not so much for the functionality itself, but how it was used (the touchscreen angle).
I don't want to see this ever on the Mac. From design standpoint it truly makes no sense now, nor in the future. The feel using touch-screen input on a laptop is weird, uncomfortable, and (most importantly for me), display hinges would degrade quickly. Who wants to see MacBooks with worn-out dangling, smudged displays?
Absolutes are usually a bad thing.
Use cases evolve. What if Apple or software providers found a cool way to use the touchscreen when it is connected to a separate monitor?
Maybe there are use cases nobody has thought of or commercialized yet.
In the TV production business we’re seeing many examples of devices that used to have dedicated control surfaces now being controlled by PCs instead. While it’s obviously possible to work them with a keyboard and mouse, it’s more convenient, intuitive and faster to just touch an on-screen button.
From its earliest days Apple has always thought that they should decide what users want and need. While that philosophy has served them well, when you implement it, you better make sure that you're right. It leaves no room for error.
In this case, Apple was correct (I think) that using a touch screen on a laptop is awkward.
But they missed one important thing: It wasn't about "either / or" - it was both -- at the user's option: If the user wanted to use the touch screen he could, if he wanted to use the cursor he could do that too -- and he could switch back & forth and mix and match as needed.
I saw an example of that when my grandson's father tried to sign into Netflex on his son's new MacBook: He kept reaching up and tapping the screen while I patiently reached over to tap the trackpad for him. That didn't happen just once but over and over again (5 or 10 times). He simply couldn't get it through his head that it was not a touch screen and, when I explained it to him, he thought the MacBook was garbage because it didn't have a touch screen.
There's nothing wrong with giving the user options.
Except that "user options" are the biggest cause of bloat in operating systems. As the options increase so does the code that supports them. Suddenly you have millions of lines of code for a million options that only a fraction of the user base takes advantage of. Options are great for OCD nerds, not so much for the average user. IMHO
OSX is already chock full of options even if you never see them. Just drop into Terminal for an ocean of options.
In fact, OSX has been 'dumbing down' certain aspects with regards to options - for GUI users - and actually going too far IMO. Look at what they did to Disk Utility for example (at least the versions I have access to).
Uhm, it hasn't been OS X for quite a while.
It's MacOS.
Just out of curiosity, what version of OS X do you have access to?
I understand why we don’t have touch screen Macs but the ergonomics argument went out the door with the iPad Pro and the Smart Keyboard. If that’s ergonomically OK then a Mac touch screen is too.
Yep and unfortunately some of the Luddites of the mac-verse around here just can't get that through their heads.
at work I never use the touchscreen because it is docked
When it isn’t docked and the mouse is connected I use the mouse
when it isn’t docked and there isn’t a mouse connected, I use the touch screen to scroll and move about the screen. I really don’t tend do anything else with a laptop touchscreen.
That’s it really. And this is because windows trackpads suck so badly. I am always astonished when I access one of my daughters’ Apple notebooks to realise how superior the Apple trackpad really is.
But I also have to say it sometimes feels there has been a determination to steer people to iOS devices to the detriment of the Mac, and this could be an element of that. Especially the last five years. As others have said, it’s good to have the option, and believe it or not, sometimes people share devices with others more used to other ways of doing things.
Maybe the trackpad experience in your HP notebook is bad, but that doesn't means that all Windows trackpads are the same. For example, the Surface Laptop trackpad is excellent. Another trackpad that I tried was the ThinkPad P1, it was very good.
And while you use the touch screen for scrolling, the are users that interact more with it. And not necessarily as a mouse / trackpad replacement, but as an additional input device.
From its earliest days Apple has always thought that they should decide what users want and need. While that philosophy has served them well, when you implement it, you better make sure that you're right. It leaves no room for error.
In this case, Apple was correct (I think) that using a touch screen on a laptop is awkward.
But they missed one important thing: It wasn't about "either / or" - it was both -- at the user's option: If the user wanted to use the touch screen he could, if he wanted to use the cursor he could do that too -- and he could switch back & forth and mix and match as needed.
I saw an example of that when my grandson's father tried to sign into Netflex on his son's new MacBook: He kept reaching up and tapping the screen while I patiently reached over to tap the trackpad for him. That didn't happen just once but over and over again (5 or 10 times). He simply couldn't get it through his head that it was not a touch screen and, when I explained it to him, he thought the MacBook was garbage because it didn't have a touch screen.
There's nothing wrong with giving the user options.
Except that "user options" are the biggest cause of bloat in operating systems. As the options increase so does the code that supports them. Suddenly you have millions of lines of code for a million options that only a fraction of the user base takes advantage of. Options are great for OCD nerds, not so much for the average user. IMHO
OSX is already chock full of options even if you never see them. Just drop into Terminal for an ocean of options.
In fact, OSX has been 'dumbing down' certain aspects with regards to options - for GUI users - and actually going too far IMO. Look at what they did to Disk Utility for example (at least the versions I have access to).
Uhm, it hasn't been OS X for quite a while.
It's MacOS.
Just out of curiosity, what version of OS X do you have access to?
Yes, I normally write macOS but whenever Darwin pops into my head it registers as Darwin/OSX. Even so, it is simply marketing but even from a marketing perspective in this case the first 'm' is not capitalised.
I'd be more interested in seeing the current Touch Bar and Trackpads merging to replace the traditional keyboard, making the entire bottom section of the MacBook a Touch interface, negating any issues with hand positions. Imagine being able to switch from keyboard mode to tablet mode with the use of the Apple Pencil.
I understand why we don’t have touch screen Macs but the ergonomics argument went out the door with the iPad Pro and the Smart Keyboard. If that’s ergonomically OK then a Mac touch screen is too.
Yep. See also using a Luna Display with and iPad as a touch display. It works with a mouse and keyboard. Even if you only use it to scroll down a page, it is faster than a touchpad. Once you get comfortable with it, it is difficult to go back.
From its earliest days Apple has always thought that they should decide what users want and need. While that philosophy has served them well, when you implement it, you better make sure that you're right. It leaves no room for error.
In this case, Apple was correct (I think) that using a touch screen on a laptop is awkward.
But they missed one important thing: It wasn't about "either / or" - it was both -- at the user's option: If the user wanted to use the touch screen he could, if he wanted to use the cursor he could do that too -- and he could switch back & forth and mix and match as needed.
I saw an example of that when my grandson's father tried to sign into Netflex on his son's new MacBook: He kept reaching up and tapping the screen while I patiently reached over to tap the trackpad for him. That didn't happen just once but over and over again (5 or 10 times). He simply couldn't get it through his head that it was not a touch screen and, when I explained it to him, he thought the MacBook was garbage because it didn't have a touch screen.
There's nothing wrong with giving the user options.
Except that "user options" are the biggest cause of bloat in operating systems. As the options increase so does the code that supports them. Suddenly you have millions of lines of code for a million options that only a fraction of the user base takes advantage of. Options are great for OCD nerds, not so much for the average user. IMHO
This is not only correct, but fundamental to the Apple design model. The more variables wedged into the system, the more lines of code and opportunities for error. In the case of MacOS, adding touchscreen capability wouldn't just involve adding the hardware and turning on the function. It would also require a fundamental redesign of the UI.
Slide your cursor up to the top of the screen on your mac, or to the left. Look at that; menus suddenly slide into view. Think about it. That won't work well or at all with a touch UI, will it? So to add touch as an option, those functions would have to be reconsidered or redesigned. As you work your way through the MacOS interface, there will be a long list of other routine interactions that won't translate to touch without significant modification or redesign, which adds complication and bloat, as well as irritation for everyone who is o.k. with how it works now. This is one of the reasons Windows is terrible. It tries to be a jack of all trades, and ends up master of none. It's not worth screwing everything up for everyone else just to accommodate your cousin's uncles' brother-in-law who can't stop poking at the screen even when told it's not a touch screen.
APPLE IS WRONG! I use Touch Screen Notebooks for 5 YEARS and will never come back!!! is is much faster to scroll pages, point elements on screen, I can move files, drag and drop files from windows to Photoshop, i even use photoshop moving images and on the UI moving layers and menus, deleting layers on trash etc, all things done much taster then traditional mouse or touchpad. And it is pretty evident too since you don't even have to look for an arrow on the screen just move your finger and point the screen! I get so upset people repeating the Apple magener like it will get fatiguing, oh boy, People works all day long with their arms and hands lifting them, not fatiguing at all like driving cars etc, taking heavy weight in bodybuilding, what the planet do you live in??? I use touch a lot with my notebook on my lap and on my bed resting on my pillow with the notebook supported by my bent legs! When you start working with a touchscreen notebook, your productivity increases a lot, and you never go back! And it is very good for those who have inflammation in the hands or fingers, because the mouse gives tendonitis, the touch on the screen does not! Apple is no longer an innovation company, and competitors are much more advanced and open-minded, creating incredible solutions!
From its earliest days Apple has always thought that they should decide what users want and need. While that philosophy has served them well, when you implement it, you better make sure that you're right. It leaves no room for error.
In this case, Apple was correct (I think) that using a touch screen on a laptop is awkward.
But they missed one important thing: It wasn't about "either / or" - it was both -- at the user's option: If the user wanted to use the touch screen he could, if he wanted to use the cursor he could do that too -- and he could switch back & forth and mix and match as needed.
I saw an example of that when my grandson's father tried to sign into Netflex on his son's new MacBook: He kept reaching up and tapping the screen while I patiently reached over to tap the trackpad for him. That didn't happen just once but over and over again (5 or 10 times). He simply couldn't get it through his head that it was not a touch screen and, when I explained it to him, he thought the MacBook was garbage because it didn't have a touch screen.
There's nothing wrong with giving the user options.
Except that "user options" are the biggest cause of bloat in operating systems. As the options increase so does the code that supports them. Suddenly you have millions of lines of code for a million options that only a fraction of the user base takes advantage of. Options are great for OCD nerds, not so much for the average user. IMHO
This is not only correct, but fundamental to the Apple design model. The more variables wedged into the system, the more lines of code and opportunities for error. In the case of MacOS, adding touchscreen capability wouldn't just involve adding the hardware and turning on the function. It would also require a fundamental redesign of the UI.
Slide your cursor up to the top of the screen on your mac, or to the left. Look at that; menus suddenly slide into view. Think about it. That won't work well or at all with a touch UI, will it? So to add touch as an option, those functions would have to be reconsidered or redesigned. As you work your way through the MacOS interface, there will be a long list of other routine interactions that won't translate to touch without significant modification or redesign, which adds complication and bloat,
So just allow touch for a limited set of controls initially, like scrolling and single clicking. Other interface elements can be redesigned if they're deemed a good candidate for touch, but the default position is not. It's not as if Apple is lacking in experience in how to write touch interfaces and APIs. And if not, then it requires a mouse/trackpad and no one is any worse off than they are now. Problem solved?
It's rather hard to stomach the argument that a different UI paradigm would be niche and too much for Apple to absorb. Apple. The company that gave us Force Touch and the Touch Bar. That company needs to consider Mac touch screens a niche interface. Right.
Comments
I included the video not so much for the functionality itself, but how it was used (the touchscreen angle).
It's MacOS.
Just out of curiosity, what version of OS X do you have access to?
And while you use the touch screen for scrolling, the are users that interact more with it. And not necessarily as a mouse / trackpad replacement, but as an additional input device.
The latest system I use is Sierra.
Slide your cursor up to the top of the screen on your mac, or to the left. Look at that; menus suddenly slide into view. Think about it. That won't work well or at all with a touch UI, will it? So to add touch as an option, those functions would have to be reconsidered or redesigned. As you work your way through the MacOS interface, there will be a long list of other routine interactions that won't translate to touch without significant modification or redesign, which adds complication and bloat, as well as irritation for everyone who is o.k. with how it works now. This is one of the reasons Windows is terrible. It tries to be a jack of all trades, and ends up master of none. It's not worth screwing everything up for everyone else just to accommodate your cousin's uncles' brother-in-law who can't stop poking at the screen even when told it's not a touch screen.
It's rather hard to stomach the argument that a different UI paradigm would be niche and too much for Apple to absorb. Apple. The company that gave us Force Touch and the Touch Bar. That company needs to consider Mac touch screens a niche interface. Right.