Comments on: Why Apple should release a touch-screen Mac

Apple should release a touch-screen Mac as soon as possible. But is it the right move for the company?

[mcooper13]

Who really wants this? I like my expensive, highly calibrated screen to be smudge-free.

Lenovo trumped anything Apple has done by including a wacom-like graphics tablet on it's latest Thinkpad W700. Much better than dirty fingers on a screen. I'm sure Apple could pull off a touch screen mac. That's not a reason to actually bring it to market.

A touchscreen mac has Newton written all over it.

[Lerianis]

Well, they have new coating that can cut down on smudges, so that wouldn't be a big problem anymore.

I do agree that dirty fingers on a screen is very bad, because I have a habit of reaching up to touch the screen on my laptop and smudging it.

[Norseman]

I totally disagree. The ergonomics of a full vertical touchscreen display are horrendously bad. Touch makes sense for horizontal trackpads and handheld devices, where you can rest your arm in a comfortable position while using them, but not for vertical surfaces. Imagine having to hold your arm out in front of you for eight hours a day. And typing on a touchscreen? No way! There are very good reasons why touchscreens aren't in wide use (except on ATMs). I think Apple is smart enough to realize this.

[vmh57]

I completely agree. Touch screens on consumer PCs are completely unpractical and just another gimmic that some companies choose to use. I just saw the commercial for the new HP TouchSmart PC and thought the same thing that is stated in the comment above - holding your arm out for 8 hours touching a vertical screen while trying to get your work done would be incredibly uncomfortable not to mention much more time consuming than just using a mouse and keyboard. I think apple is smart to realize that consumers would not appreciate a product like this.

[ndotkrame]

Respectfully disagree. Who really wants a touchscreen computer? It's a niche product at best, and certainly would not be the push that Apple "needs" to get past HP or Dell. The thought is cheap and the idea impractical. It's not innovation if it's been done already. Perhaps paired with a multi-screen tablet it would offer a desirable functionality?

I say continue to improve the laptop line from the inside out, incorporate only solid state hard drives, and above all provide for unprecedented amounts of collaboration among different types of hardware through wireless means.

No more buggy roll-outs, no more closed off public image, and most importantly - stay unique. Apple can't be caught pandering to the HP's and Dell's of the world, or it will compromise the persona which has made it so popular since Jobs came back to the company.

[yelocab]

Are there statistics to validate "the fact that many people prefer touchscreen technology"? Touchscreens have been around for many years (I remember a BYTE magazine article, circa mid-1980s where one could make a crude touchscreen). Touch screens are perfect for limited tasks (ATMs, iPhone, etc.) But a keyboard and mouse at desk-level and a screen at eye level is the most practical, useful (and ergonomic) setup for everyday work. Lay your monitor on your desk and try to work that way for 8 hours. Or try holding your had up to your monitor for 8 hours. See how long that lasts. Look at how large your finger is, how accurate would that be trying to select words or text in Word. I can move a window across the screen by moving a mouse 3 inches. With a touch screen, I would have to move my hand 15 inches.

[billmosby]

I think multitouch has already been added to OS X (Mac). It would be pretty easy to integrate a touchscreen into a Mac and retain the mouse, keyboard, etc. For me, it would only make sense for long periods of use ergonomically if the screen were positioned horizontally somehow.

[murbo]

do a google search for modbook. touch screen macs already exists.

[dd13reis]

True, but not from Apple.

[Penguinisto]

Err, no thanks. If I want that kind of control, I'll plug my Wacom Intuos back in.

/P

[fredtheviking]

With all due respect to other reader's comments, I don't think the author implied that the touchscreen would replace the good old keyboard and mouse. All the author said was to create a computer or labtop with touch screen techology. The laptop could a dual screen like that found in the DS. The bottom screen would allow you bring up a keyboard that you could use like a regular keyboard (no keys need some getting use to) or if you don't need a keyboard, you coud just that space for something else, like other windows, art (think finger painting with no messy hands). It could come with a ditigal pen, where you could write in your web addresses. There loads other possiblities and there is no reason the product wouldn't be compatiable with your own keyboard and mouse if you need to do some serious typing. I agree with author touch-screen computer would be awesome and would give Apple and edge. You all have to keep in mind that Microsoft has been working on getting touch-screen computing to the market a long time now.

[Lerianis]

Now, this posting makes sense, and I think that a SECOND screen under the first screen on a laptop would be a good idea.
This wouldn't be something that would be good for a desktop however, unless you were making a keyboard strip that could easily be changed to allow you to type in different languages.... something that I have to do on an almost daily basis and get seriously angry at Microsoft for not including some way to type in another language without buying a Japanese language keyboard.

[KTLA_knew]

Folks that assume all laptop screens are vertical, and thus the multi-touch would be a pain have clearly been stuck in the Apple, non-tablet world. If/when Apple releases such a beast, expect the screen to fold down flat like Windows laptops have done for years and years.

HP has a touch (single) tablet at Costco for you to demo if you want to try it out. It'll obvioulsy be better when the OS is developed with touch in mind. Not only is this not new thinking, it's been glaringly obvious an inevitable move for years now, it was just a question of who would do it first.

[kelmon]

The thing is, tablet computing hasn't exactly taken off, and I don't think that is due to the OS. Tablet computing has practical application but not within normal desktop computing. For this reason I don't see Apple going in this direction because it has already been shown that there is little demand for such devices.

[DrtyDogg]

There was little demand for mp3 players too when they got in the market. 3 years later it took off.

[dechah]

HP are already selling a touch enabled all in one PC for US$1,299 http://tinyurl.com/5p79kc

It is not multi touch, but it has some handy capabilities for somebody wanting touch convenience.

Secondly your article stated in the third last paragraph that Apple was now the number 3 OEM vendor behind Dell and HP. As of Q2 2008, Apple was fifth behind Lenovo.

The rankings are:
HP 13.2M units shipped
Dell 11.4M units shipped
Acer 8.4M
Lenovo 5.6M
Apple 2.5M

[dd13reis]

I was referring to market share figures here (http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/08/07/16/apple_passes_acer_to_become_third_largest_u_s_pc_vendor.html) for the US only. Your figures are not for the US.

Also, that HP machine, as you mention, is not multi-touch, so it's not the same.

[thelemurking]

I play with that HP every time I go into Office Depot, Best Buy, Circuit City etc. It almost makes me hate my Intel iMac. The touch screen is a novelty to a certain degree... but it's thinner, sleeker and dare I say sexier than the iMac. HP did a great job of sizing down the keyboard to that of the new iMac's. That HP keyboard is super thin but still feels sturdy.

You can tell that HP took a lot of ideas from Apple and I think in many ways did it better. Glad to see HP is putting some style in their products.

[el1179]

@dd13reis

if you are talking about US your shouldnt say "Right now, Apple is slowly gaining ground on HP and Dell in hardware sales and is the third-most popular hardware manufacturer in the world"

you specifically say in the world

also the HP machine is 2-point multitouch.

[dd13reis]

@dechah Whoops! Good catch. Fixed.

[smilin:)]

Microsoft has had tablets around for what 5 years now? They combine the best of both worlds since they flip back and forth between laptop and desktop. The "fat finger" problem is easily gotten around with a stylus and you aren't left with a goofed up screen after you've been eating cheetos.

Apple really just doesn't blow me away with their innovation. The iPod/iPhone is "cute" but that's about it.

[john55440]

HP has been selling touch screen desktop computers for a couple years, but a keyboard is also included.

A touch-screen-only computer, with no keyboard, is a highly impractical idea.

[BHCS]

Windows Tablet PC's are used extensively in medical & other vert. markets -- that's by far where most of the sales are I'd bet. They're generally smaller (8.1 up to 12" screens), lighter & fairly easy to cradle in one arm while using your other hand's fingers to select/input. The interface also allows notetaking using a stylus w saves as either an image of the note or OCR'ed so it's editable text for later revision. The med apps are moving more & more to "structured reporting" which is mostly selecting from pull down list, ck boxes or radio button'ed choices. This means that most of this type of interfacing is being developed by the med apps/other vert market companies using the touch controls embedded in the OS by MS. But both could be better (as could the iPhone's interface). If Apple goes after the touch screen market on small notebooks/netbooks then I'd bet they'll go first for the general consumer market & developing that market which is going to be a tough nut to crack (I don't see a big demand for this type of inputting there). If they go after the vertical markets, I'd bet they'd start with the edu market (even tho most teaches I've worked with are not early adapters of tech, esp "cutting edge" interfaces). The med & other service markets are big time into MS/MS-SQL networked apps & will be slow to move to another OS (but doing something like the 2X App server from the linux world would allow win apps to be served on OSX devices & maybe beat MS extortionist pricing on Term-Server CALs). There's a whole lot of related stuff that's gonna have to be developed if this thing is ever going to be something more than a vanity idea or developement by Apple &/or their fanboys.

[BHCS]

Windows Tablet PC's are used extensively in medical & other vert. markets -- that's by far where most of the sales are I'd bet. They're generally smaller (8.1 up to 12" screens), lighter & fairly easy to cradle in one arm while using your other hand's fingers to select/input. The interface also allows notetaking using a stylus w saves as either an image of the note or OCR'ed so it's editable text for later revision. The med apps are moving more & more to "structured reporting" which is mostly selecting from pull down list, ck boxes or radio button'ed choices. This means that most of this type of interfacing is being developed by the med apps/other vert market companies using the touch controls embedded in the OS by MS. But both could be better (as could the iPhone's interface). If Apple goes after the touch screen market on small notebooks/netbooks then I'd bet they'll go first for the general consumer market & developing that market which is going to be a tough nut to crack (I don't see a big demand for this type of inputting there). If they go after the vertical markets, I'd bet they'd start with the edu market (even tho most teaches I've worked with are not early adapters of tech, esp "cutting edge" interfaces). The med & other service markets are big time into MS/MS-SQL networked apps & will be slow to move to another OS (but doing something like the 2X App server from the linux world would allow win apps to be served on OSX devices & maybe beat MS extortionist pricing on Term-Server CALs). There's a whole lot of related stuff that's gonna have to be developed if this thing is ever going to be something more than a vanity idea or developement by Apple &/or their fanboys.

[DrtyDogg]

See the Dell latitud XT to see what a multi-touch enabled tablet PC looks like. While some are waiting for Apple to "innovate" the multi-touch computer others are already using one that is already available.

[NewsReader_]

The iPhone is cool but it is not leaps and bounds ahead of other 'touch screen' mobile devices. Not enough to justify this propsed leap into the desktop space. Besides, Tablet PC's have been around for some time. Multi-touch is nothing new. Consumer demand in the tablet space is not there yet and neither are applications that can leverage it.

In addition, Microsoft Surface is setting a high bar for consumer multi-touch computing; there is no experience quite like it. Contrary to the opening statement in this article, Apple is no where near Microsoft's Surface technology; not by a long shot.

[bigmc6000]

No where near MS's Surface technology? Are you kidding me? Just because MS puts their guy on a freakin' table that means it's better? All Apple would have to do is make a screen that big and put the iPhone OS on it and Surface would be no where near Apple, not by a long shot. And yes, I've seen the demos, I've seen all the lovely little videos for surface and it's just not what you're making it out to be. Also, in it's current version it's not meant for consumers at all.

[Vegaman_Dan]

bigmc6000:

You're right, the Surface is not meant for consumer use- nor was it ever intended or marketed to be.

However, it is superior to Apple's closest product in much the way a Ferrari is to a Model T. They do different jobs. The Surface unit can be used by mulitple people at once, apps can be shared or given to other people on the unit, the integration with services is tighter, etc. It's a different product entirely. Trying to compare the two is just silly. If you put the iPhone OS on a projection table that size, you'd still end up with a single user experience and much more limiting. It just doesn't scale that way.

[bgrimsle]

It's too late to "beat" HP to this market, they already have a very nice touchscreen computer (TouchSmart) in 2 models.

[Perry_Clease]

"It's too late to "beat" HP to this market, they already have a very nice touchscreen computer (TouchSmart) in 2 models."

True, but it is not too late to do one that is better.

[dd13reis]

Both of HP's machines are actually single-touch though. I'm looking for something more advanced in what I want to see from Apple.

Don

[open-mind]

I think there is definately a market for a touch-screen tablet from Apple. After all, there is already a successful commercial touch-tablet running OS X. I think the main question is whether the tablet should be a small touch screen Mac or large touch screen iPod. I think the latter, say in a 6x9 inch form factor would be quite successful. Let's call it the "iPod Tablet".

Obviously the iPod Tablet wouldn't be something you would use while jogging, and it wouldn't fit in your pocket. But I have a 5G iPod, and I don't use it for that anyway. But here is where the iPod Tablet would shine...

It would include an internal speaker, so you wouldn't have to drag around earbuds, although you could.

It would be a better portable gaming device, video player, and web/email client than the iPod touch, mostly because of its bigger screen.

It would include a couple USB ports, allowing for external keyboards, storage and backup. This would also allow it to work as an IP telephone.

It would include a hard drive in addition to the flash storage, so it could carry much more video content than is possible with the current iPod Touch.

Its extreme ease of use (relative to Windows and even OS X) would make it popular to people who don't need the flexibility (and don't want the complexity) of a traditional computer.

You could actually use an iPod Tablet at the gym. The elyptical workout machines at my gym all have a place to set a magazine to read while on the machine. The iPod Tablet would work there just fine.

Anyway, I'd be surprised if Apple is not working on such a thing. The Cocoa Touch development guidelines suggest that developers not make assumptions about screen size. There's no reason the Touch GUI cannot scale up to something much larger, just like the original Mac GUI scaled from 9 inch to 21 inch desktop screens.

[open-mind]

Sorry, one more benefit of the the iPod Tablet that I sort of implied, but didn't specifically say. For many, iPod Tablet would be a better ultra-portable than the MacBook Air. It would certainly be smaller in size than the Macbook Air, yet do many of the same things. Apple would want to include a video out port so it could connect to projectors for presentations.