6 ms·
Touch screens are much more efficient that keyboard and mice for some types of input (not for others: e.g. typing). Not only that, the intuitiveness of an obvio
by jng 11y ago
Touch screens are much more efficient that keyboard and mice for some types of input (not for others: e.g. typing). Not only that, the intuitiveness of an obvious "hands-on" touch-screen interface allows toddlers to learn to use it before they even learn to speak (I've seen it first hand, as I guess many others must have). I believe there are forms of programming that can be done better with a touch-based interface. It's just that programming languages and tools have to evolve until we get there. When we get there, I believe it will mostly obliterate the current approaches to programming, the same way we're not entering machine code manually through a front-mounted panel with LEDs, or writing assembly language. Of course some exceptions always remain.
- Retra 11y agoDon't you think having your hands in front of the screen is inherently problematic? It's hard to image where that would enhance efficiency.
- s73v3r 11y agoInput of Chinese/Japanese characters.
- freehunter 11y agoBeing able to draw enhances that. Having your fingers in the way does not. That's a use case for a stylus or a pen, as they don't block your vision nearly as much as a hand does.
- JoeAltmaier 11y agoNo way. Nobody is going to take my keyboard away and have me poking one finger around on a smudgy screen, and still call it programming. So many ways that is worse. Pipe dream.
- marshray 11y agoI know right? Touch screens are just perfect for finger painting. Still, I prefer an Etch-a-Sketch if rectilinear lines are required.