4 ms·

Doesn't the new Air have a large (multi) touch pad? That might allow for a more transitional 'middle ground' to exist. Lion and it's feline ancestors will get m

Doesn't the new Air have a large (multi) touch pad? That might allow for a more transitional 'middle ground' to exist. Lion and it's feline ancestors will get more touchy over time, plus what Dave W is hinting at is more of a virtualization strategy rather than a sudden leap I think. I too think that Apple cares deeply about UX, but you're probably discounting the enormous amount of money/users that could be made if this evolution could be made to fly?

joezydeco 16y ago
I play Angry Birds by physically dragging the birds around the screen. How exactly do I do that when the trackpad is somewhere different than the screen?
- daviding 16y ago
  Sorry, I don't know - don't have one. Large comedy finger pointer perhaps? I do remember the last Stevenote having something about why touching monitors wasn't going to fly and how the pad would all be ok (waves Steve's magic field over joezydeco)
- tjogin 16y ago
  Good point, though I think Angry Birds is one of the apps that would lend itself better to being ported from iOS to OS X. But like you pointed out, it would be quite different still. Think about how different the official Twitter client would be for example. Refreshing the feed by dragging the list of tweets down; something that feels intuitive, just right, on the iPhone and iOS; would seem weird and retarded on OS X. Or how about when you swipe over a Tweet (or any list-view item) to manipulate it? Works great in a touch/direct manipulation interface. That would be incredibly poor UI design on OS X. Astoundingly bad. Buttons and widgets would be oversized on OS X. Form factor and layout would be needlessly limited. Etc, etc.
  - joezydeco 16y ago
    That's my point. Do we really expect to merge iOS and desktop apps someday? We've created a new class of direct-manipulation apps on the iOS devices that we just can't bring to the other machines without using a mouse...or turning them into iPads.
    - davewiner 16y ago
      Yes, as a matter of fact, according to Steve Jobs,we do expect that. They webcast his talk at the Back To The Mac announcement, anyone could have watched it. What you're saying directly contradicts what he said.
      - tjogin 16y ago
        He said nothing like that, as I recall. Please provide a direct quote.
protomyth 16y ago
Apple's explanation of why a touch UI would be horrible on an iMac or MacBook suggests strongly that they are not interested in moving to a touch screen and touch pads with gestures are the future. vertical touch = bad : horizontal touch = good
- tjogin 16y ago
  Touch is only part of what makes the iOS devices different from OS X. The other half is direct manipulation — you touch the very thing you want to manipulate. On OS X, there is a pointer between you and the things you want to manipulate. That pointer gives you increased accuracy, speed, etc. But it also means your hands and fingers don't block your view of the screen. All things put together you end up with a drastically different way of interacting with your computer. People who aren't UI or UX designers may gloss over these things. But Apple is obsessive about this stuff.
  - protomyth 16y ago
    I was replying to the "middle ground part", and Steve made it pretty clear touch on a desktop / non-tablet portable was not in the cards. I was making no comment on the various advantages of touch / direct manipulation / pointing devices.
tjogin 16y ago
I don't think there would be enormous amounts of money to be made from porting made-for-touch-interface driven apps to a mouse/pointer driven system. iOS apps on OS X would feel terribly weird and out of place, since, again, they're made for an entirely different user interface paradigm. They'll make a lot of money off the Mac App Store though; because the software on it will be great. As opposed to weird.

joezydeco 16y ago

I play Angry Birds by physically dragging the birds around the screen. How exactly do I do that when the trackpad is somewhere different than the screen?

daviding 16y ago
Sorry, I don't know - don't have one. Large comedy finger pointer perhaps? I do remember the last Stevenote having something about why touching monitors wasn't going to fly and how the pad would all be ok (waves Steve's magic field over joezydeco)
tjogin 16y ago
Good point, though I think Angry Birds is one of the apps that would lend itself better to being ported from iOS to OS X. But like you pointed out, it would be quite different still. Think about how different the official Twitter client would be for example. Refreshing the feed by dragging the list of tweets down; something that feels intuitive, just right, on the iPhone and iOS; would seem weird and retarded on OS X. Or how about when you swipe over a Tweet (or any list-view item) to manipulate it? Works great in a touch/direct manipulation interface. That would be incredibly poor UI design on OS X. Astoundingly bad. Buttons and widgets would be oversized on OS X. Form factor and layout would be needlessly limited. Etc, etc.
- joezydeco 16y ago
  That's my point. Do we really expect to merge iOS and desktop apps someday? We've created a new class of direct-manipulation apps on the iOS devices that we just can't bring to the other machines without using a mouse...or turning them into iPads.
  - davewiner 16y ago
    Yes, as a matter of fact, according to Steve Jobs,we do expect that. They webcast his talk at the Back To The Mac announcement, anyone could have watched it. What you're saying directly contradicts what he said.
    - tjogin 16y ago
      He said nothing like that, as I recall. Please provide a direct quote.

protomyth 16y ago

Apple's explanation of why a touch UI would be horrible on an iMac or MacBook suggests strongly that they are not interested in moving to a touch screen and touch pads with gestures are the future. vertical touch = bad : horizontal touch = good

tjogin 16y ago
Touch is only part of what makes the iOS devices different from OS X. The other half is direct manipulation — you touch the very thing you want to manipulate. On OS X, there is a pointer between you and the things you want to manipulate. That pointer gives you increased accuracy, speed, etc. But it also means your hands and fingers don't block your view of the screen. All things put together you end up with a drastically different way of interacting with your computer. People who aren't UI or UX designers may gloss over these things. But Apple is obsessive about this stuff.
- protomyth 16y ago
  I was replying to the "middle ground part", and Steve made it pretty clear touch on a desktop / non-tablet portable was not in the cards. I was making no comment on the various advantages of touch / direct manipulation / pointing devices.

tjogin 16y ago

I don't think there would be enormous amounts of money to be made from porting made-for-touch-interface driven apps to a mouse/pointer driven system. iOS apps on OS X would feel terribly weird and out of place, since, again, they're made for an entirely different user interface paradigm. They'll make a lot of money off the Mac App Store though; because the software on it will be great. As opposed to weird.