If Apple made a wifi mouse with two buttons and a scroll-wheel, it would be the best mouse they have ever made.
Think Normal - sometimes it just works.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curmudgeon
Why the hell won't Apple just build a normal freaking mouse?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gustav
Apple is going backwards in mouse usability. My three year old knows how to use a one button mouse, and a mouse with two physical buttons. I can tell him to click the left or right button.
I can't tell him to click the right button when there are no buttons.
I agree 100%. Two button mouse with a scroll-wheel is the best input method.
If you input device requires visual feedback, you'll have to refocus between that and the screen all the time. Not the most ergonomic solution.
You know all those engineering drawings that they flash on the screen in those shows - those won't be drawn with a virtual keyboard even in star date 2050. The human hand will still need the equivalent of a mouse/input device to draw. Controlling a vehicle or calling up database records, sure, but creating graphics will not be done on a virtual keyboard. I'm pretty sure of this unless telekinesis becomes the new input method.
Virtual keyboards aren't exclusive. A virtual keyboard will be far superior to what most of us use today imo but for a (graphic) artist requiring a freeform input device I am sure the Vacoms of this world will still be around. I can't imagine using finger input to create drawings and such. But as an aside - it is interesting that something like a tablet uses a stylus that looks like a pen to recreate brushes and chalk, etc. Much as I love brushes and chalk they are of the past. We have digital media with infinite possibilities and yet we try and re-create chalk. There is nothing special about chalk per se. At some point it was state of the art.
I agree 100%. Two button mouse with a scroll-wheel is the best input method.
Disagree - by far the best mouse I have ever used is the magic mouse. Buttons and wheels are a drag. Cables get in the way.
Quote:
If you input device requires visual feedback, you'll have to refocus between that and the screen all the time. Not the most ergonomic solution.
There is no requirement for visual feedback but an input device that has that option is more useful. A keyboard is great for typing. It has been adapted to be used in a video editing environment but it is not ideal. If the layout and keys could change when your Video Editing software opens the experience could be much better and more efficient. Most feedback should and would be displayed on the screen on which you are looking.
But as an aside - it is interesting that something like a tablet uses a stylus that looks like a pen to recreate brushes and chalk, etc. Much as I love brushes and chalk they are of the past. We have digital media with infinite possibilities and yet we try and re-create chalk. There is nothing special about chalk per se. At some point it was state of the art.
It is about the hand. The digital paint brush is a logical extension of the hand - a direct connection from the brain to the canvas. If you had to paint by typing machine assembly code the drawings would be crap. It's all about the eye hand coordination that is uniquely human and enables us to create art.
It is about the hand. The digital paint brush is a logical extension of the hand - a direct connection from the brain to the canvas. If you had to paint by typing machine assembly code the drawings would be crap. It's all about the eye hand coordination that is uniquely human and enables us to create art.
Yeah, I get that.
What I am amused by is the fact that we are trying recreate something we rarely use. You just referred to a paintbrush and canvas. I don't think that paints and canvas are about to disappear, far from it, but I find it interesting that we use those reference points and try to re-create those effects when we don't need to. It's like using paints and canvas to try and recreate computer graphics.
What I am amused by is the fact that we are trying recreate something we rarely use. You just referred to a paintbrush and canvas. I don't think that paints and canvas are about to disappear, far from it, but I find it interesting that we use those reference points and try to re-create those effects when we don't need to. It's like using paints and canvas to try and recreate computer graphics.
Anyway, I told you it was an aside.
Sorry, I used such archaic terms as paint and canvas when referring to digital graphics but that is what they are named even in the state of the graphics application. Perhaps you are not involved in graphic arts but there is really no other way to put feeling into a piece of art, except the old fashion way regardless of the medium.
BTW. Few people realize when they are typing on their computer, that the characters are often derivatives of carefully drawn figures from the 15th century.
A screen on a mouse doesn't make sense and is too counter-intuitive for Apple. I'm sure they patented the idea along the way for IP reasons. The existing Magic Mouse and Trackpad are the logical evolution from the Mighty Mouse. More hand and finger gestures will lead the way from here, and we'll see where they lead us to.
Apple (and others) will eventually develop Trackpads and/or Touchboards with screens instead of keys on them, but that's a long ways off, not because the technology isn't there (it already is), but because consumers en mass just aren't ready for that. Even after the wild popularity of the iPhone and all its imitators, many people still prefer having physical keyboards on their mobiles. You think those folks are going to easily give up their desktop keyboards?
Keyboards with physical keys will be around for a long time as the tactile input is still very much a part of how we interact with computers. Before Touchboards, we'll probably see iconographic keyboards like in Alien, Aliens, or Deep Impact infiltrate niche segments of industry (they're probably already there), but screen-only input devices for casual consumers? I'm not holding my breath.
As for the future, I think it will be a combination of the Star Trek: TNG and Minority Report models. Personally, I say bring it on! But unfortunately, I can't see either one happening and, more importantly, being widely adopted anytime in the near future.
Disagree - by far the best mouse I have ever used is the magic mouse. Buttons and wheels are a drag. Cables get in the way.
I never mentioned cables. Wireless is a given. The rest is your personal opinion that is likely shared by few, certainly not by me.
Quote:
There is no requirement for visual feedback but an input device that has that option is more useful. A keyboard is great for typing. It has been adapted to be used in a video editing environment but it is not ideal. If the layout and keys could change when your Video Editing software opens the experience could be much better and more efficient. Most feedback should and would be displayed on the screen on which you are looking.
You describe a very specialized use-case (Video editing). It would appear to me that a dedicated secondary input device would be more suited than turning your keyboard/mouse into some Mickey mouse travesty.
I agree 100%. Two button mouse with a scroll-wheel is the best input method.
If you input device requires visual feedback, you'll have to refocus between that and the screen all the time. Not the most ergonomic solution.
Throw me in with this camp. So far, Apple has not paid as much attention to the tactile experience of using their mice. Even the keyboard has received much more attention and yet it's the mouse that our hands caress the surface of.
I currently use the logitech 7+ button, metal scroll wheel wonders. I like real buttons that give haptic feedback by clicking when pressed. I love that spinning flywheel. It feels substantial and fun to use. They even put a strip of rubber on it for traction. And somehow the logitech mice barely draw juice from the batteries. They last a looong time. No wireless issues here.
Apple will keep trying new things. I'm excited about that and think they should continue. But Apple should also stomp Logitech by making the same mouse, same metal scroll wheel, same clickable buttons, and lots of them, only make the case metal as well. So when you grasp it, you are rewarded with something that feels substantial and exquisitely engineered. Put some fine curves to it and make it feel perfect in the hand.
Logitech scores on everything except the case is plastic. Functional but hardly awe inspiring. Apple pays so much attention to the backs and fronts of their mobile kit, it's hard to believe they have neglected to do the same on the device our hands must massage every day.
Sorry, I used such archaic terms as paint and canvas when referring to digital graphics but that is what they are named even in the state of the graphics application. Perhaps you are not involved in graphic arts but there is really no other way to put feeling into a piece of art, except the old fashion way regardless of the medium.
BTW. Few people realize when they are typing on their computer, that the characters are often derivatives of carefully drawn figures from the 15th century.
I am very familiar with digital graphics though I rarely work the Mac myself. Not sure I would classify a lot of what we do as 'art' but I am familiar with most of the packages. What interests me is the way we lean on the 'old ways' even when dealing with a new media.
"there is really no other way to put feeling into a piece of art, except the old fashion way regardless of the medium" Really? I completely disagree with you that the 'old fashioned way' is the only way to express emotion. I enjoy modern art, photography, expressionist film, installation art and conceptual art as much as I do paints, canvas and the like. But I love oil and canvas, don't get me wrong. Rothko is one of my favourites.
Throw me in with this camp. So far, Apple has not paid as much attention to the tactile experience of using their mice. Even the keyboard has received much more attention and yet it's the mouse that our hands caress the surface of.
I currently use the logitech 7+ button, metal scroll wheel wonders. I like real buttons that give haptic feedback by clicking when pressed. I love that spinning flywheel. It feels substantial and fun to use. They even put a strip of rubber on it for traction. And somehow the logitech mice barely draw juice from the batteries. They last a looong time. No wireless issues here.
Apple will keep trying new things. I'm excited about that and think they should continue. But Apple should also stomp Logitech by making the same mouse, same metal scroll wheel, same clickable buttons, and lots of them, only make the case metal as well. So when you grasp it, you are rewarded with something that feels substantial and exquisitely engineered. Put some fine curves to it and make it feel perfect in the hand.
Logitech scores on everything except the case is plastic. Functional but hardly awe inspiring. Apple pays so much attention to the backs and fronts of their mobile kit, it's hard to believe they have neglected to do the same on the device our hands must massage every day.
I have never tried the logitec mouse you talk about but it sounds very nice. Apple will never make anything like that however. I sometimes think that the ultimate achievement in the eyes of Apple would be to be able to reduce their product line to a single item. If it could be THAT good, THAT universal and yet do all the things we want it to do... I am not really being serious but in my opinion the present magic mouse is pretty close to a perfect mouse. All previous Apple mice have been pretty awful. I imagine they would love to do away with the mouse altogether if they could, however. Pare it down to the bare minimum.
]"there is really no other way to put feeling into a piece of art, except the old fashion way regardless of the medium"[/I] Really? I completely disagree with you that the 'old fashioned way' is the only way to express emotion. I enjoy modern art, photography, expressionist film, installation art and conceptual art as much as I do paints, canvas and the like. But I love oil and canvas, don't get me wrong. Rothko is one of my favourites.
Probably my poor writing skills to blame but I don't think we are on the same page at all. By the old fashion way I mean by hand. Even in digital graphic arts the grunt work is done dragging objects and positioning virtual light sources, selecting colors by eye, dragging sliders, tweaking, nudging etc. So this is what I mean by the hand, not simply by the numbers. Once the art and design part is done then the automated part can take over. Remember this is a discussion started as mouse verses keyboard. That is why we have a GUI in computers.
I like my keyboard and mouse to have a cable and USB plug at the end of it.
If Apple sold the small keyboard and this mouse for USB, I would buy for sure -- until then I will keep using my full sized corded-keyboard an a 5-button Microsoft Intellimouse.
Apple has had a track record of making terrible mice. It has changed that around with mighty mouse and magic mouse. This, however, could bring back the flop designs of the past. How am I going to look at a screen when my hand is covering it 90% of the time. The other 10 I am looking at the monitor, not the mouse.
Apple has had a track record of making terrible mice. It has changed that around with mighty mouse and magic mouse. This, however, could bring back the flop designs of the past. How am I going to look at a screen when my hand is covering it 90% of the time. The other 10 I am looking at the monitor, not the mouse.
Virtual keyboard seems a very adaptable solution, but I just can't touch type on one. No home row.
I an AR drone aircraft controlled via the iPhone. When it is flying I look at it, not my hands. The controls are about 2/3 accelerometer based so no problem, by the virtual joystick for yaw and power is tough to manipulate. Half the time my fingers end up off of the control unintentionally. That goodness for the autopilot in those cases..
If you are in a situation where you can't monitor your finges visually you need a substitute. A glass surface gives me nothing.
All for the terminator style liquid metal based mouse. Unless it tried to kill me.
Voice recognition is one of the longest running boondoggles in tech. It's inherently impossible for a computer to "recognise" what you are saying, but we all pretend like it's going to happen someday anyway.
The reason is that the computer would have to be conscious to perform that task and you guessed it ... Artificial Intelligence, or the idea that a computer will someday "think" is a an even longer running boondoggle.
Please define what you mean by "inherently" and "impossible". The simple fact is there is already functional voice recognition even in iPhone apps, and there are highly functional voice recognition systems that have been developed, some by DARPA. So your claim that voice recognition is "impossible" is either you being uninformed, or badly misunderstanding what "impossible" means.
Also, please define what you mean by "artificial intelligence", and "think". What is thinking? If you mean simply the processing of information, then any device that produces an input to an output 'thinks'. In this case, a simple calculator 'thinks'.
If you're referring to having the experience of mental contents, thoughts, feelings, holding something in your mind and manipulating it, you have no basis to say that anyone thinks...
Mental contents and experiences (or "qualia" as used by those in philosophy of mind) are privileged, there is no access to them other than for the one experiencing them. No one can look into someone else's mind, or brain even, and co-experience that person's qualia. So the question is, how do we know ANYONE can think?
The simple fact is, we don't. We have no objective or empirical proof that there is anything called 'thinking', even for us humans. It doesn't matter that we can scan someone's brain while they're solving a particular problem and see the same pattern of brain activity in everyone who does the task; the problem is how do we know that brain activity IS the qualia? Again, the simple fact is, we don't, and we can't.
So your claim that machines can think is well based in common sense, but you really need to define what you mean before you go popping off about what is and is not "impossible". Flight used to be "impossible"... Whether someone recovered from an infection used to be "the will of God"...
Simply because it doesn't fit in with your metaphysics doesn't mean that something is "impossible".
Is there a speed advantage to taking your eyes off the screen to look down at your touch-sensitive mouse, find a virtual button, hitting it, then bringing your eyes back up to the screen? ...I mean, over simply moving your mouse to click an on-screen button, that is...
Gestures, I'm on board with, but this is a clear step backwards.
-Clive
I've been using an app called FlyGesture. I'd rather use something like this that I can see on the monitor rather than on an input device. I don't want to learn umpteen gestures that don't always work even after taking my eyes off the monitor.
A big problem with the whiz kids at Apple and elsewhere is that someone comes up with a great idea but forgets to test it in the real world. Example - the second finger is lower than the first finger (it has been for a million years or so), which means that in order to keep from accidentally touching the MagicMouse with the second finger, you have to keep it elevated, which creates strain. Logitec has no problem understanding this. Why not Apple? Accidental right clicks are a part of the daily routine. If you are in the middle of editing something in AfterEffects and suddenly the preview is zoomed out to the size of a pea, this is very annoying, especially if it happens a dozen or so times a day.
I suggest that Apple do one of two things with the MagicMouse: either provide a sensitivity adjustment for the secondary button field or create right hand and left hand versions of the mouse, with the front quarter being sloped to conform to the anatomy of the human hand.
At least the MM is not the worst misfire out there. Contour makes a so-called "ergonomic" mouse in seven sizes, each of which is designed to completely fill the shape of the hand, which means you cannot mouse with your fingers - you have to use your forearm, which makes it next to impossible to do precise work.
Comments
If Apple made a wifi mouse with two buttons and a scroll-wheel, it would be the best mouse they have ever made.
Think Normal - sometimes it just works.
Why the hell won't Apple just build a normal freaking mouse?
Apple is going backwards in mouse usability. My three year old knows how to use a one button mouse, and a mouse with two physical buttons. I can tell him to click the left or right button.
I can't tell him to click the right button when there are no buttons.
I agree 100%. Two button mouse with a scroll-wheel is the best input method.
If you input device requires visual feedback, you'll have to refocus between that and the screen all the time. Not the most ergonomic solution.
You know all those engineering drawings that they flash on the screen in those shows - those won't be drawn with a virtual keyboard even in star date 2050. The human hand will still need the equivalent of a mouse/input device to draw. Controlling a vehicle or calling up database records, sure, but creating graphics will not be done on a virtual keyboard. I'm pretty sure of this unless telekinesis becomes the new input method.
Virtual keyboards aren't exclusive. A virtual keyboard will be far superior to what most of us use today imo but for a (graphic) artist requiring a freeform input device I am sure the Vacoms of this world will still be around. I can't imagine using finger input to create drawings and such. But as an aside - it is interesting that something like a tablet uses a stylus that looks like a pen to recreate brushes and chalk, etc. Much as I love brushes and chalk they are of the past. We have digital media with infinite possibilities and yet we try and re-create chalk. There is nothing special about chalk per se. At some point it was state of the art.
I agree 100%. Two button mouse with a scroll-wheel is the best input method.
Disagree - by far the best mouse I have ever used is the magic mouse. Buttons and wheels are a drag. Cables get in the way.
If you input device requires visual feedback, you'll have to refocus between that and the screen all the time. Not the most ergonomic solution.
There is no requirement for visual feedback but an input device that has that option is more useful. A keyboard is great for typing. It has been adapted to be used in a video editing environment but it is not ideal. If the layout and keys could change when your Video Editing software opens the experience could be much better and more efficient. Most feedback should and would be displayed on the screen on which you are looking.
But as an aside - it is interesting that something like a tablet uses a stylus that looks like a pen to recreate brushes and chalk, etc. Much as I love brushes and chalk they are of the past. We have digital media with infinite possibilities and yet we try and re-create chalk. There is nothing special about chalk per se. At some point it was state of the art.
It is about the hand. The digital paint brush is a logical extension of the hand - a direct connection from the brain to the canvas. If you had to paint by typing machine assembly code the drawings would be crap. It's all about the eye hand coordination that is uniquely human and enables us to create art.
It is about the hand. The digital paint brush is a logical extension of the hand - a direct connection from the brain to the canvas. If you had to paint by typing machine assembly code the drawings would be crap. It's all about the eye hand coordination that is uniquely human and enables us to create art.
Yeah, I get that.
What I am amused by is the fact that we are trying recreate something we rarely use. You just referred to a paintbrush and canvas. I don't think that paints and canvas are about to disappear, far from it, but I find it interesting that we use those reference points and try to re-create those effects when we don't need to. It's like using paints and canvas to try and recreate computer graphics.
Anyway, I told you it was an aside.
Yeah, I get that.
What I am amused by is the fact that we are trying recreate something we rarely use. You just referred to a paintbrush and canvas. I don't think that paints and canvas are about to disappear, far from it, but I find it interesting that we use those reference points and try to re-create those effects when we don't need to. It's like using paints and canvas to try and recreate computer graphics.
Anyway, I told you it was an aside.
Sorry, I used such archaic terms as paint and canvas when referring to digital graphics but that is what they are named even in the state of the graphics application. Perhaps you are not involved in graphic arts but there is really no other way to put feeling into a piece of art, except the old fashion way regardless of the medium.
BTW. Few people realize when they are typing on their computer, that the characters are often derivatives of carefully drawn figures from the 15th century.
Apple (and others) will eventually develop Trackpads and/or Touchboards with screens instead of keys on them, but that's a long ways off, not because the technology isn't there (it already is), but because consumers en mass just aren't ready for that. Even after the wild popularity of the iPhone and all its imitators, many people still prefer having physical keyboards on their mobiles. You think those folks are going to easily give up their desktop keyboards?
Keyboards with physical keys will be around for a long time as the tactile input is still very much a part of how we interact with computers. Before Touchboards, we'll probably see iconographic keyboards like in Alien, Aliens, or Deep Impact infiltrate niche segments of industry (they're probably already there), but screen-only input devices for casual consumers? I'm not holding my breath.
As for the future, I think it will be a combination of the Star Trek: TNG and Minority Report models. Personally, I say bring it on! But unfortunately, I can't see either one happening and, more importantly, being widely adopted anytime in the near future.
Disagree - by far the best mouse I have ever used is the magic mouse. Buttons and wheels are a drag. Cables get in the way.
I never mentioned cables. Wireless is a given. The rest is your personal opinion that is likely shared by few, certainly not by me.
There is no requirement for visual feedback but an input device that has that option is more useful. A keyboard is great for typing. It has been adapted to be used in a video editing environment but it is not ideal. If the layout and keys could change when your Video Editing software opens the experience could be much better and more efficient. Most feedback should and would be displayed on the screen on which you are looking.
You describe a very specialized use-case (Video editing). It would appear to me that a dedicated secondary input device would be more suited than turning your keyboard/mouse into some Mickey mouse travesty.
I agree 100%. Two button mouse with a scroll-wheel is the best input method.
If you input device requires visual feedback, you'll have to refocus between that and the screen all the time. Not the most ergonomic solution.
Throw me in with this camp. So far, Apple has not paid as much attention to the tactile experience of using their mice. Even the keyboard has received much more attention and yet it's the mouse that our hands caress the surface of.
I currently use the logitech 7+ button, metal scroll wheel wonders. I like real buttons that give haptic feedback by clicking when pressed. I love that spinning flywheel. It feels substantial and fun to use. They even put a strip of rubber on it for traction. And somehow the logitech mice barely draw juice from the batteries. They last a looong time. No wireless issues here.
Apple will keep trying new things. I'm excited about that and think they should continue. But Apple should also stomp Logitech by making the same mouse, same metal scroll wheel, same clickable buttons, and lots of them, only make the case metal as well. So when you grasp it, you are rewarded with something that feels substantial and exquisitely engineered. Put some fine curves to it and make it feel perfect in the hand.
Logitech scores on everything except the case is plastic. Functional but hardly awe inspiring. Apple pays so much attention to the backs and fronts of their mobile kit, it's hard to believe they have neglected to do the same on the device our hands must massage every day.
Sorry, I used such archaic terms as paint and canvas when referring to digital graphics but that is what they are named even in the state of the graphics application. Perhaps you are not involved in graphic arts but there is really no other way to put feeling into a piece of art, except the old fashion way regardless of the medium.
BTW. Few people realize when they are typing on their computer, that the characters are often derivatives of carefully drawn figures from the 15th century.
I am very familiar with digital graphics though I rarely work the Mac myself. Not sure I would classify a lot of what we do as 'art' but I am familiar with most of the packages. What interests me is the way we lean on the 'old ways' even when dealing with a new media.
"there is really no other way to put feeling into a piece of art, except the old fashion way regardless of the medium" Really? I completely disagree with you that the 'old fashioned way' is the only way to express emotion. I enjoy modern art, photography, expressionist film, installation art and conceptual art as much as I do paints, canvas and the like. But I love oil and canvas, don't get me wrong. Rothko is one of my favourites.
Throw me in with this camp. So far, Apple has not paid as much attention to the tactile experience of using their mice. Even the keyboard has received much more attention and yet it's the mouse that our hands caress the surface of.
I currently use the logitech 7+ button, metal scroll wheel wonders. I like real buttons that give haptic feedback by clicking when pressed. I love that spinning flywheel. It feels substantial and fun to use. They even put a strip of rubber on it for traction. And somehow the logitech mice barely draw juice from the batteries. They last a looong time. No wireless issues here.
Apple will keep trying new things. I'm excited about that and think they should continue. But Apple should also stomp Logitech by making the same mouse, same metal scroll wheel, same clickable buttons, and lots of them, only make the case metal as well. So when you grasp it, you are rewarded with something that feels substantial and exquisitely engineered. Put some fine curves to it and make it feel perfect in the hand.
Logitech scores on everything except the case is plastic. Functional but hardly awe inspiring. Apple pays so much attention to the backs and fronts of their mobile kit, it's hard to believe they have neglected to do the same on the device our hands must massage every day.
I have never tried the logitec mouse you talk about but it sounds very nice. Apple will never make anything like that however. I sometimes think that the ultimate achievement in the eyes of Apple would be to be able to reduce their product line to a single item. If it could be THAT good, THAT universal and yet do all the things we want it to do... I am not really being serious but in my opinion the present magic mouse is pretty close to a perfect mouse. All previous Apple mice have been pretty awful. I imagine they would love to do away with the mouse altogether if they could, however. Pare it down to the bare minimum.
This has been my main futuristic request for several years now for notebooks, where it makes a lot more sense. This is inevitable at some point.
I think you should have patented the idea. That way you could be suing apple when it comes out with an actual device.
]"there is really no other way to put feeling into a piece of art, except the old fashion way regardless of the medium"[/I] Really? I completely disagree with you that the 'old fashioned way' is the only way to express emotion. I enjoy modern art, photography, expressionist film, installation art and conceptual art as much as I do paints, canvas and the like. But I love oil and canvas, don't get me wrong. Rothko is one of my favourites.
Probably my poor writing skills to blame but I don't think we are on the same page at all. By the old fashion way I mean by hand. Even in digital graphic arts the grunt work is done dragging objects and positioning virtual light sources, selecting colors by eye, dragging sliders, tweaking, nudging etc. So this is what I mean by the hand, not simply by the numbers. Once the art and design part is done then the automated part can take over. Remember this is a discussion started as mouse verses keyboard. That is why we have a GUI in computers.
If Apple sold the small keyboard and this mouse for USB, I would buy for sure -- until then I will keep using my full sized corded-keyboard an a 5-button Microsoft Intellimouse.
Apple has had a track record of making terrible mice. It has changed that around with mighty mouse and magic mouse. This, however, could bring back the flop designs of the past. How am I going to look at a screen when my hand is covering it 90% of the time. The other 10 I am looking at the monitor, not the mouse.
Virtual keyboard seems a very adaptable solution, but I just can't touch type on one. No home row.
I an AR drone aircraft controlled via the iPhone. When it is flying I look at it, not my hands. The controls are about 2/3 accelerometer based so no problem, by the virtual joystick for yaw and power is tough to manipulate. Half the time my fingers end up off of the control unintentionally. That goodness for the autopilot in those cases..
If you are in a situation where you can't monitor your finges visually you need a substitute. A glass surface gives me nothing.
All for the terminator style liquid metal based mouse. Unless it tried to kill me.
Indeed.
Voice recognition is one of the longest running boondoggles in tech. It's inherently impossible for a computer to "recognise" what you are saying, but we all pretend like it's going to happen someday anyway.
The reason is that the computer would have to be conscious to perform that task and you guessed it ... Artificial Intelligence, or the idea that a computer will someday "think" is a an even longer running boondoggle.
Please define what you mean by "inherently" and "impossible". The simple fact is there is already functional voice recognition even in iPhone apps, and there are highly functional voice recognition systems that have been developed, some by DARPA. So your claim that voice recognition is "impossible" is either you being uninformed, or badly misunderstanding what "impossible" means.
Also, please define what you mean by "artificial intelligence", and "think". What is thinking? If you mean simply the processing of information, then any device that produces an input to an output 'thinks'. In this case, a simple calculator 'thinks'.
If you're referring to having the experience of mental contents, thoughts, feelings, holding something in your mind and manipulating it, you have no basis to say that anyone thinks...
Mental contents and experiences (or "qualia" as used by those in philosophy of mind) are privileged, there is no access to them other than for the one experiencing them. No one can look into someone else's mind, or brain even, and co-experience that person's qualia. So the question is, how do we know ANYONE can think?
The simple fact is, we don't. We have no objective or empirical proof that there is anything called 'thinking', even for us humans. It doesn't matter that we can scan someone's brain while they're solving a particular problem and see the same pattern of brain activity in everyone who does the task; the problem is how do we know that brain activity IS the qualia? Again, the simple fact is, we don't, and we can't.
So your claim that machines can think is well based in common sense, but you really need to define what you mean before you go popping off about what is and is not "impossible". Flight used to be "impossible"... Whether someone recovered from an infection used to be "the will of God"...
Simply because it doesn't fit in with your metaphysics doesn't mean that something is "impossible".
Is there a speed advantage to taking your eyes off the screen to look down at your touch-sensitive mouse, find a virtual button, hitting it, then bringing your eyes back up to the screen? ...I mean, over simply moving your mouse to click an on-screen button, that is...
Gestures, I'm on board with, but this is a clear step backwards.
-Clive
I've been using an app called FlyGesture. I'd rather use something like this that I can see on the monitor rather than on an input device. I don't want to learn umpteen gestures that don't always work even after taking my eyes off the monitor.
http://hints.macworld.com/article.ph...71003073516550
FlyGesture works a lot like Automator. You can create a single action, or chains of actions to be invoked by the simple movements of your mouse. ...
http://www.flyingmeat.com/flygesture/
I suggest that Apple do one of two things with the MagicMouse: either provide a sensitivity adjustment for the secondary button field or create right hand and left hand versions of the mouse, with the front quarter being sloped to conform to the anatomy of the human hand.
At least the MM is not the worst misfire out there. Contour makes a so-called "ergonomic" mouse in seven sizes, each of which is designed to completely fill the shape of the hand, which means you cannot mouse with your fingers - you have to use your forearm, which makes it next to impossible to do precise work.
Sounds great, but I'll have to change my batteries every week instead of every month.
You change your batteries once a month?
Might I suggest getting some better quality lithium batteries... 2 months here and still at 100% for my Magic Mouse.