Comments on: Touch in Windows 7: Just for show?

Support for multitouch input is one of the most tangible ways that Windows 7 differs from its predecessors. But will many people actually get their hands on the technology?

[redmarine]

I never expected the computer manufacturers to adopt this technology within months anyway. Hopefully the cost will go down and eventually all screens will contain them making Tablet Pens irrelevant.

I don't want to buy expensive Tablet Pens for personal use.

[traxx09]

I think everyone's getting hung up on the "Why would you want to touch the screen when a mouse works just as well?" question. The thing about touch is that it will change the way OSes are written and thus the way we interact with them.

Not only do today's computer GUIs work and look similar to those twenty years ago, but they don't even work that different from the original Xerox PARC projects. But touch will change GUIs to the point that in twenty years the GUI will hardly resemble the desktop environment of today.

Here's a good article on the touch interface:

http://www.winsupersite.com/win7/win7_touch.asp

[Random_Walk]

I sincerely doubt that, at least on normal computers (desktops, laptops), a touch screen will make any difference.

It's not just a simple question of 'bleah - I have a mouse, now get offa my lawn!", either. A couple of reasons why:

* I can move my wrist less than a centimeter, and the mouse cursor is anywhere on the screen that I want it to be. To do the same with a touch-screen, I'd have to move shoulder, arm, wrist, and fingers out to the screen, gesture a certain way (to avoid zoom, move, whatever other features), and then the cursor may go where it needs to be, but then again may not, depending on how big my fingers are, how well the screen is calibrated, and etc.

* I don't need to keep a bottle of Windex handy, like one would with a touch screen (have kids? Then you better have two bottles in the house, and keep a roll of paper towels handy at the desk while you're at it).

Now don't get me wrong - there are uses for the thing. Replacing my Wacom Intuos tablet would be cool (though drawing on a vertical surface isn't as natural as drawing on a horizontal one). Naturally, industrial computers commonly use touch screens, as do kiosks and other niche applications.

OTOH, for home use as a typical desktop? I doubt it becomes anything more than a fad. There is literally nothing outside of a few games and certain graphics applications that could or would make use of it in any practical manner. (Heh - wouldn't last long in an FPS game, either. Consider: User A is flailing his fatigued arms about and poking his screen to death just trying to stay alive, while User B is pounding him into the dirt with a few mouse clicks...)

[Mark_Anderson]

Touch isn't designed for consumers, it's for corporations who use large screens with imaging technology. That's where it sells.

For the rest of us there's the mouse and keyboard. It's called building an OS to do many things for many people.

[Random_Walk]

"Touch isn't designed for consumers, it's for corporations who use large screens with imaging technology. That's where it sells."

Don't tell HP that ;)

"It's called building an OS to do many things for many people."

Yep - I know about that already... one of my primary OSes at home can run on anything from embedded devices to mainframes, and is used everywhere from Wall Street to your set-top cable DVR box.

...so when will we see a Windows version that can do more than just x86 processors, or natively access more filesystem types than just NTFS and FAT?

[rnaoncfixd]

We have one of those HP Touch Screens here at work. Guess what? No one uses it because it's inaccurate, hard to input text, and is very straining to use after a while.

My biggest gripe with touch screen anything is that you can't see where you're navigating to. A mouse actually goes away when you're scrolling around or typing and is very small on the screen so as to reduce obscuring the view. When your hands are on the screen blocking your view of what you want to do, it becomes bothersome.

it may just be everyone's age around the work place, but people immediately dumped the touch screen and immediately took up the keyboard and mouse.

Also, don't forget, people like typing on things. People constantly complain about cellphones that have no QWERTY key pad. How do you expect people to accept a fully touch screen computer with nothing attached to it?

[Undune]

@Random_Walk
Ooo, I hope you really don't use windex to clean your monitors. That stuff hella ruins 'em fast.
+1 to the mouse usage argument.

[traxx09]

I think keyboards and touch technology will coexist. But too many of you are thinking inside the box. Your thinking about where technology is today not where it might go. The way OSes are designed and the way we interact with them could change dramatically over the next couple of decades.

[kewell82]

@ Random_Walk

"* I can move my wrist less than a centimeter, and the mouse cursor is anywhere on the screen that I want it to be. To do the same with a touch-screen, I'd have to move shoulder, arm, wrist, and fingers out to the screen, gesture a certain way (to avoid zoom, move, whatever other features), and then the cursor may go where it needs to be, but then again may not, depending on how big my fingers are, how well the screen is calibrated, and etc."

-This has got to be the most lazy comment I have ever heard. How much do you weight? I'm guessing +300. I think you should get a touch screen so that you can exercise those arms. Maybe hang it on the wall so that you can work out those not being used legs of yours.

[Random_Walk]

"-This has got to be the most lazy comment I have ever heard."

You're obviously not an admin or programmer, so let me help you out a bit:

Sit in front of a computer/console for upwards of 8-10 hours in a typical workday. Better yet, try to write code with a touchscreen-only IDE interface, then get back to me.

In my circles, I get to hear arguments over which key combos help shave time best, let alone mouse-clicks. People will argue over which keyboard types allow for the longest coding sprints.

It may be fine to sit there and go 'ooh and 'ahh over these things at the local Geek Squad counter there, but some of us have to work with these things for a living, and would prefer to not be stuck with eye-candy tech that would slow us down.

[rrod182]

@Random_Walk:

Props to you buddy. as a software engineer I barely even use the mouse, emacs forever!

However I do see many valid applications for touch, namely in art and design, but at the moment it's a novelty. Once some of the haptic feedback displays are affordable for mainstream you will see more value in industrial design, science, and research. Has to start somewhere though.

[ballmerisanape]

All current Apple laptops are Multitouch... they just use the trackpad instead of messing up the screen. It's seems strange at first.. but it works very well. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple redesigned their standard keyboard to include the Multitouch trackpad.

[ballmerisanape]

Come to think about it... it's surprising that you made no mention of the fact that Apple laptops have been multitouch for a little while now. You talk about the iPhone.. but don't even mention the obvious... you know.. the mainstream (#1 laptop on Amazon) 13 inch Apple Macbook... it's Multitouch...

[BabyBroomer]

OMG you are slow, I am glad you did see the news article was about Multi-touch LCD's; also referring to the technology that needs to be represented in the hardware to have this as an option.

Apple's track pad technology is yesterdays news, and not part of this Windows 7 article.

I wish my MacBook Pro had a touch screen........

[bananaphonerules]

Because every new article ISN'T about Apple. Duh!

PS. a track pad is a lame excuse for a touch screen. Seriously...its just not the same thing. Its like comparing Apples with Oranges.

[ballmerisanape]

The article is about Multitouch in Windows 7. It highlights the problems encountered when trying to implement a cool OS feature into the mainstream. Including what has become a very successful approach to this issue would have been appropriate.

If you think reaching out and touching your screen all day is going to be comfortable... I hope you have a good supply of ibuprofen and a cheap chiropractor.

[kelmon]

I'm with ballmerisanape is an ape on this one, although not necessarily from a Mac perspective. The fact of the matter is that touchscreens are almost completely useless when combined with a traditional desktop OS and the software that runs on it. The MacBook trackpads are actually quite useful because they utilise an interface that you already use and, frankly, all laptops should have them and Windows should support this form of interface. However, the usefulness of the MacBook trackpads reduce if you are using an external mouse because you are no longer using the trackpad for controlling the cursor, and it gets even worse if you are using an external keyboard as well.

Touchscreens will never be successful in their current form, particularly when combined with a traditional desktop or laptop computer. Tablet PCs already pretty much died (because they still used a desktop OS that wasn't designed for the job) and yet they are designed to be touched. Attempting to use a touchscreen on a traditional desktop or laptop is simply uncomfortable and, most likely, slow when compared to using the existing interfaces that the OS was designed to use.

I'm sorry but I only see touchscreen support in Windows 7 as a gimmick and I would be saying the same if Apple was trying to introduce it in OS X. To make touch useful you need new hardware, OS and software that assumes that touch is the only way that you will be interacting with it. Microsoft Surface is a decent example of ground-up approach.

[Renegade Knight]

It doesn't take long to get used to mutli touch trackpads. That said it's a done deal. Vista supports it, OS X pioneerd it, I have no doubt that 7 and Snow Leopard will see it perfected.

Viable touch screens though is news. Both 7 and Snow Leopard will support it at the level needed to make tablet PC's take off.

Gorilla Arm will remain a problem. Tablet PC's arleady solve it. Desktop's...will only be able to offer touch as a supliment to the other interfaces.

[PatrickDIS-SCADA]

Interesting how you are all not thinking outside your "traditional desktop/laptop" boxes.

This tool becomes extremely helpful in environments outside your cubicle - places such as the rest of the world. Touchscreens are used widely throughout industrial environments as machine and control system interfaces. There are hundreds of thousands (perhaps millions) of cases where having an OS with the written about features would be of immediate benefit.

There is no need to go down the "Mac vs. PC" route, it's pretty well-trodden.

[kelmon]

@PatrickDIS-SCADA

Exactly. The applications of this technology where it works well were designed to be interacted with in this way. Attempting to "port" touch to the traditional desktop simply doesn't work.

[ikramerica--2008]

the reason people are mentioning MAC is because Ina did in the article. And was wrong about it, to boot.

As pointed out, Mac OS X has supported multi-touch for quite some time. It is no different on a trackpad as it would be on a screen. The implementation is basicly the same if one turns on 1:1 tracking on the trackpad, only the surface area of the sensor is much larger when it's the whole screen.

Further, Ina makes a point of saying it's "not found on a Mac when referring to direct on screen touching, when there are two problems with his/her statement.

1. Neither is it found on Windows as of July, as Windows 7 is not yet released. So it is a feature yet to come.
2. Just as Windows 7 will have it when released soon, so will Snow Leopard, being developed at the same time and being released at roughly the same time. So there is no advantage here, Apple has no catching up to do or is not lacking a feature, as implied by this silly throw away comment by Ina early in the article.

There are specialized display companies that make standard touch displays now, and they have Mac drivers just as there are Windows drivers. There are mac touch screen kiosks, for example. There are Wacom pen displays, like the Cintiq. And when there are multi-touch capable LCDs, they will be supported in OS X Snow Leopard with a driver to interface with the built in multi-touch API same as Windows 7, just as trackpads require a driver on Mac or Windows to achieve the same thing.

So making a point of saying that Mac's don't have it is disingenuous if known by Ina and ignored, or basically just ignorant if he/she wasn't aware of it.

[kelmon]

"As pointed out, Mac OS X has supported multi-touch for quite some time. It is no different on a trackpad as it would be on a screen."

Er, no it isn't. There is no relationship between the screen and trackpad when it comes to responding to multi-touch gestures on a MacBook trackpad, which is probably the reason why it works well. The trackpad has no idea where the cursor is on the display or what is under it. All it is doing is sensing what the user is doing with their fingers and the OS is left to decide if a gesture is being performed and to handle that in the context of what is currently selected on-screen. There is very little similarity between a "true" touchscreen and a MacBook multi-touch trackpad.

[Carion]

A mouse is fast, accurate and dirt-cheap and your screen stays clean. For real productivity a mouse is the preferred tool.
Touch only has an advantage when using a mouse becomes problematic, like with small devices.

[thisnamestoolong]

Agreed -- touch screens are cool but are really little more than a toy -- you can get far more done with mouse and keyboard far more quickly. I guess it could be nice to have available, but I am pretty sure that anything I could do on the touch screen I would have already had done with the mouse and keyboard by the time I got my hands up to the screen.

[kelmon]

While I agree with your main point, I do disagree that real productivity requires a mouse. Touch could be much faster than using a mouse but it needs the hardware and software to take advantage of it. Besides, touch is also much more natural and therefore would make computing easier to access for new users.

[Renegade Knight]

Mice are inaccurate crap when it comes to drawing, making notes and some other thnigs. Mice won't go away with touch screens but they will show their limits.

[PatrickDIS-SCADA]

Interesting how you are all not thinking outside your "traditional desktop/laptop" boxes.

This tool becomes extremely helpful in environments outside your cubicle - places such as the rest of the world. Touchscreens are used widely throughout industrial environments as machine and control system interfaces. There are hundreds of thousands (perhaps millions) of cases where having an OS with the written about features would be of immediate benefit.

There is no need to go down the "Mac vs. PC" route, it's pretty well-trodden.

[Random_Walk]

"Mice are inaccurate crap when it comes to drawing, making notes and some other thnigs"

Agreed on the graphics angle... but then, that's why I have a tablet. :)

As for a vertical touchscreen? Well, perform this simple experiment: tape a sheet of paper to your current monitor, but do not re-position that monitor at all from its vertical position. Now draw something on it (like, say, a portrait) with a pencil. How accurate were you, and how long could you do it continuously?

Wacom (among others) get around this not only with traditional tablets, but with tablets that have LCD screens built under then. This would be a cool application, IMHO. That said, those mofos ain't cheap... and I don't see even current desktop touchscreens (e.g. that one HP keeps pimping) as being rugged enough to sit flat on a table just yet.

[Renegade Knight]

@Random_Walk

I understand your gorilla arm point point and addresed it in another post. It's also why I noted that a mouse won't go away. That said, it doesn't change my point that a moust at any angle isn't accurate for drawing compaired to direct like you could do with a touch screen.. Horizontal is better like you note, but vertical would allow for some options that a mice doesn't provide outside of art.

A final thought on Gorilla Arm. They still have painting esals (sp?) thate are mostly vertical and artists manage. Personally my uses would requrie a horizontal screen to be effecive.

[pj-mckay]

You are thinking of your current use and blinkered. Open your mind to applications and uses beyond what you've got. The mouse is fine for most things but what about other times when you've got, say, an access database using forms that you can simply tap around, like a POS system would. Or applications such as PC Juke Boxes... I've seen them working and the mouse is simply rubbiish. You've got an app that just asks for you to tap some buttons dotted about the screen. Adding gestures just opens up the possibilities even more; turn pages, scroll up, expand??? Anyone can use it, and it's just much more useful.. I use a tablet and pen but the toucscreen lcd should be even better.

It's down to what you want to do with your PC. If you want to scribble a doc, or update a spreadsheet stick to the mouse. If you want to use multimedia better, and build in better forms (yes you can use this at home) then it is a good feature. It's innovation and available for us to use. Take a look around and see where it culd be built into PC systems better.

AND if the mouse was so great I'd have one on the microwave instead of buttons; My remote control would be a mousepad; Anything with buttons would be a mousepad. But they're not... because buttons are better. Simillarly touchscreen buttons and gestures WILL be better for some things.

[ikramerica--2008]

I am thinking about sitting on the couch right now and moving my fingers mere centimeters to navigate the entire Mac OS X HD window with multi-touch trackpad, and how I'd be reaching all over the screen to do the same thing with a mult-itouch screen. I couldn't lay it flat on my lap and still see it, so my wrists would always be bent, moving from keyboard to screen and back. And if the screen were the keyboard, it would severely limit screen space or be at an awkward angle for my eyes. And with my arms always up and moving. It would be tiring.

Even manipulating an iPhone is much more work than a multi-touch trackpad.

[odubtaig]

Someone has a serious need to get down the gym.

[rpen25]

This would be really handy for airman on an E-3 Sentry AWACs. Not only would it free up a lot of space in an already cramped environment, but it could potentially simplify the job these people do in directing military aircraft. If you didn't already know, an AWACs (airborn warning and control) is a big plane fitted with a huge radar dome on top that acts as a flying control tower/rapcon for the USAF. Stuffed into the plane is tons of electronics and stations for airman/air traffic controllers to do their job. Getting rid of keyboards/mice in favor of a single touch screen can help free up space and maybe even simplify the process of identifying targets/routing packages to and from theatre, etc. There isn't much "spreadsheet" type work, so there isn't a need for a dedicated keyboard.

[AJ Pants]

Yet another Microsoft fail. A screen is for looking at. Not putting your grimy fingerprints all over.

[Renegade Knight]

This would be an Apple fail as well then since they are doing the same thing with Snow Leopard.

[kelmon]

? Damned if I have heard of any touchscreen support in Snow Leopard. To my knowledge all that Apple is doing is expanding what you can do with their multi-touch trackpads on their notebooks.

[monkeyfun14]

I love how if Apple did this you guys would be all over this.

[kelmon]

It depends. If Apple did touchscreens then I hope they'd have the sense to do it properly and not just add touch to an OS designed to be operated by a mouse and keyboard. Consider the iPhone - Apple could have just tried shoehorning the desktop OS onto the device but they had the sense to implement a user interface that is completely designed to be operated by touch and only touch. This is what any implementation of a touch interface needs.

[Jeremy Chappell]

Not to mention that the screen dives away from even the slightest touch. (Look at Ina's video - does that look fun?)

Seriously for a "normal" laptop or desktop this is a huge meh.

I think the biggest problem with this is that it isn't a radical new UI (like dare I say it the iPhone) this is a classic mouse UI with some limited touch features tacked on...

I hope Microsoft don't think this is going to drive adoption of Windows7, because it really isn't. They need to focus on other features of the OS. This might be nice on a Tablet PC so interact without needing to fish out the pen (looking stuff up). But on a normal laptop it looks hopeless. As for a desktop - why would you want this?

[pj-mckay]

Response to Jeremy Chappell too..

Don't mock somethng because you can't see a use for it. Take a look at the PC Juke Box software (for instance) and try to envisage that in your home. Lets expand it to a house party where your guests plop in their choices and use gestures to move pages.

The danger is it gets pooh poohed because everyone isn't open minded enough. If it's good enough for an iphone why should it not migrate to a desktop? If you can navigate one gadget why not another? Or is everyone saying the iphone needs a keyboard for every app? Probably just a bit of snobbery and 'not invented here' type of syndrome me thinks.

[kelmon]

Sorry, pj-mckay, but you just aren't thinking this through. The reason why touch works for the iPhone is because that is all that is offered - the whole thing is setup to use touch only and therefore it works. You don't have some applications that respond to touch and others that need a mouse. You simply cannot just add touch to a traditional desktop OS and expect it to work.

While I will note that the scenario you present (jukebox) is a useful use of the technology, how many more can you think of? As has been mentioned already in this thread, the HP TouchSmart is great for things that were designed for touch but the applications of it are limited and normal applications simply don't work with this kind of interface because they weren't designed for it.

[odubtaig]

No kelmon, you're not.

This isn't a feature for the O/S, it's a feature for the applications which run on the O/S. You probably yawned at tablet PCs while a legion of artists nearly wet themselves with excitement (artists f***ing LOVE tablet PCs, have you seen the price of a Cintiq?). MOI3D was designed specifically with Tablet PCs in mind and it works exceptionally well even away from them. This will only add to the ability to directly interact in DCC and art programs instead of fudging around a clunky interface where a mouse just isn't suited. As a graphics programmer I can see a metric sh*tton of potential applications.

Talk about a lack of imagination.

[kewell82]

@kelmon

Why can't you add touch screen capabilities to an OS that uses mouse/keyboard? I don't understand why it would cause a major problem as you predict.

[geuph]

i think this is a forward looking addition to windows, somewhat impractable now i think that this feature will become more widely used in a few years esp with small netbooks... new computer monitors are going to start using led screens which will be much brighter and thinner and easier to use with touch

[Gorgeclimber1]

Control Data's PLATO system since used single touch over 30 years ago. The technology offers interesting options. Touch sensitivity on the screen can be an issue. Programming for multi-touch must be a real treat.

[MaLvaDo39]

Yeah, let's see you work all day with your arms extended out.
Gorilla arms!

[funkyboot]

Touch would be great for musicians using their PC's for audio recording. The ability to move multiple faders on a mixer (I have ten fingers that could each theoretically be on a volume fader) would negate the need for hardware control surfaces.

[funkyboot]

Hate to reply to my own comment, but I'll bet money that Cakewalk (makers of Sonar), will be the first to jump on Windows 7 multi-touch features to control a software mixer. If that's the case, their competitors will follow suit, and I guarantee that segment of the market will jump on multi-touch quickly.

[Renegade Knight]

It will also be a boon for artists.

Essentially you can replace digitizers (mostly) with your screen, or a screen. Other than for quikc and dirty commands though that screen will have to be flat on a table.

[kelmon]

Fair enough - I can see the benefit of that, although I still think that new hardware needs to be designed to run the software since the traditional approximately 90-degree angle of a display is hardly idea for the purpose. What you want is something that either lies flat or isn't angled beyond about 45-degrees.

[funkyboot]

Kelmon, I think the direction things will move in will be a combination of the current monitor setup (which works in terms of comfort), along with a tablet like touch interface that will replace the mouse and possibly even the keyboard.

[kelmon]

Yes, that would work for me. Whatever the engineer interacts with it probably ought to be at the same sort of angle as a traditional mixing desk.

[ikramerica--2008]

Renegade - you ca do that now. It's called a Cintiq. I have one. Works quite well. Multitouch would not help there, as the screen is designed to respond to stylus, not finger touch, and you would not want multiple points of contact during design.

[weegg]

They need to take the next step and make a fist interface, so when the computer does what you tell it not what you are thinking you can put your fist to the screen :-)

[PatrickDIS-SCADA]

The fist interface would be a brilliant move!

[kelmon]

Hmm, one that simply detects when I am giving it the finger would be a start...

[Renegade Knight]

@kelmon

MS has that planned for the next gen console. Your wish is coming soon to Xbox.

[PatrickDIS-SCADA]

Interesting how you are all not thinking outside your "traditional desktop/laptop" boxes.

This tool becomes extremely helpful in environments outside your cubicle - places such as the rest of the world. Touchscreens are used widely throughout industrial environments as machine and control system interfaces. There are hundreds of thousands (perhaps millions) of cases where having an OS with the written about features would be of immediate benefit.

There is no need to go down the "Mac vs. PC" route, it's pretty well-trodden.

[kelmon]

Step away from the Copy/Paste function.

[Random_Walk]

agreed with kelmon... step well away from the cut+paste, please.

[berg0011]

You forgot to add that the service industry could finally upgrade their computers/cash registers without too much of a hassle now. And don't forget about jukeboxes, in-car pc/stereos, in home wall mounted sound control systems and anything else that has a touch screen can now get an upgrade... Seeing a photo booth with the blue screen of death was just too depressing, and will hopefully be upgraded to win 7 when it's released.

[johnwbaxter--2008]

As I read this story, I found that if I reach out toward the screen, I couldn'treach it without leaning forward. This is on my Dell desktop machine. As I typically use laptops, I can reach the screen.

Either way, I'm not in the touch market. (Hmmm, I really should shut off the touch software, which Windows 7 makes quite easy to do.)

[Windywoo]

I don't see this as a gimmick, I see this as Microsoft providing the tools for software and hardware companies to produce new toys. I admit I don't see much use for it, but I am ready to be convinced otherwise by a clever developer.

Put it this way, it doesn't hurt to have it.

[kelmon]

I think you are looking at a "chicken vs. egg" scenario. I don't see hardware manufacturers really committing to this without the software and I don't see developers committing to this unless there is suitable hardware. If the only interface available in Windows 7 was touch then of course developers would have no choice but to design for it (same for hardware manufacturers) but because it isn't I don't see what the incentive is going to be.

[DragonJoeSmith]

Is it just me, or do these arguments ring of the old, "what good is a mouse" arguments back in the early days. I remember some engineers refused saying: "I can get there fast with a simple key combination than using a mouse."

[kelmon]

Well, in all honesty, if the interface and applications are done correctly then there is no reason why touch cannot be better than the traditional mouse/keyboard. However, what Microsoft is currently showing is not "touch done right" but rather it is "touch in Windows". Design the OS and the applications so that touch is the only interface available and it will work (or fail horribly but not get stuck in some bizarre half-way house where you're using the mouse one moment and fumbling with the monitor the next).

[ikramerica--2008]

No, dragon, because various forms of touching the screen are as old as the mouse, and have never taken off.

Touch screens have been available for decades.

Light pens before that.

Mice and trackpads were both more practical and less expensive.

Most people commenting here have first hand experience with touch devices, be they ATM machines, self-checkout machines, smart phones, etc. We aren't luddites talking from a place of ignorance. We have experienced touch technology and don't see it changing the way we compute due to the physical limitations of reaching.

The goal should be to limit hand movement as much as possible, not increase those movements.

[odubtaig]

You a child of Thalidomide or something?

Take up painting.

Learn to sculpt.

Swim.

Get laid (if this requires minimum stretching you're doing it wrong).

If this small amount of stretching is too much for you, you're unfit, out of shape and need to do something about it. Or a quadraplegic.

Seriously, the mouse will still be there if you want it you whiny bugger.

...and Joe, there are people younger than me still making that argument (and that emacs is the bestest evar IDE and GUIs suck). I'm 30 on Sunday. How wrong is that?

[The_happy_switcher]

Leave it to Microsoft to take an existing technology and make it worse. Better start working those forearm muscles if you're planning on using their dumb method.

[odubtaig]

Yes! Exercise! Seek fresh air and sunlight!

Skip to 8:36 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0v9-9NwYEx0&feature=related

That's you.

Nerds.

[retroboy77]

I would love to have a touch screen computer, and I'm sure I will in a few years (maye just one). At the moment I'm content with my dual moniter setup. I'm glad that Windows is offering this kind of software free in 7, I'm not going to argue with that.

[ballmerisanape]

It probably isn't going to be free.. you'll likely have to upgrade to the Windows Home Premium Ultimate Touch-Me addition ;)

(not trolling... just a joke.. )

[pubsnomore]

You're getting Windows 7 for free? Please tell me how.

[superswiss]

I'm pretty sure, touch won't replace keyboard and mouse in the traditional desktop setting any time soon. With touch you have to think out of the box. MS sees the PC as the digital hub in your house having more than one auxiliary display throughout the house besides the main monitor. This is already possible today. Using Media Center Extender technology, both my Plasma displays in my living and media room are connected to my PC over the network. The UI that is displayed on the TVs is rendered by my PC in the study and I use a remote to interact with my PC from my couch to browse and watch all my media content. If I'm sitting at my desk in the study, I use keyboard and mouse to interact with my PC. Now take this a step further, what if my kitchen counter is gonna turn into another auxiliary display to my PC? I probably would want to use touch to interact with my PC from the kitchen. This vision is all about the connected home. You will be able to interact with your PC from many parts of the house using an interface that's appropriate.

[vincentyu2007]

Ina, as in her previous video demo, let the camera shoot from her right side while using her right hand to demonstrate. This is very awkward to watch - your hand is obstructing the view! You can either use your left hand instead or shoot from your left side if you use your right hand.

[therearenogoodusernames]

I have the HP Touchsmart - which is sort of like the imac of PCs.
Touch works good - but only for large UI's - I built my own with links to weather, recipes, news etc.

The main issue with touch however is that it is NO GOOD FOR DRAWING. Its not supported in corel, photoshop, painter etc - artrage works - but it is pitiful. You cannot rest your hand on the screen either as that counts as a click.

If you are an artist and are considering a touch pc - dont do it. get a tablet with a pen.
It is a shame as I would love to draw on my Touchsmart - but it literally doesnt work.

[kelmon]

The important thing that you are missing here when it comes to drawing is that your screen is not, I presume, detecting how hard you are pressing against it. A current WACOM Intuos tablet detects 2,048 levels of pressure whereas your HP only detects 2 (all or none, I think) and therefore is terrible for drawing with naturally, which is what you want to do.

You also bring up a good point which is what I have effectively been arguing - the only aspects of the HP TouchSmart that work well with touch are those parts that have been designed for it (i.e. large, easy to press buttons, etc.). Having played around with one in a shop I can agree with all that you have said here.

[yolanda_bernice]

try adjusting your screen input settings. mine is set that the digitizer pen turns off the touch interface till i double tap the screen with a finger. Just bring the digitizer pen nearby and your touch feature is off again. Likewise after booting it will remain off till you double tap again. In photo editing and draw suites the touch or pen input matches mousing, but it's a good deal easier to accurately paint a mask or recolour areas using the screen input.

[therearenogoodusernames]

that's the thing though - there is no pen support.

[yolanda_bernice]

I am currently using an HP Touchsmart tablet PC. Yes it cost a bit more than a non-tablet laptop of it`s class, but the tablet feature is so useful to me I don`t mind. I find it easier to wander from room to room with a movie playing and the machine folded flat, I use it for artwork, being able to draw right into the screen. I'll set the machine backwards with the keyboard facing the table and the screen tented like a board on an easel, facing me. I read the paper on it and can hold it in my hand like a newspaper with touch input. It uses a digitizer pen when I need more precision (like doing artwork) and the multi-touch features already available in vista tablet edition give me nifty features like win7. There are a few more tricks in win 7 than this has, but mostly it's alike to what I am using already. The market is here, the users are already using it, when touch-screens get more popular they'll come down in price. Then you`ll discover the joy of touchscreen interfacing for non-standard PC use.
I've never appreciated mice, they jump when I try to click the button, missing my target. Instead I used add-on touch-pads externally on desktop systems when not using a laptop's pad. The touchscreen can be delightfully hand instead. Especially when I'm out and about with my computer.

[scottthesculptor]

I don't quite get how "support for multi-touch" ended up being exclusively about screens.
The OS doesn't know, or care where the input device is located - transparently over your monitor or on an opaque tablet sitting next to the monitor.
So it's not exactly new.
But still doesn't have much software support.

Think Wacom tablet or Wacom Cintiq - lot's of tablets around with no monitors behind them . . .
Still not that much software that supports angle and pressure - two decades later.