4 ms·

Insightful. It seems to me that the touchscreen, because of the reconfigurability you point out, is the lowest common denominator of input. It makes a lot of s

Insightful. It seems to me that the touchscreen, because of the reconfigurability you point out, is the lowest common denominator of input. It makes a lot of sense for a highly portable device, because you can pack many configurations into a small device. I guess what I lament is the richness or input resolution you give up. And if general computing trends more toward this lowest common denominator, we're faced with an input paradigm that's impoverished in every vector. Which, as I've stated before, only really affects the input part of it, and not the consumption part.

aphyr 15y ago
You're absolutely right: it is a spatial resolution problem. There are only so many distinct targets for a finger on a given surface. Part of the reason we're seeing so many finger-oriented glass interfaces is because it lets us sweep the resolution issue under the rug: capacitative sensing just isn't that good yet. However, I expect that in the next twenty years we'll be able to offer affordable glass with both display and touch resolution equivalent to ink/paper. The stylus could conceivably make a return; it'd be the natural successor to Wacom's devices, and could conceivably play a role in replacing scratch paper. We still have to solve the texture problem, but I doubt that's insurmountable. I'd also be willing to bet on digital whiteboards (or tabletops). They suck currently, but there's no reason we can't have large-format, medium-resolution collaborative writing surfaces. It's an established workflow for corporate meetings, theoretical physics, software planning etc., and has obvious extensions: copy/paste, save-restore, colorize, resize/move, etc.
- joebadmo 15y ago
  Hm. If we're blue-skying, I'd say the ergonomic issues of a direct manipulation UI are still very bad. I prefer an indirect manipulation paradigm for two reasons: 1. Ergonomics; 2. Abstraction. I think the abstraction that digital media give/force on us is powerful and frees us from physical limitations. Collaborative stuff is less limited in a fully digital medium, because 'people' can occupy the same space and see content from the same perspective. I guess what I'm saying is I'd prefer to see dedicated output device (monitor/glasses/retina laser?) and a dedicated, robust, tactile input device. Like a keyboard. http://blog.byjoemoon.com/post/9325300749/a-different-kind-of-gui http://blog.byjoemoon.com/post/9325300749/a-different-kind-o...
- hammock 15y ago
  Your vision has me imagining a future where tiny stylus tips are implanted into the tips of our index fingers. Like a little nubbin that increases the pointing precision of our fingers. Not sure I like that vision.
  - aphyr 15y ago
    No. I think individual fingers are actually less precise than manipulating an object with the whole hand. For one, it's hard to see what's under your fingertip, whereas a stylus can be very thin. You're able to use more muscles and apply leverage, which reduces jitter and improves precision. Barring anatomical changes, I suspect external implements will be around for specialized work for some time.
- isnotchicago 15y ago
  And the texture problem is being worked on: http://www.technologyreview.com/computing/26506/ http://www.technologyreview.com/computing/26506/

aphyr 15y ago

You're absolutely right: it is a spatial resolution problem. There are only so many distinct targets for a finger on a given surface. Part of the reason we're seeing so many finger-oriented glass interfaces is because it lets us sweep the resolution issue under the rug: capacitative sensing just isn't that good yet. However, I expect that in the next twenty years we'll be able to offer affordable glass with both display and touch resolution equivalent to ink/paper. The stylus could conceivably make a return; it'd be the natural successor to Wacom's devices, and could conceivably play a role in replacing scratch paper. We still have to solve the texture problem, but I doubt that's insurmountable. I'd also be willing to bet on digital whiteboards (or tabletops). They suck currently, but there's no reason we can't have large-format, medium-resolution collaborative writing surfaces. It's an established workflow for corporate meetings, theoretical physics, software planning etc., and has obvious extensions: copy/paste, save-restore, colorize, resize/move, etc.

joebadmo 15y ago
Hm. If we're blue-skying, I'd say the ergonomic issues of a direct manipulation UI are still very bad. I prefer an indirect manipulation paradigm for two reasons: 1. Ergonomics; 2. Abstraction. I think the abstraction that digital media give/force on us is powerful and frees us from physical limitations. Collaborative stuff is less limited in a fully digital medium, because 'people' can occupy the same space and see content from the same perspective. I guess what I'm saying is I'd prefer to see dedicated output device (monitor/glasses/retina laser?) and a dedicated, robust, tactile input device. Like a keyboard. http://blog.byjoemoon.com/post/9325300749/a-different-kind-of-gui http://blog.byjoemoon.com/post/9325300749/a-different-kind-o...
hammock 15y ago
Your vision has me imagining a future where tiny stylus tips are implanted into the tips of our index fingers. Like a little nubbin that increases the pointing precision of our fingers. Not sure I like that vision.
- aphyr 15y ago
  No. I think individual fingers are actually less precise than manipulating an object with the whole hand. For one, it's hard to see what's under your fingertip, whereas a stylus can be very thin. You're able to use more muscles and apply leverage, which reduces jitter and improves precision. Barring anatomical changes, I suspect external implements will be around for specialized work for some time.
isnotchicago 15y ago
And the texture problem is being worked on: http://www.technologyreview.com/computing/26506/ http://www.technologyreview.com/computing/26506/