Replace "multi-touch" with just about anything and this sentence works. Something exists and is sold and used by people for years; Apple makes a sexier version, Jobs gets on stage and says "revolution" a few times and suddenly Apple invented it.
I think the word you're looking for is re-invented, which is accurate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat
Apple invented everything.
Nobody says that. Sounds to me like you've been listeneing to your buddy Bill too much.
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat
Everyone steals from Apple, especially Micro$oft (lol!).
Again not everyone but it seems quite apparent to me and actually most people who aren't in love with Microsoft that a lot of people, especially Microsoft copy Apple and do so quite obviously. Or are you going to tell me that Apple copied the Windows interface for their first OS, Apple copied Microsoft's Zune designs and Urge music store, that Apple copied the Vista interface for use in OS X. I suppose they were always going to have Windows Movie Maker before imovie etc.
I'd agree this is Vista powered. The interface reminds me of Vista's MCE interface a bit. And the 3d accelerated effects also make me think Vista when I see the demo.
Apple and Microsoft play the same game, they homebrew some of their innovations, swipe some more, and buy up smaller companies. And all the while, they pump out PR that tells the world they were the first to get there.
I would not wear it as a badge of honor were I to decide to take the credulous position of lapdog for either of these massive corporations that spends millions "protecting copyrights" (i.e. - pilfering someone else's work then suing them) and "innovating" (warming over someone else's idea and pretending it is yours).
Apple and Microsoft play the same game, they homebrew some of their innovations, swipe some more, and buy up smaller companies. And all the while, they pump out PR that tells the world they were the first to get there.
I would not wear it as a badge of honor were I to decide to take the credulous position of lapdog for either of these massive corporations that spends millions "protecting copyrights" (i.e. - pilfering someone else's work then suing them) and "innovating" (warming over someone else's idea and pretending it is yours).
Yeah, that's true now that the companies are so big. In the beginning maybe not so much. The innovation does get abstracted into either Apple/Steve or Microsoft/Bill. Ultimately that kind of label is pretty meaningless. Just because Shake has an Apple logo doesn't mean that much given that they bought it. Same idea with Final cut. They do add things to it but a lot comes from places most people don't hear about.
I think at this stage, companies need to start 'merging' more and more just like Adobe and Macromedia. Some people like competition to keep prices low but I wonder if the hassle of incompatibility is worth it. Companies have to keep prices low anyway or people won't buy their product.
What I'd hate to see is for Microsoft to get these tables into restaurants and then make them incompatible with ipods. There's no need for that kind of thing. It's the same with Blu-Ray and HD-DVD, they should have been made to settle just like for DVD.
I'd agree this is Vista powered. The interface reminds me of Vista's MCE interface a bit. And the 3d accelerated effects also make me think Vista when I see the demo.
It looked like a cross between dashboard/dock, coverflow and the iPhone (demos) to me. Which means it's possible that it is vista based.
Sorry... I'm still angry about how vista is "innovative and new" when it is clearly a ripoff of OSX.
Apple and Microsoft play the same game, they homebrew some of their innovations, swipe some more, and buy up smaller companies. And all the while, they pump out PR that tells the world they were the first to get there.
I would not wear it as a badge of honor were I to decide to take the credulous position of lapdog for either of these massive corporations that spends millions "protecting copyrights" (i.e. - pilfering someone else's work then suing them) and "innovating" (warming over someone else's idea and pretending it is yours).
True...they both buy up smaller companies and call the tech their own. But Apple does innovate considerably in-house. And MSFT? Well they try...and after ripping off technologies they fail to deploy them in a way that's appealing to the masses.
Apple and Microsoft play the same game, they homebrew some of their innovations, swipe some more, and buy up smaller companies. And all the while, they pump out PR that tells the world they were the first to get there.
I would not wear it as a badge of honor were I to decide to take the credulous position of lapdog for either of these massive corporations that spends millions "protecting copyrights" (i.e. - pilfering someone else's work then suing them) and "innovating" (warming over someone else's idea and pretending it is yours).
My my, quite they cynic aren't we? As a person running a small tech company I can only hope such a corporation will PAY us for our efforts and then use their other skills - marketing, product development, etc. - to bring our technology to a large audience. Those skills are innovation as well, and if they buy our tech their welcome to call it their own as we would now be them.
Where Apple truly excels, like Sony used to, is in taking the technologies and creating real products, not just new bags of technology. To me, this is what surface is, another bag of technology that now someone has to figure out if its really good for anything.
I dont really care who did what first ... its school kid playground stuff they way you lot are bickering.
Yes, the possibilities are there and have been for a while.
Yes, its said to be 3 years away . . . but likely it'll only be a year away i think
Yes, Apple has multi-touch in an iPhone and there is multi-touch elsewhere too.
In terms of the surface concepts shown . . . i quite liked a good few of the ideas. I liked the restaurant / menu / order sort of ideas and what i would call public space interaction . . . also things like tourist information maps ... but i dont really see folk buying them as their coffee table yet.
One thing to me however , is its pretty clear that the concept of multi-touch is something that is going to be more and more prevelant in a multi-tude of devices. I think it'll be akin to the mouse and pointer type of input. It'll become a standard method of input across a range of devices and applications ( the 2 finger drag to zoom / rotate etc )
So the Ars article basically confirms it's running on Vista, and on normal PC hardware (with some near-IR cameras). I think it's not that surprising because we saw a lot of the same techniques in January, just on a smaller screen. I see now that it's not based on flat screen tech, so it's not pressure aware.
What I'd like to see from Apple, and I'm sure they are working on it as we speak, is:
- Based on flat screen technology, be it LCD, OLED, or the next big thing, so it can sit on a desk.
- Pressure sensitive, like the Newton, so you can scribble down notes with a stylus.
Interesting that Microsoft is calling this a product release. It sure looks a lot more like a demonstration from the research labs. What is different about this video compared to the Jeff Han videos? My money says Apple is already way ahead in this area. Leopard will bring resolution-independence, a critical component in this kind of interface. Since when does Vista have resolution-independence? This looks like another desperate attempt to keep up with Apple.
This is Microsoft we're talking about here. Betas are alphas, release candidates are betas, and Product Releases are "it might work properly in 1-3 years".
Outsider...I would but the screen on some kind of base which is the computer and allow the user to shift it from vert to horiz as desired. Kinda like the Cintiq only with a computer for a base.
All MS Surface is is trophy product that is intended to highlight the capabilities of MS.
Sure the graphics are decent and the touch capabilities are cool. but they have all been done before.
Specifically by apple (yes, I know Apple was not first ot multitouch-- they just came out with an idea to use it that works better than anyone could have thought). Only Apple did not need a small island to lay out the cameras and touch sensitive panels and all of the tech to make it work.
Apple crams all of this into a teeny tiny unit that fits into your pocket.
That is where the innovation comes in.
Here is what matters:
Apple puts this awesome tech in the palm of your hand available soon at a store near you.
Microsoft just says: Gee, we can do that to, but you cannot buy it (and why would you?). It is too expensive, too big, and it has no real purpose, no killer app (casino games???), except for just being a halo product that puts into peoples minds that somehow behind the scenes, Microsoft is really innovating and really ahead in the whole technology thing. And to be fair, they have to. Their latest operating system is behind Apple's two year old OS, their office software is plagued by format incompatibilities and bugs and user interface issues, their brand is recognized as being old and limiting the advancements of tech rather than pushing it forward (which they have been doing through monopolization, licensing, and being happy to make money while being just good enough and not anything special - When I spend more than a thousand dollars on something,, you had better beleive I want something special-not just good enough for the comany to extract my money).
Surface is meant to put it into your minds and give MS an Apple-like face while still just being the same company behind office doors.
in other words...
Surface is LAME.
What does that mean for Leopard? I don't know. To be honest, I am not expecting too much. I expect a more stable (if that is possibe) kernel, some new whiz bang animations, wallpaper, BootCamp, Parellels type stuff, and hopefully a new UI (one that still looks aqua-ish, but more refined... like steel with a hint of gloss). Leopard will have to support PPC and intel based Macs without touch screens. It may include touch support, but I don't know and I really don't see why it would. it would be neat though.
Right now, the only things that I think can really use touch for are devices like the iPhone and tablet devices, but to use multitouch in a tablet, you would either have to set it down like a laptop or sit in a wierd position with the tablet supported by your hips and knees to use both hands -- not my idea of convenient. That is why surfact is the way it is... if the device is any bigger than the iPhone, multitouch becomes counter productive unless it is mounted on a wall or mounted on a table.
And again... that is why surface is LAME.
And again... MS copying Apple while trying to look like it is not.
Poor MS. It must tire of having to always say: "me too, me too!"
My first thought on viewing the video demos was "Maybe a MacBook / Tablet might be pretty cool after all!". Personally, I can imagine using that kind of interface for viewing and sorting photos - and showing them to others. While a prototype $10,000 coffee table might not be very persuasive, after watching those Surface demos you could be forgiven for thinking that maybe the iPhone's screen is a little small for playing around with photos. Use 2 fingers to enlarge / zoom in? How big can the pix possibly get on the iPhone's screen? Whereas, that exact same UI on something the size of a MacBook screen would be more like it.
A couple of months ago these forums were full of MultiTouch "iTablet" rumours and there seemed to be a division between those who'd love to play around with iPhone-style M-T UI on a tablet and those who aren't ready to give up using a keyboard. Of course, with a screen that flips round to cover the keyboard and only activates the M-T screen sensitivity in that position, you could have the best of both worlds.
But .... that would need Leopard and so any such hardware would have to wait until October, right?
I myself have a strong suspicion Apple's ultra-portable Mac will be a 10 or 11" tablet. It will be roughly 11", and widescreen, it will have very few buttons, an optimized UI, and wont have a physical keyboard. The dock will be more like the dock on the iPhone, than the dock in the current OS X. Here
other than multi-touch, i dont think the iPhone and Surface are items which can be directly compared . . . they are both aimed at completely different usage markets.
No one is pretending that a surface is meant for your pocket. You'll probably find devices like surface work alongside the iPhone where one is an extension of the other depending in terms of generic functional usage.
To me, Surface is open public collaborative usage device/concept . . . through a multi-touch implementation.
iPhone is a private usage device/concept ( there will be others following no doubt ) . . . again, through a multitouch implementation.
As for Leopard v Surface . . . i wouldn't be surprised if multi-touch was some sort of API/development kit module that was part of the OS in form similar to Core Image and the like. That way, any input device / application could make use of a standard set of functions to drive the OS to respond around multi-touch. If so, then you could soon get add-on devices which have multi-touch implementations
- multi-touch tablets . . .use the pen in for brush work in photoshop as normal, but while still holding the pen you could drag your finger or fingers to zoom in and out or scroll around the image.
Or from the application side . . . a standard set of functions to use that an application could simply pick up on.
- web browsers . . . a standard set of multi-touch input events could mean that all web browsers could respond the same way ( like dragging finger left and right to go forward and back )
These sorts of things i would image Leopard would implement to a form. Would MS Surface compete with that? I think they would run concurrently. Leopard would have its implementation and Vista its own version.
It would nice if the 2 versions shared the same gestures. That way, any user could come to a multi-touch machine and be able to make use of the machine without having to learn a whole set of gestures again.
Lastly, i dont see things like iMacs and Macbook/Pro machines implementing a physical touch method immediately ... just a step too far in terms of the hardware at the moment i think. I reckon that it would be possible for iSight to watch a user implement a multi-touch gesture system where it could recognise gestures of hands. So if your looking at albums and photos, you could simply put your fingers up and wiggle them about in front of the camera and the gestures being picked up.
There was a thread about that technology a while back. It is doable . . . and again, it could be viable through a standard multi-touch API / development module.
Lastly, i dont see things like iMacs and Macbook/Pro machines implementing a physical touch method immediately ... just a step too far in terms of the hardware at the moment i think. I reckon that it would be possible for iSight to watch a user implement a multi-touch gesture system where it could recognise gestures of hands. So if your looking at albums and photos, you could simply put your fingers up and wiggle them about in front of the camera and the gestures being picked up.
There was a thread about that technology a while back. It is doable . . . and again, it could be viable through a standard multi-touch API / development module.
Comments
Replace "multi-touch" with just about anything and this sentence works. Something exists and is sold and used by people for years; Apple makes a sexier version, Jobs gets on stage and says "revolution" a few times and suddenly Apple invented it.
I think the word you're looking for is re-invented, which is accurate.
Apple invented everything.
Nobody says that. Sounds to me like you've been listeneing to your buddy Bill too much.
Everyone steals from Apple, especially Micro$oft (lol!).
Again not everyone but it seems quite apparent to me and actually most people who aren't in love with Microsoft that a lot of people, especially Microsoft copy Apple and do so quite obviously. Or are you going to tell me that Apple copied the Windows interface for their first OS, Apple copied Microsoft's Zune designs and Urge music store, that Apple copied the Vista interface for use in OS X. I suppose they were always going to have Windows Movie Maker before imovie etc.
I would not wear it as a badge of honor were I to decide to take the credulous position of lapdog for either of these massive corporations that spends millions "protecting copyrights" (i.e. - pilfering someone else's work then suing them) and "innovating" (warming over someone else's idea and pretending it is yours).
Apple and Microsoft play the same game, they homebrew some of their innovations, swipe some more, and buy up smaller companies. And all the while, they pump out PR that tells the world they were the first to get there.
I would not wear it as a badge of honor were I to decide to take the credulous position of lapdog for either of these massive corporations that spends millions "protecting copyrights" (i.e. - pilfering someone else's work then suing them) and "innovating" (warming over someone else's idea and pretending it is yours).
Yeah, that's true now that the companies are so big. In the beginning maybe not so much. The innovation does get abstracted into either Apple/Steve or Microsoft/Bill. Ultimately that kind of label is pretty meaningless. Just because Shake has an Apple logo doesn't mean that much given that they bought it. Same idea with Final cut. They do add things to it but a lot comes from places most people don't hear about.
I think at this stage, companies need to start 'merging' more and more just like Adobe and Macromedia. Some people like competition to keep prices low but I wonder if the hassle of incompatibility is worth it. Companies have to keep prices low anyway or people won't buy their product.
What I'd hate to see is for Microsoft to get these tables into restaurants and then make them incompatible with ipods. There's no need for that kind of thing. It's the same with Blu-Ray and HD-DVD, they should have been made to settle just like for DVD.
It's a concept car, it's not an improved Focus or Mondeo.
Move along now.
I'd agree this is Vista powered. The interface reminds me of Vista's MCE interface a bit. And the 3d accelerated effects also make me think Vista when I see the demo.
It looked like a cross between dashboard/dock, coverflow and the iPhone (demos) to me. Which means it's possible that it is vista based.
Sorry... I'm still angry about how vista is "innovative and new" when it is clearly a ripoff of OSX.
Apple and Microsoft play the same game, they homebrew some of their innovations, swipe some more, and buy up smaller companies. And all the while, they pump out PR that tells the world they were the first to get there.
I would not wear it as a badge of honor were I to decide to take the credulous position of lapdog for either of these massive corporations that spends millions "protecting copyrights" (i.e. - pilfering someone else's work then suing them) and "innovating" (warming over someone else's idea and pretending it is yours).
True...they both buy up smaller companies and call the tech their own. But Apple does innovate considerably in-house. And MSFT? Well they try...and after ripping off technologies they fail to deploy them in a way that's appealing to the masses.
Sorry... I'm still angry about how vista is "innovative and new" when it is clearly a ripoff of OSX.
It's a poor mans Tiger rip off. They got nothing on Leopard. M$ is still 5 years behind Apple, again.
Apple and Microsoft play the same game, they homebrew some of their innovations, swipe some more, and buy up smaller companies. And all the while, they pump out PR that tells the world they were the first to get there.
I would not wear it as a badge of honor were I to decide to take the credulous position of lapdog for either of these massive corporations that spends millions "protecting copyrights" (i.e. - pilfering someone else's work then suing them) and "innovating" (warming over someone else's idea and pretending it is yours).
My my, quite they cynic aren't we? As a person running a small tech company I can only hope such a corporation will PAY us for our efforts and then use their other skills - marketing, product development, etc. - to bring our technology to a large audience. Those skills are innovation as well, and if they buy our tech their welcome to call it their own as we would now be them.
Where Apple truly excels, like Sony used to, is in taking the technologies and creating real products, not just new bags of technology. To me, this is what surface is, another bag of technology that now someone has to figure out if its really good for anything.
I dont really care who did what first ... its school kid playground stuff they way you lot are bickering.
Yes, the possibilities are there and have been for a while.
Yes, its said to be 3 years away . . . but likely it'll only be a year away i think
Yes, Apple has multi-touch in an iPhone and there is multi-touch elsewhere too.
In terms of the surface concepts shown . . . i quite liked a good few of the ideas. I liked the restaurant / menu / order sort of ideas and what i would call public space interaction . . . also things like tourist information maps ... but i dont really see folk buying them as their coffee table yet.
One thing to me however , is its pretty clear that the concept of multi-touch is something that is going to be more and more prevelant in a multi-tude of devices. I think it'll be akin to the mouse and pointer type of input. It'll become a standard method of input across a range of devices and applications ( the 2 finger drag to zoom / rotate etc )
What I'd like to see from Apple, and I'm sure they are working on it as we speak, is:
- Based on flat screen technology, be it LCD, OLED, or the next big thing, so it can sit on a desk.
- Pressure sensitive, like the Newton, so you can scribble down notes with a stylus.
- Multiple sizes. Low-end, 20"; mid-range, 30"; high-end, +30".
- Software keyboard, like the iPhone. Allow plugins so you can have added functionality.
I'll whip up a mock up
Interesting that Microsoft is calling this a product release. It sure looks a lot more like a demonstration from the research labs. What is different about this video compared to the Jeff Han videos? My money says Apple is already way ahead in this area. Leopard will bring resolution-independence, a critical component in this kind of interface. Since when does Vista have resolution-independence? This looks like another desperate attempt to keep up with Apple.
This is Microsoft we're talking about here. Betas are alphas, release candidates are betas, and Product Releases are "it might work properly in 1-3 years".
Sure the graphics are decent and the touch capabilities are cool. but they have all been done before.
Specifically by apple (yes, I know Apple was not first ot multitouch-- they just came out with an idea to use it that works better than anyone could have thought). Only Apple did not need a small island to lay out the cameras and touch sensitive panels and all of the tech to make it work.
Apple crams all of this into a teeny tiny unit that fits into your pocket.
That is where the innovation comes in.
Here is what matters:
Apple puts this awesome tech in the palm of your hand available soon at a store near you.
Microsoft just says: Gee, we can do that to, but you cannot buy it (and why would you?). It is too expensive, too big, and it has no real purpose, no killer app (casino games???), except for just being a halo product that puts into peoples minds that somehow behind the scenes, Microsoft is really innovating and really ahead in the whole technology thing. And to be fair, they have to. Their latest operating system is behind Apple's two year old OS, their office software is plagued by format incompatibilities and bugs and user interface issues, their brand is recognized as being old and limiting the advancements of tech rather than pushing it forward (which they have been doing through monopolization, licensing, and being happy to make money while being just good enough and not anything special - When I spend more than a thousand dollars on something,, you had better beleive I want something special-not just good enough for the comany to extract my money).
Surface is meant to put it into your minds and give MS an Apple-like face while still just being the same company behind office doors.
in other words...
Surface is LAME.
What does that mean for Leopard? I don't know. To be honest, I am not expecting too much. I expect a more stable (if that is possibe) kernel, some new whiz bang animations, wallpaper, BootCamp, Parellels type stuff, and hopefully a new UI (one that still looks aqua-ish, but more refined... like steel with a hint of gloss). Leopard will have to support PPC and intel based Macs without touch screens. It may include touch support, but I don't know and I really don't see why it would. it would be neat though.
Right now, the only things that I think can really use touch for are devices like the iPhone and tablet devices, but to use multitouch in a tablet, you would either have to set it down like a laptop or sit in a wierd position with the tablet supported by your hips and knees to use both hands -- not my idea of convenient. That is why surfact is the way it is... if the device is any bigger than the iPhone, multitouch becomes counter productive unless it is mounted on a wall or mounted on a table.
And again... that is why surface is LAME.
And again... MS copying Apple while trying to look like it is not.
Poor MS. It must tire of having to always say: "me too, me too!"
My first thought on viewing the video demos was "Maybe a MacBook / Tablet might be pretty cool after all!". Personally, I can imagine using that kind of interface for viewing and sorting photos - and showing them to others. While a prototype $10,000 coffee table might not be very persuasive, after watching those Surface demos you could be forgiven for thinking that maybe the iPhone's screen is a little small for playing around with photos. Use 2 fingers to enlarge / zoom in? How big can the pix possibly get on the iPhone's screen? Whereas, that exact same UI on something the size of a MacBook screen would be more like it.
A couple of months ago these forums were full of MultiTouch "iTablet" rumours and there seemed to be a division between those who'd love to play around with iPhone-style M-T UI on a tablet and those who aren't ready to give up using a keyboard. Of course, with a screen that flips round to cover the keyboard and only activates the M-T screen sensitivity in that position, you could have the best of both worlds.
But .... that would need Leopard and so any such hardware would have to wait until October, right?
I myself have a strong suspicion Apple's ultra-portable Mac will be a 10 or 11" tablet. It will be roughly 11", and widescreen, it will have very few buttons, an optimized UI, and wont have a physical keyboard. The dock will be more like the dock on the iPhone, than the dock in the current OS X. Here
No one is pretending that a surface is meant for your pocket. You'll probably find devices like surface work alongside the iPhone where one is an extension of the other depending in terms of generic functional usage.
To me, Surface is open public collaborative usage device/concept . . . through a multi-touch implementation.
iPhone is a private usage device/concept ( there will be others following no doubt ) . . . again, through a multitouch implementation.
As for Leopard v Surface . . . i wouldn't be surprised if multi-touch was some sort of API/development kit module that was part of the OS in form similar to Core Image and the like. That way, any input device / application could make use of a standard set of functions to drive the OS to respond around multi-touch. If so, then you could soon get add-on devices which have multi-touch implementations
- multi-touch tablets . . .use the pen in for brush work in photoshop as normal, but while still holding the pen you could drag your finger or fingers to zoom in and out or scroll around the image.
Or from the application side . . . a standard set of functions to use that an application could simply pick up on.
- web browsers . . . a standard set of multi-touch input events could mean that all web browsers could respond the same way ( like dragging finger left and right to go forward and back )
These sorts of things i would image Leopard would implement to a form. Would MS Surface compete with that? I think they would run concurrently. Leopard would have its implementation and Vista its own version.
It would nice if the 2 versions shared the same gestures. That way, any user could come to a multi-touch machine and be able to make use of the machine without having to learn a whole set of gestures again.
Lastly, i dont see things like iMacs and Macbook/Pro machines implementing a physical touch method immediately ... just a step too far in terms of the hardware at the moment i think. I reckon that it would be possible for iSight to watch a user implement a multi-touch gesture system where it could recognise gestures of hands. So if your looking at albums and photos, you could simply put your fingers up and wiggle them about in front of the camera and the gestures being picked up.
There was a thread about that technology a while back. It is doable . . . and again, it could be viable through a standard multi-touch API / development module.
Lastly, i dont see things like iMacs and Macbook/Pro machines implementing a physical touch method immediately ... just a step too far in terms of the hardware at the moment i think. I reckon that it would be possible for iSight to watch a user implement a multi-touch gesture system where it could recognise gestures of hands. So if your looking at albums and photos, you could simply put your fingers up and wiggle them about in front of the camera and the gestures being picked up.
There was a thread about that technology a while back. It is doable . . . and again, it could be viable through a standard multi-touch API / development module.
You mean this one?
You mean this one?
yup - thats the one...