OSNews

Probally as good as a compairable Vista PC (Mine wakes from sleep in 2-4 seconds) No clue on the power but if this would have a low power laptop chipset probally pretty low power.

I'll see your PacMan, raise you Ms. PacMan and let's not forget, Galaga/Galactica or Defenders.

...and Tehkan World Cup!!! (imagine playing subbuteo like that...)

...and billiards/pool!!!

Screw Pac-Man.....Missile Command would rule!!!

Ok, you are now officially my friends. Come over for BBQ someday, bring your girlfrinds. And a girl for me.

The pontential is big, I can imagine my self making UML diagrams with my two hands instead of the point and click rudimentary mouse, or a Music DJ using it instead of vinil records (ain't that cool).

The possibilities are endles.

I don't like to draw UML (or any diagram) with a mouse or otherwise. I'd much prefer the computer to do that for me.

Simulating record scratching (what I presume you're referring to) would sort of be a self-defeating kludge. I mean, if you're not using the vinyl to create the sound, and you're just going to digitize the sound effect, why not just include it in the sound track in the first place? However, DJing would be one of those applications where input is relatively simple (consisting of pointing at things like a monkey).

I don't like ....

Why I like it doesn't have to like you.

In my opinion, there is plenty of marked for it.

If you are behind the mixing console in an audio studio or on the concert, one shitty mouse or even two hands are not enough; you are performing, not playing it back!

You can abstract and automate, but on a multitouch interface you can express yourself and communication in some cases (games, education...) is much easier.

I can't see touch screen ever replacing midi controllers. Performers generally prefer tactile instruments rather than virtual controls.

Ideally an algorithm would be written to simulate the sound of record scratching that way it would sound more natural then just a sound effects patch. The cheap way would be to use a patch, but it would sound cheap and jarring.

Why not just include it in the track from the beginning? Because then it would be part of the track and there would be no improvisation. For a CD yes it should be part of the track, but for a live show the scratch needs to be done live on the spot in order to give the crowd something besides just a prerecorded track.

Computers make DJing simple as they can analyze things better then we can. It doesn't have to be that way though. Just turn off all the electronic assistance and let the human control the mix.

Agreed for novices this is the case, however a well trained human ear will always out perform current computer systems. You only have to look at how inaccurate BPM counters are for the more obscure rhythms compared to an experienced drummer or dance beatmatcher.

But surely the two examples you give apply to any multi-touch surface, and are not unique to tabletop computing, A multitouch enabled tablet pc or laptop (in future), could just as well be used. Advantages of the Table form factor are fewer with this in mind.

If you want to computerise DJing then (again) virtualizing it isn't the ideal route to take. Programs like live sequencing packages such as Ableton have far more potential in DJ set ups that virtual turntables.

I happen to agree with the earlier post that mimicing everyday tasks in the computer world isn't particularly the best method to opperate computerised tasks. It may be the quickest to learn but ultimately (and like most things) you only get out of software what you spend the time learning what to putting in.

Are you aware, that all current interfaces simulate paper and dashboards? This type of communication is very unnatural to humans. Getting rid of the rodent is a worthy goal, with multitouch interface the pointer will probably soon follow and I hope other WIMP crap as well.

My thoughts exactly. Microsoft Surface is a damn cool tech demo, but I don't see it having wide application.
Yes, for painting it would be cool, and perhaps some other niche applications like an info booth. But for general use, no way. There just aren't that many tasks where having direct, two handed input is helpful. Once you get beyond image resizing and panning actions you're pretty much out of ideas.
User fatigue and pointing accuracy are other issues. I would much rather roll a scroll wheel on a mouse than drag my hand across the display, or move both my hands apart. There's a reason touch screens never took off, and it's not just the price.
Sure looks cool though!

Yes, for painting it would be cool, and perhaps some other niche applications like an info booth. But for general use, no way.

You don't usually use touch screens for general use either, but that doesn't mean they're not useful for specific tasks.

That fact has already been conceded.

Well, yes but we'd have to learn those. Living in the physical world as we do, an interface which uses behaviours taken from that world will require less learning. That's different from saying that having your photos in a messy pile instead of an organised folder is a good thing. Though this multi-touch thing does seem to make the basic windows metaphor work better. I can see how I might like having a messy pile, knowing how much easier it is to manage than with a mouse.



Plenty of grownup people still regularly count on their fingers. Arithmetic takes a long time to learn. By the time you're a toddler, you've gained a useable grasp of physics.

Tell that to my puppy.

My niece beat the *hit out of the poor dog, because she doesn't understand acceleration is proportional to increased force at impact.

While it was definitely funny to see her reaction, the poor dog was whining in the corner, and it was OBVIOUS that this toddler had NO GRASP, WHATSOEVER about basic physics.

As for arithmetic: she can count to 10, understands basic addition & subtraction, and has a vocabulary that grows nearly instantly. ("Can you say Marijuana?") It doesn't take long to learn that 2 + 2 = 4, or that 20 - 17 is 3. It's basic memorization after you understand the basic number theory. The problem is that schools don't start out with basic number theory. They just want kids to repeat facts they don't understand.

Oh, and the word is usable, not useable.

I think Microsoft is targeting Surface for applications where the table is already there, and it would be nice if it were a computer, too. Hence the menu application for restaurants. I can't imagine people doing work or consuming media on a horizontal plane. Even if they could miniaturize the optical tracking system so it can fit in a thin display (instead of in a deep pedestal), I'm not sure that people want a wall-mounted touchscreen.

I think that gyroscopic gestural controls (yes, sort of like Minority Report) are the next step in spatial input for large form factors. You want to be a certain distance away from the screen and you want to minimize motion (unlike Minority Report). The key is subtle gestures, and it will be an acquired dexterity. But then again, so is handwriting, driving a car, or using a mouse.

As for GUI metaphors, I think that overlapping windows may be on the way out, not because they're too complicated (as Microsoft suggested many years ago) but because they're not very useful. As ultra-mobile and living room form factors dominate over the desktop, most windows will be fullscreen or tiled. Dialogs and controls will be composited overlays.

Many aspects of the Surface either useless or not as impressive as they may seem. For example, Compiz Fusion has a rippling water effect, too, and it's totally useless. But the optical tracking technology could become useful in a different product. For example, if it could be enhanced to track the motion of my hands from a 10-foot distance, I wouldn't need to wear gloves or handle physical objects to have the aforementioned gestural control.

They probably won't. I'm thinking that the mouse and keyboard would get replaced with a multi-touch sensitive pad kind of like a Wacom tablet that could display images.

I agree for the most part with you. I think the idea's behind surface are not to replace the way we do existing physical tasks ( I could never see myself coding on a surface ). However, uses in Mall for directories, photo books, resteraunts POS devices, etc are quite in line with what you would expect.

This is similiar to the whole concept of tablet PCs in that its good in theory but the actual implementation will play a large role in the future of this idea. The tablet is, to me, still too immature to be serious business device. I own one and it is far too much work to keep the screen clean to make sure the pen can follow.

I started thinking, I started using computers because my handwriting is terrible, why am I trying to go back to what is no more then a more expensive piece of paper

You mean like some gaming device from the big N

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_Glove

So have Apple and a couple of others who I can't recall. It's not really that innovative of an idea imo as it's just taking an existing idea (touch screen) and adding another finger.

Neither MS or Apple invented multi-touch either, however much noise they've both made implying they did.

"Neither MS or Apple invented multi-touch either, however much noise they've both made implying they did."

Microsoft has never claimed they invented "multi-touch". See Microsoft's Bill Buxton provides a detailed history on multi-touch.
http://www.billbuxton.com/multitouchOverview.html

Maybe Apple is claiming some "invention" but Microsoft isn't.

That's not to say that Microsoft isn't implementing it in a new way or isn't using it in ways that haven't been done before, and the same goes for Apple.

One last point. Why do topics like this always devolve into who invented what first and when? WHO CARES???

Speaking of Bill Buxton, channel 9 interviewed him just a few days ago:
http://channel9.msdn.com/Showpost.aspx?postid=344657

To get a few interesting apps out there and get it released at a price conducive to purchase by the masses.
I think we can all agree that the mouse and keyboard, while tried and true, are way overdue for an upgrade. "Point and click" is so tired.

Touch screens have never taken off because the "wow" applications were usually handwriting recognition. YAWN!

Maybe multitouch and multivoice could really take off. We just need a technology that is interesting to the common man, or at least the very boring man who writes the checks.

They did ME and Vista too.

In 2001 i would have been impressed. Now i find it hard to believe this is all they are capable of to be honest.

It's a huge i-phone. And an expensive one.

I would agree with you there but their dishonesty is not in question. We know they cheat, lie, extend and extinguish, strongarm, and steal ideas. That aside, the system is pretty darn cool. The iPhone can't do everything Surface does. I'm no MS proponent but I can't deny the business applications of this system. If it was an open source app it would be a marvel, but it has been relegated to being a MS ploy to dupe the public into buying more MS products. The latter may be true, but boy is it a nice toy. It would at least stop waiters from getting my order wrong.

First, your assertion assumes that this indeed represents progress. I think there is plenty of room to challenge that premise.

I wouldn't say that I'm against the product per say (I'm not even sure what that means really). I just don't think simulating physical tasks or other forms of direct manipulation interfaces are the way forward. Being able to drag stuff around a screen with two fingers doesn't help me get information in or out any more than I could with one. Natural language processing, I think, has far more potential in that regard.

Natural language processing, I think, has far more potential in that regard.

Yes!

AI has many implementations. Not that natural language selection in itself is new, hence have a look at the SHRDLU project, and that was 1968-1970

<quote>

Person: Pick up a big red block.
Computer: OK.
Person: Grasp the pyramid.
Computer: I don't understand which pyramid you mean.
Person (changing their mind): Find a block which is taller than the one you are holding and put it into the box.
Computer: By "it", I assume you mean the block which is taller than the one I am holding.
Computer: OK.
Person: What does the box contain?
Computer: The blue pyramid and the blue block.
Person: What is the pyramid supported by?
Computer: The box.
Person: How many blocks are not in the box?
Computer: Four of them.
Person: Is at least one of them narrower than the one which I told you to pick up?
Computer: Yes, the red cube.
etc.

</quote>

Pretty impressive.
NLA is a fascinating sub-field of AI nonetheless :-)

This isn't progress though. This is mearly further dumbing down for the stupid by adding and extra finger to a system that's already decades old.

Progress would be doing away with traditional point-and-click ideas or building such a system from the ground up as opposed to slapping a few effects on top of NT.

Maybe, eventually, MS will do something note worthy with this technology - but as it stands at the moment, it's about as groundbreaking as wireless mice.

The wireless mouse can be considered, in a sense, groundbreaking: unlike corded mice, they fall straight to the ground.

I guess not all see application in this design like I do. Natural language computing certainly is a greater step but I thought this was a pretty good intermediate step to the next generation. I foresee a mix of the two.