Again, don't assume. Youth are just as, if not sometimes more, capable of great things. Many adults are very arrogant about this. Anyways, I have a track record at any rate. These aren't empty boasts. I'll have to get the building project done or I'll fail my independent study. We (we being me and a group of several other students) might be getting a grant for this invention project, and this website idea I have it something no other website does.
Yeah, sure. Kids always think they're far better than any who've come before. "Might be getting a grant." Pray tell, when was the last time a bunch of teenagers got a multimillion dollar grant? Will I find your name among the Intel Science Talent Search winners or even the finalists? Extremely doubtful. And even those kids -- who ARE incredibly gifted and brilliant rather than just claiming to be -- don't get million dollar grants. Where's the patent for your revolutionary billion dollar invention? Sorry, you are completely full of yourself. Everybody says their website does something no other website does. You're 15, so you don't remember the last time everybody made that claim and then the bubble burst. From everything you've said, I don't think I'd be sticking my neck out very far by saying you won't be attending MIT or Caltech.
Quote:
Again as I said, Multi-touch is revolutionary in IMPLEMENTATION, but not in theory. It's a simple theory, but complex and scarcely used in practice. And that's why I said Kudos to Apple...for IMPLEMENTING it. I was already aware FingerWorks invented it.
If you already know about FingerWorks, then why did you make the asinine statement that "Multi-touch is a technology invented for portable use," when no FingerWorks product was ever designed for portable use, except when plugged into a laptop? FingerWorks did implement it. Try reading for once. FingerWorks had mass-produced products on the market for years incorporating MultiTouch. They didn't keep it in the lab.
Quote:
Give me specifically examples of things that NEED multiple contact points.
You already brought it up yourself with another of your inane assertions. You wrote, "With a mouse, I can easily click and drag the corner of a photo with a slight twitch of the hand, whereas with multi-touch, I'd have to lift both arms and make a huge pinching motions." All stunningly wrong. With a mouse and MultiTouch, you need to move the cursor to the corner of the photo and drag to resize. You're confusing window resize with zoom, which is not the same thing. A one-handed "spread the fingers" gesture ANYWHERE on the screen or on an iGesture pad could let me literally zoom in and out blindfolded at this moment if I wanted to, not that that would be very useful. It's just one small example of all of the stupid, ill-informed statements you've made and continue to make. You think you will be working with a touchscreen and therefore you know MultiTouch, which you continue to stubbornly and mistakenly equate with touchscreens. You know nothing. MultiTouch can be used with touchscreens but does not absolutely need to be. And an awful lot of people were working with touchscreens before you were born.
Give me specifically examples of things that need more than one mouse button. Yet for some reason, five-button mice with scroll wheels dominate the market and even Apple doesn't sell one-button mice anymore.
If the ILC won't be available then Tevatron will likely be kept alive. In 2009 we'll have another administration, possibly from another party and Congress has been realtively more supportive than this admistration has been. Given that DOE has said no ILC likely for an extra 5 years my guess is congress will keep the Tevatron longer rather than have a 15 year gap even if the Tevatron will be outclassed by the LHC.
SLAC is getting the LCLS in 2009 which is an exciting instrument although not for high energy physicists. Losing the PEP-II is a shame but I believe that the LCLS is a good trade. Its also not like the US is starving the scientific community or even the high-energy/nuclear physicsts given the $500M spent at CERN. The priority has shifted in favor of other research areas but DOE has $4B alone.
If we don't get the ILC then you can close the chapter on US HEP.
Vinea
PS As an aside...one GLAST instrument was built at SLAC and NSF is funding particle and nuclear astrophysics at $16M a year. Source? Your Science article. Why assume I don't have access? Provide link then excerpt.
The Tevatron is as good as dead. The funding is winding down rapidly. $16 million a year isn't even scratch, as the article indicated.
Two problems with the Tevatron now. While it's high density makes several searches easier than it will be with the LHC, the energy levels are not high enough to do much new physics. Much of the staff is already in the process of leaving, and many of the scientists have already accepted other positions, a number at CERN.
We need a new facility. That's the reasons old ones are being closed down. Remember that many of these facilities are designed to find one thing, and if they find it, the rest of the life of the machine is spent on lesser activities. After a while, it becomes too expensive to keep them running. Then a new facility is already in the planning, and possibly, in the building stage.
But our big project was cancelled, and nothing else major has been approved since.
I assumed that you didn't have access, because the time we discussed Science, was when I mentioned it, and stated that one needed to be a member to access the articles other than some of the news, and such. You expressed astonishment that a scientific publication would restrict access to members. I assured you that they did.
As they plaster that members passwords and screen names are reguired every time you attempt to access an article, it was an easy assumption that you didn't know that, and so didn't have access. Otherwise why were you so surprised at what I had said about it?
Yeah, sure. Kids always think they're far better than any who've come before. "Might be getting a grant." Pray tell, when was the last time a bunch of teenagers got a multimillion dollar grant? Will I find your name among the Intel Science Talent Search winners or even the finalists? Extremely doubtful. And even those kids -- who ARE incredibly gifted and brilliant rather than just claiming to be -- don't get million dollar grants. Where's the patent for your revolutionary billion dollar invention? Sorry, you are completely full of yourself. Everybody says their website does something no other website does. You're 15, so you don't remember the last time everybody made that claim and then the bubble burst. From everything you've said, I don't think I'd be sticking my neck out very far by saying you won't be attending MIT or Caltech.
If you already know about FingerWorks, then why did you make the asinine statement that "Multi-touch is a technology invented for portable use," when no FingerWorks product was ever designed for portable use, except when plugged into a laptop? FingerWorks did implement it. Try reading for once. FingerWorks had mass-produced products on the market for years incorporating MultiTouch. They didn't keep it in the lab.
You already brought it up yourself with another of your inane assertions. You wrote, "With a mouse, I can easily click and drag the corner of a photo with a slight twitch of the hand, whereas with multi-touch, I'd have to lift both arms and make a huge pinching motions." All stunningly wrong. With a mouse and MultiTouch, you need to move the cursor to the corner of the photo and drag to resize. You're confusing window resize with zoom, which is not the same thing. A one-handed "spread the fingers" gesture ANYWHERE on the screen or on an iGesture pad could let me literally zoom in and out blindfolded at this moment if I wanted to, not that that would be very useful. It's just one small example of all of the stupid, ill-informed statements you've made and continue to make. You think you will be working with a touchscreen and therefore you know MultiTouch, which you continue to stubbornly and mistakenly equate with touchscreens. You know nothing. MultiTouch can be used with touchscreens but does not absolutely need to be. And an awful lot of people were working with touchscreens before you were born.
Give me specifically examples of things that need more than one mouse button. Yet for some reason, five-button mice with scroll wheels dominate the market and even Apple doesn't sell one-button mice anymore.
I assumed that you didn't have access, because the time we discussed Science, was when I mentioned it, and stated that one needed to be a member to access the articles other than some of the news, and such. You expressed astonishment that a scientific publication would restrict access to members. I assured you that they did.
As they plaster that members passwords and screen names are reguired every time you attempt to access an article, it was an easy assumption that you didn't know that, and so didn't have access. Otherwise why were you so surprised at what I had said about it?
That's an odd comment for me to have made given that IEEE locks up content from non-members and I use their stuff a lot. If I said something that dumb I was clearly wrong.
In any case, I'm presumably not the only reader and other folks will undoubtably have access given these are common periodicals. As it is, I do have access to a lot of online journals simply from what I do. Saves me the cost of personal subscriptions but also contributes to "too much stuff to read in a month" syndrome.
The downside is that it's not useful on the train or airplane unless I have the foresight to DL it ahead of time and I have batteries, etc. Paper is sometimes best.
The Tevatron is as good as dead. The funding is winding down rapidly. $16 million a year isn't even scratch, as the article indicated.
Two problems with the Tevatron now. While it's high density makes several searches easier than it will be with the LHC, the energy levels are not high enough to do much new physics. Much of the staff is already in the process of leaving, and many of the scientists have already accepted other positions, a number at CERN.
We need a new facility. That's the reasons old ones are being closed down. Remember that many of these facilities are designed to find one thing, and if they find it, the rest of the life of the machine is spent on lesser activities. After a while, it becomes too expensive to keep them running. Then a new facility is already in the planning, and possibly, in the building stage.
But our big project was cancelled, and nothing else major has been approved since.
Duh...didn't comment on the Tev...half of this is national pride and there will be experiments that are fine for the Tevatron if it still exists.
Yes, we dropped the ball on SSC. ILC is the next thing if we get it. If we don't...well, like I said, you can then close the chapter on HEP in the US. Until then it seems premature to say that the US isn't supporting the community.
A little competition never hurts anyway. Wanna bet the second the Chinese gets close to putting a man on the moon that we see a big inject into NASA's budget?
Please sweet little baby Jesus give us a redesigned, 8-core, multitouch Macbook Pro. I want to be able to do the things in that video
Y'know, as impressive as their demo is, one would be exhausted in short order what with all the flailing arms. Smaller scale objects (a la iPhone) seem to make more sense where the range of motion is more constrained.
Please sweet little baby Jesus give us a redesigned, 8-core, multitouch Macbook Pro. I want to be able to do the things in that video
Hmmm...you do realize that the multi-touch interface as shown by Han is better suited for larger displays? Take a piece of paper the size of a 15" or even 17" screen and think about gesture manipulation on that scale. Useful in some cases but not nearly as much as say on a 30" surface.
Fingers are somewhat large and typical UI controls deisgned smallish (ie as targets for a mouse pointer). You'd want to redesign most elements to be more finger sized...which works just fine on a large 30" MT ACD. Not quite as well on a 15" MT MBP screen.
For example if you look at the posting screen on this forum in the additional options there are two check boxes very close together (Automatically parse links and Disable smilies). These would have to be made larger and further apart. Likewise pull downs, buttons, links and other elements.
The 17" MBP unfolded with two 17" LCDs would be better but at the cost of having a poorer keyboarding experience. The 17" MBP is somewhat unwieldy (doesn't fit in most hotel room safes, computer packs, etc) and I wish I had gotten the 15" version.
The Starfire MT demonstration had the entire work surface (desk) as a MT environment.
It seems (off the cuff) that large or small seems to be the sweet spots for MT gesture based interfaces. That and tablets but you still suffer from the same tablet limitations of today but perhaps Apple can figure out a good way to include a physical keyboard when desired. Say docking a tablet body into a laptop "dock" or perhaps just a flip top MBP.
For a 15" tablet surface, I'd want the ability to use a stylus as well as MT.
Y'know, as impressive as their demo is, one would be exhausted in short order what with all the flailing arms. Smaller scale objects (a la iPhone) seem to make more sense where the range of motion is more constrained.
You mean like folks that write on whiteboards/blackboards for long periods? Eh...as a collaborative environment the wall works reasonably well.
And the surface CAN be horizontal like a draftsman's table and you manipulate objects as you would pieces of paper or other objects on your desk.
I used to work on a drafting table... I'll take a mouse or Wacom tablet any day over that experience again...
Well, I was thinking of a shallower angle than most drafting tables are set. More like a Cintiq which isn't a) sunk into the table and b) typically I don't use completely horizontal. But folks do work at more vertical work surfaces like whiteboards and drafting tables.
The argument that folk's arms will get tired keeps ignoring the fact that the MT surface can be a comfortable distance, elevation and angle for users. Its not just stuck to the "on the wall" form factor.
The MT system we bought from Mitsubishi is completely table top. It's meant for 4 person collaboration I believe...the one we have I think is the same one you see in the demo where some HCI folks modded Warcraft to be controlled via a MT/gesture based interface.
Comments
Again, don't assume. Youth are just as, if not sometimes more, capable of great things. Many adults are very arrogant about this. Anyways, I have a track record at any rate. These aren't empty boasts. I'll have to get the building project done or I'll fail my independent study. We (we being me and a group of several other students) might be getting a grant for this invention project, and this website idea I have it something no other website does.
Yeah, sure. Kids always think they're far better than any who've come before. "Might be getting a grant." Pray tell, when was the last time a bunch of teenagers got a multimillion dollar grant? Will I find your name among the Intel Science Talent Search winners or even the finalists? Extremely doubtful. And even those kids -- who ARE incredibly gifted and brilliant rather than just claiming to be -- don't get million dollar grants. Where's the patent for your revolutionary billion dollar invention? Sorry, you are completely full of yourself. Everybody says their website does something no other website does. You're 15, so you don't remember the last time everybody made that claim and then the bubble burst. From everything you've said, I don't think I'd be sticking my neck out very far by saying you won't be attending MIT or Caltech.
Again as I said, Multi-touch is revolutionary in IMPLEMENTATION, but not in theory. It's a simple theory, but complex and scarcely used in practice. And that's why I said Kudos to Apple...for IMPLEMENTING it. I was already aware FingerWorks invented it.
If you already know about FingerWorks, then why did you make the asinine statement that "Multi-touch is a technology invented for portable use," when no FingerWorks product was ever designed for portable use, except when plugged into a laptop? FingerWorks did implement it. Try reading for once. FingerWorks had mass-produced products on the market for years incorporating MultiTouch. They didn't keep it in the lab.
Give me specifically examples of things that NEED multiple contact points.
You already brought it up yourself with another of your inane assertions. You wrote, "With a mouse, I can easily click and drag the corner of a photo with a slight twitch of the hand, whereas with multi-touch, I'd have to lift both arms and make a huge pinching motions." All stunningly wrong. With a mouse and MultiTouch, you need to move the cursor to the corner of the photo and drag to resize. You're confusing window resize with zoom, which is not the same thing. A one-handed "spread the fingers" gesture ANYWHERE on the screen or on an iGesture pad could let me literally zoom in and out blindfolded at this moment if I wanted to, not that that would be very useful. It's just one small example of all of the stupid, ill-informed statements you've made and continue to make. You think you will be working with a touchscreen and therefore you know MultiTouch, which you continue to stubbornly and mistakenly equate with touchscreens. You know nothing. MultiTouch can be used with touchscreens but does not absolutely need to be. And an awful lot of people were working with touchscreens before you were born.
Give me specifically examples of things that need more than one mouse button. Yet for some reason, five-button mice with scroll wheels dominate the market and even Apple doesn't sell one-button mice anymore.
If the ILC won't be available then Tevatron will likely be kept alive. In 2009 we'll have another administration, possibly from another party and Congress has been realtively more supportive than this admistration has been. Given that DOE has said no ILC likely for an extra 5 years my guess is congress will keep the Tevatron longer rather than have a 15 year gap even if the Tevatron will be outclassed by the LHC.
SLAC is getting the LCLS in 2009 which is an exciting instrument although not for high energy physicists. Losing the PEP-II is a shame but I believe that the LCLS is a good trade. Its also not like the US is starving the scientific community or even the high-energy/nuclear physicsts given the $500M spent at CERN. The priority has shifted in favor of other research areas but DOE has $4B alone.
If we don't get the ILC then you can close the chapter on US HEP.
Vinea
PS As an aside...one GLAST instrument was built at SLAC and NSF is funding particle and nuclear astrophysics at $16M a year. Source? Your Science article. Why assume I don't have access? Provide link then excerpt.
The Tevatron is as good as dead. The funding is winding down rapidly. $16 million a year isn't even scratch, as the article indicated.
Two problems with the Tevatron now. While it's high density makes several searches easier than it will be with the LHC, the energy levels are not high enough to do much new physics. Much of the staff is already in the process of leaving, and many of the scientists have already accepted other positions, a number at CERN.
We need a new facility. That's the reasons old ones are being closed down. Remember that many of these facilities are designed to find one thing, and if they find it, the rest of the life of the machine is spent on lesser activities. After a while, it becomes too expensive to keep them running. Then a new facility is already in the planning, and possibly, in the building stage.
But our big project was cancelled, and nothing else major has been approved since.
I assumed that you didn't have access, because the time we discussed Science, was when I mentioned it, and stated that one needed to be a member to access the articles other than some of the news, and such. You expressed astonishment that a scientific publication would restrict access to members. I assured you that they did.
As they plaster that members passwords and screen names are reguired every time you attempt to access an article, it was an easy assumption that you didn't know that, and so didn't have access. Otherwise why were you so surprised at what I had said about it?
Yeah, sure. Kids always think they're far better than any who've come before. "Might be getting a grant." Pray tell, when was the last time a bunch of teenagers got a multimillion dollar grant? Will I find your name among the Intel Science Talent Search winners or even the finalists? Extremely doubtful. And even those kids -- who ARE incredibly gifted and brilliant rather than just claiming to be -- don't get million dollar grants. Where's the patent for your revolutionary billion dollar invention? Sorry, you are completely full of yourself. Everybody says their website does something no other website does. You're 15, so you don't remember the last time everybody made that claim and then the bubble burst. From everything you've said, I don't think I'd be sticking my neck out very far by saying you won't be attending MIT or Caltech.
If you already know about FingerWorks, then why did you make the asinine statement that "Multi-touch is a technology invented for portable use," when no FingerWorks product was ever designed for portable use, except when plugged into a laptop? FingerWorks did implement it. Try reading for once. FingerWorks had mass-produced products on the market for years incorporating MultiTouch. They didn't keep it in the lab.
You already brought it up yourself with another of your inane assertions. You wrote, "With a mouse, I can easily click and drag the corner of a photo with a slight twitch of the hand, whereas with multi-touch, I'd have to lift both arms and make a huge pinching motions." All stunningly wrong. With a mouse and MultiTouch, you need to move the cursor to the corner of the photo and drag to resize. You're confusing window resize with zoom, which is not the same thing. A one-handed "spread the fingers" gesture ANYWHERE on the screen or on an iGesture pad could let me literally zoom in and out blindfolded at this moment if I wanted to, not that that would be very useful. It's just one small example of all of the stupid, ill-informed statements you've made and continue to make. You think you will be working with a touchscreen and therefore you know MultiTouch, which you continue to stubbornly and mistakenly equate with touchscreens. You know nothing. MultiTouch can be used with touchscreens but does not absolutely need to be. And an awful lot of people were working with touchscreens before you were born.
Give me specifically examples of things that need more than one mouse button. Yet for some reason, five-button mice with scroll wheels dominate the market and even Apple doesn't sell one-button mice anymore.
*Sigh*
Only time will tell.
*Sigh*
Only time will tell.
It's interesting how things change when we have seen it from both sides of the age barriers.
It's interesting how things change when we have seen it from both sides of the age barriers.
And experience barriers.
I assumed that you didn't have access, because the time we discussed Science, was when I mentioned it, and stated that one needed to be a member to access the articles other than some of the news, and such. You expressed astonishment that a scientific publication would restrict access to members. I assured you that they did.
As they plaster that members passwords and screen names are reguired every time you attempt to access an article, it was an easy assumption that you didn't know that, and so didn't have access. Otherwise why were you so surprised at what I had said about it?
That's an odd comment for me to have made given that IEEE locks up content from non-members and I use their stuff a lot. If I said something that dumb I was clearly wrong.
In any case, I'm presumably not the only reader and other folks will undoubtably have access given these are common periodicals. As it is, I do have access to a lot of online journals simply from what I do. Saves me the cost of personal subscriptions but also contributes to "too much stuff to read in a month" syndrome.
The downside is that it's not useful on the train or airplane unless I have the foresight to DL it ahead of time and I have batteries, etc. Paper is sometimes best.
Vinea
The Tevatron is as good as dead. The funding is winding down rapidly. $16 million a year isn't even scratch, as the article indicated.
Two problems with the Tevatron now. While it's high density makes several searches easier than it will be with the LHC, the energy levels are not high enough to do much new physics. Much of the staff is already in the process of leaving, and many of the scientists have already accepted other positions, a number at CERN.
We need a new facility. That's the reasons old ones are being closed down. Remember that many of these facilities are designed to find one thing, and if they find it, the rest of the life of the machine is spent on lesser activities. After a while, it becomes too expensive to keep them running. Then a new facility is already in the planning, and possibly, in the building stage.
But our big project was cancelled, and nothing else major has been approved since.
Duh...didn't comment on the Tev...half of this is national pride and there will be experiments that are fine for the Tevatron if it still exists.
Yes, we dropped the ball on SSC. ILC is the next thing if we get it. If we don't...well, like I said, you can then close the chapter on HEP in the US. Until then it seems premature to say that the US isn't supporting the community.
A little competition never hurts anyway. Wanna bet the second the Chinese gets close to putting a man on the moon that we see a big inject into NASA's budget?
Vinea
http://www.fastcompany.com/video/pla...ctid=422563006
Please sweet little baby Jesus give us a redesigned, 8-core, multitouch Macbook Pro. I want to be able to do the things in that video
Sorry if this has already been posted, and sorry to interrupt the flame-fest, but:
http://www.fastcompany.com/video/pla...ctid=422563006
Please sweet little baby Jesus give us a redesigned, 8-core, multitouch Macbook Pro. I want to be able to do the things in that video
Y'know, as impressive as their demo is, one would be exhausted in short order what with all the flailing arms. Smaller scale objects (a la iPhone) seem to make more sense where the range of motion is more constrained.
Sorry if this has already been posted, and sorry to interrupt the flame-fest, but:
http://www.fastcompany.com/video/pla...ctid=422563006
Please sweet little baby Jesus give us a redesigned, 8-core, multitouch Macbook Pro. I want to be able to do the things in that video
Hmmm...you do realize that the multi-touch interface as shown by Han is better suited for larger displays? Take a piece of paper the size of a 15" or even 17" screen and think about gesture manipulation on that scale. Useful in some cases but not nearly as much as say on a 30" surface.
Fingers are somewhat large and typical UI controls deisgned smallish (ie as targets for a mouse pointer). You'd want to redesign most elements to be more finger sized...which works just fine on a large 30" MT ACD. Not quite as well on a 15" MT MBP screen.
For example if you look at the posting screen on this forum in the additional options there are two check boxes very close together (Automatically parse links and Disable smilies). These would have to be made larger and further apart. Likewise pull downs, buttons, links and other elements.
The 17" MBP unfolded with two 17" LCDs would be better but at the cost of having a poorer keyboarding experience. The 17" MBP is somewhat unwieldy (doesn't fit in most hotel room safes, computer packs, etc) and I wish I had gotten the 15" version.
The Starfire MT demonstration had the entire work surface (desk) as a MT environment.
It seems (off the cuff) that large or small seems to be the sweet spots for MT gesture based interfaces. That and tablets but you still suffer from the same tablet limitations of today but perhaps Apple can figure out a good way to include a physical keyboard when desired. Say docking a tablet body into a laptop "dock" or perhaps just a flip top MBP.
For a 15" tablet surface, I'd want the ability to use a stylus as well as MT.
Vinea
Y'know, as impressive as their demo is, one would be exhausted in short order what with all the flailing arms. Smaller scale objects (a la iPhone) seem to make more sense where the range of motion is more constrained.
You mean like folks that write on whiteboards/blackboards for long periods? Eh...as a collaborative environment the wall works reasonably well.
And the surface CAN be horizontal like a draftsman's table and you manipulate objects as you would pieces of paper or other objects on your desk.
Vinea
You mean like folks that write on whiteboards/blackboards for long periods? Eh...as a collaborative environment the wall works reasonably well.
And the surface CAN be horizontal like a draftsman's table and you manipulate objects as you would pieces of paper or other objects on your desk.
Vinea
I used to work on a drafting table... I'll take a mouse or Wacom tablet any day over that experience again...
Sorry if this has already been posted, and sorry to interrupt the flame-fest, but:
http://www.fastcompany.com/video/pla...ctid=422563006
Please sweet little baby Jesus give us a redesigned, 8-core, multitouch Macbook Pro. I want to be able to do the things in that video
Don't worry... the flame fest already died out.
Don't worry... the flame fest already died out.
Yeah, these things come and go.
I'm still on the road. What's the Discover fake April Fool article?
Mel,
I'm still on the road. What's the Discover fake April Fool article?
You must have missed my post.
It looks to be the problem on page 76. The "Area Paradox" problem related to the Fibonacci secquence.
I still haven't read everything, but what I did read seemed fine, except for this.
I used to work on a drafting table... I'll take a mouse or Wacom tablet any day over that experience again...
Well, I was thinking of a shallower angle than most drafting tables are set. More like a Cintiq which isn't a) sunk into the table and b) typically I don't use completely horizontal. But folks do work at more vertical work surfaces like whiteboards and drafting tables.
The argument that folk's arms will get tired keeps ignoring the fact that the MT surface can be a comfortable distance, elevation and angle for users. Its not just stuck to the "on the wall" form factor.
The MT system we bought from Mitsubishi is completely table top. It's meant for 4 person collaboration I believe...the one we have I think is the same one you see in the demo where some HCI folks modded Warcraft to be controlled via a MT/gesture based interface.
Vinea