Comments on: Getting a feel for Windows 7

Its multitouch feature is clearly its most tactile improvement, but just how widespread that feature will be implemented remains to be seen.

[ckurowic]

Woooooow....so it IS vista. Man, this further widens the gap between OS 10 and windblows. Vista looks like it promises to be the same old crap from microsoft, bloated, ugly and next to useless.

[Mark_Anderson]

Not unlike your commentary, eh churowic?

[nonaste]

Microsoft still trying to put lipstick on a pig.

[CrashPad63]

Yeah Windows is really putting distance between itself and that crapware OSX. Good luck on the second coming of the great Apple fall.

[joe_llama]

Sounds like ckurowic is well informed. After all, reading a 1/2 page blurb about the compounded efforts of 1000's of software engineers and assorted professionals over a period of 3 years pretty much makes you an expert on the subject. Maybe you should stick to dotting the i's in Apple's product line...

[ckurowic]

Anyone else notice this "windows event" looks like it took place in the hallway of some random highschool? yeah. Thats about how much attention this deserves. I really like how that laptop was flopping around when they were using the "super cool" touch features, amazingly LAME

[gsmiller88]

I have found no compelling reason to use touch screen technology on a home computer. This is just one of those things that the industry leaders are trying to convince us we want and need in order to make more money for themselves.

[CrashPad63]

Spoken like an Apple troglidite.

[Mark_Anderson]

Prices come down as supply increases and manufacturing costs decrease. That's why we use flatscreen monitors now and not CRTs. This will be nothing different.

[solitare_pax]

If they could make an affordable tablet PC that you could draw on in Photoshop or Illustrator, and see what you were doing at a good price - that would make it interesting enough to consider buying to replace my old art supplies.

Other than that - why would I want fingerprints all over my monitor?

[Mr. Dee]

Come on, this argument that Windows 7 is Vista is so lame. Then it would most likely apply to Windows XP that its just Windows 2000 with make up on or that Windows 2000 is NT 4 with some stability improvements or NT 4 is just NT 3.51 with the Windows 95 UI. The same applies to OS X and Ubuntu too, those operating systems have all changed slightly over their life time. OS X users have paid nearly $500 in upgrade just to get a few apps and slightly changed global menu bar appearance. There is no denying that Windows 7 is evolutionary, even the kernel version specifies that (6.1), but a lot of the UI changes I consider to be major, jump list, floating gadgets, improvements to how interact wireless networks and so on.

[kelmon]

"OS X users have paid nearly $500 in upgrade just to get a few apps and slightly changed global menu bar appearance."

Absolutely - and Vista is just XP with a makeover, right? I don't know how much really changed in Vista (I'm still running XP) but it is quite clear that you don't know what changed in the Mac OS over the past few years either, so you can knock it off with daft statements like that.

The upgrade to Vista was a bit of a cockup and I think everyone knows that. The results are fine but they were many years behind schedule. Prior to this Microsoft used to bang out updates to its OS at pretty one every 2-3 years, and everyone thought that was fine. Suddenly it's bad that Apple pushes out an OS refresh once every year or so? You won't find anyone unhappy with this, particularly given that the retail price is pretty reasonable and you get a decent bang for your buck (or pound sterling, in my case).

[sirtwist]

Actually, Vista isn't XP with a makeover. That's one of the reasons there were so many driver issues and other issues with Vista out of the gate. There was a huge amount of underlying changes in the driver model and the componentization of the OS in Vista. That's why it took so long to get Vista out and why it was so disappointing to many people, because they focused a lot on the underlying components and left a lot of the end-user facing aspects of the OS unfinished or finished improperly.

From everything I'm seeing Windows 7 will include a lot of tightening up of the base OS from Vista. Not major changes in the underlying OS, but performance tweaks, etc. to the existing codebase from Vista. Additionally, they spent a lot of time focused on the UI aspects in Windows 7. Sure, they have multi-touch. It's cool, but I wouldn't use it that often. I'm just looking forward to a lot of the really nice UI improvements as well as the stability and speed increases Windows 7 will offer.

[CrashPad63]

Kelman=troll

[kelmon]

@sirtwist

Indeed, I am quite aware that Vista is more than an XP makeover but I should have made that a bit clearer. Rather, I was taking offense to the suggestion that OS X updates have been nothing more than "a few apps and slightly changed global menu bar appearance", which is clearly nonsense to anyone who knows what has changed. Stupid statements are stupid regardless of which side you are coming from.

I really don't have anything against Vista - it's just not for me. However, it is definitely sounding as though Windows 7 is what Vista should have been and therefore those people waiting for it will probably be much happier with it than they were with Vista.

@CrashPad63

You clearly have no idea who I am.

[Llib Setag]

Mac OSX update is $129...NOT $500.

[CrashPad63]

I could give a **** who you are. Anyone who stops to say this is just that ****. Have a good day though.

[a85]

Winner

[AppleSuxLeo]

Looks like it works very well , but...I would rather use a mose to navigate rather than put inevitably oily/dirty fingers all over a PC screen. BTW , the Home and End buttons on a PC are more efficient than that touch scrolling you did. And with a PC/Windows , we have always had the most functionality with the "right-click" of our two-button mouse. "Jump lists" makes our right mouse button even more useful.
Also , I`d rather scroll with my scroll-wheel , the speed of the scroll is easily adjustable as all PC users know.

[AppleSuxLeo]

BTW...mose=mouse.

[pablouk1]

Vista is rubbish there is no other word to decribe how poor it was on release. It and failed badly with gamers (DX10 so what) and normal home computer users, can we say overkill security. It is about time Microsoft remembered that these are our computer at home not theirs.
Now if Windows 7 is just an update of Vista with extra bells on then its another failure.
I have said it before all the public want is XP2 not a system you can't control out of the box without having to spash out on a graphic card costing £ 300/400 just to make it look (wow).
Touch screen, nice idea but come on how much would this cost, i mean look how overpriced the I-pod touch and the new range of telephones are due to the touch aspect.
Would your 60 year old parents use it?

[a85]

Can I just ask how cnet missed this:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/video/2008/nov/07/video-speech-recognition

I think it's even more exciting than touch in Win 7. I know it's not completely original, others are doing it etc. but it is pretty sweet.

[mjconver]

I'm old enough to remember programming the first touch screen monitors, when DOS and CP/M were king, and a color monitor meant different plastic on the outside. There were infrared beams that went across the screen that were intercepted by a fingertip, and the resolution was about 10 X 20. But still, when the program only had 25 lines anyway, it worked fine for menu and option selection.

They failed miserably, for two simple reasons:

1.) The screens got dirty and had to be cleaned multiple times a day
2.) Pressing the screen wasn't any faster then typing the menu selection. In fact, it was slower, because it took your hands off the keyboard.

The bottom line is touch screens are a niche product, just another million lines of bloat that don't belong embedded in an OS, and will probably one day be automatically installed on my SQL server whether I want it or not.

[hafenbrack]

You assume that there is still a keyboard. Take a look at the included link, with a multi-0touch system, even a keyboard would/could become useless. Notice this came out WAYYYY before anything Apple had, but also that the machine he is running this on is running on Windows.

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/jeff_han_demos_his_breakthrough_touchscreen.html

[kelmon]

@hafenbrack

Indeed - this technology is nothing fundamentally new so I do not understand what the brouhaha is about. I seem to recall having watched the same demonstration some time ago and while it is impressive, I'm not convinced that it is going to become a reality. The ergonomics of the table are not good for your posture (you're going to end up hunched over it) and the screen should give a tactile response to typing. Still, something like this is far more practical than a touchscreen embedded in a traditional monitor so I guess the concept has legs.

It should be noted that no one really knows how long Apple had been working on their own devices. They had the Newton back in the early 90s, which is also the same time when Palm were banging out their own touchscreen devices with virtual keyboards. I really don't think that the concepts demonstrated here, or in the iPhone, is really that different to what was commercially available 15-years ago.

[Jimmygotajobatgoogle]

Touch - nice to see, nice to play around, once owned, unlikely to be used.

[kelmon]

Even as a Mac user, who is theoretically prepared to pay more, I don't see the point of a touch interface to the operating system. I can see the benefits of this in some places, such as kiosks, computers for media playback, and remote interfaces, but I can't see the benefit in my day-to-day computing. In order to make me want to pay for the technology it needs to show me how it will let me write my documents faster, or find browsing the web more enjoyable. Even "obvious" uses like editing pictures in Photoshop are not obvious benefits since such functions can already be achieved today using graphic tablets or Tablet PCs.

What can this technology deliver that is not already being delivered today?

[Mark_Anderson]

Aside from Imaged workflow solutions you mean? That's a rather obvious application for corporate users.

[kelmon]

@Mark_Anderson

I'm not sure what you mean. Can you describe a scenario to illustrate the workflow? Cheers.

[Mark_Anderson]

Ok.

We use 21" screens to show document images for workflow. Multi-touch would enable them to drag and select the itmes whilst selecting actions from the user interface. At the moment this is a messy "click-mouse move-click" transaction.

[squished]

I told my wife (who's about average techie) about the upcoming touch feature in Win7. She was really excited at this possibility since her wrist tends to get sore with using the mouse. So I'm saying anyone with this kind of wrist pain (and there are probably millions) could potentially benefit.

[GlynnKy]

So here's what I'm wanting to know... everyone knows that the whole multitouch phenomenon is predicated and chasing after what we saw in Minority Report... thank you Tom Cruise! ... I'll admit that it looked stinking cool. However, when you think about how most people peruse the internet, it is neither a time restrictive endeavor nor is it condusive to lengthy typing sessions. I wonder, what does the data entry center for Minority Report's database look like? Apart from the reality of the production, I'm willing to bet that there would still be keyboards somewhere in the environment...

Which brings me to my next point... yup, touch screens are a very niche technology, and they are and have been around for quite a while ... possibly more and longer that most of us realize (nearly EVERY restaurant has touch screen systems). So would definately agree with the comment that touchscreens end up taking more time due to the hands leaving the keyboard... UNLESS a typing alternative (typing in the air?) were proposed.

However, multitouch requries ... wait for it ... touch. It doesn't quite emulate our blessed Minority Report. Also, something I've not heard anything about it the necessity for a multitouch compatible screen/surface... if Windows succeeds like I'm sure MS hopes it will, you best be buying stock in NEC and the touchscreen division...

But let's consider an interface environment somewhere between Minority Report and the multitouch interface that's being integrated and tauted as the next evolution of human input device... carpal tunnel syndrome anyone?

I'll admit, I'm ignorant when it comes to the realm of causes and best practices to avoid carpel tunnel... I must be since I'm still typing on straight keyboards and laptop keyboards and not using a track ball, i digress ... would a multitouch screen or 'in air' HID environment provide less tendency for improper posturing? Or might allow for more natural, or more freely personalized user interface for each person allowing the body to be in the most ideal posture?

Please don't get me wrong, I want to geek out and fling my hands in the air while processing data... but then I image a call center looking like a hospital for the mentally impaired during the daily calisthinics... on second, that would be entertaining!

Glynn
-please provide a receipt, I may need my 2 cents back-

[inachu]

if the screen was big enough I would love to play a video game such as World of Warcraft or solitaire more fluently.

[GlynnKy]

while touching the screen the entire time? or utilizing a "hands-off" interface?

[Drazhna]

I've seen flat screens and earlier tube monitors where some guy liked pointing and touching the screen. It didn't look good. Now mind you, an Apple Touch doesn't look all that great either after a few oily swipes on it's glassy interface, but I figure what are ya gonna do? You have to touch it.

Someone's eventually going to do this touch OS stuff, surprised Apple hasn't followed though yet from the Ipod Touch. But one thing is for sure, the screens will have to be finger streak resistant or you're looking at smeary screens, which takes away from the classiness of it all.

I won't be rushing out to get it, for certain. I can wait and make sure all is worked out, as with any new technology. A lot of us have been around long enough to know, being the first to own, isn't always smart.

[RompStar_420]

Do you guys remember that StarTrek movie where they were in a plexiglass manufacturing company and Scotty was trying to use the computer to show them how to make more stronger plexi-glass and still it be thinner ?

He was trying to speak into the mouse, because you know in the future there is no keyboard, you just say, Computer!!! I want 3 eggs over easy, 3 piece of bakon, toast and orange juice.

Instead he had to use a keyboard!!!! how 21st Century/pathetic is that ?

Apple seems to be the innovator here when it comes to touch screen, everyone copies and followed their way, including the Google Phone, so take that to the bank.

I wouldn't mind using a touch screen, that would be kind cool, but I would still want me keyboard and mouse, that's for sure!

[CrashPad63]

Hardly the innovator, Apple bought into the tech they have. MS has been working on MT for 10 years. So no Apple is the follower on this.

[superswiss]

Until they come out with self-cleaning display technology or better yet, a material the repels the oil on our fingers, I stay away from touch screens. I'm kinda ok with touch screens on cell phones, because they already get smugged up from holding it against one's face, but I use the touch screen very little and if I do, I use my finger nails. I just hate fingerprints all over my displays. Every time somebody touches my display I'm ready to punch that person in the face. My wife's iPhone looks terrible most of the time.