SuperSite Blog

I expect to hear from cesjr in

3

2

1...

"This just provides more fodder for that, and it makes my job--as someone interested in accurately portraying how things happen--that much harder"

How about concentrating on facts instead of letting out an equal amount of crap in some sort of a twisted effort to balance the situation. Internet is full of that already.

Microsoft's touch stuff is great and they've been doing it a long time, but if it's not sold in appealing products then who cares? There's been opportunities for years now to have a great touch experience in their mobile OS. Where are the devices that put Wow in now? Where's my Zune Touch? I really wanted to like my tablet PC and was impressed with the hand writing recognition and OneNote integration, but the form factor of the tablet PC that I was using sucked. Apple should be given credit for putting it together well in the iPhone and iTouch; even if they did not invent the technology. A long time ago a Harvard dropout bought the rights to some Operating System technology and married it to commodity hardware and did pretty well without having to invent anything. Maybe Microsoft should put their research to better use. I saw all sorts of stuff at past Tech Fests that could be made into great products.

Well, I don't know if Apple invented the touch technology or not. But it was the first to deliver a touch user interface, fifteen years ago - the Apple Newton. After it came the Pilot (later called Palm Pilot, and the simply Palm), and the Pocket PC. Microsoft added, IIRC, pen extensions to Windows 3 at around the same time.

But the point is other than who invented the technology. The point is that the Apple iPhone and the prototype of Microsoft Surface are part of a new generation of devices that allow direct manipulation of data through touch devices. Take, for example, the way in which both iPhone and Surface let you zoom, pan and rotate a picture by using two fingers. Or iPhone's ability to let you scroll a list by flipping a finger over it. These are new ways of applying existing technology, and Apple has been the first to market it (even if surface was in development long before Apple started working on the iPhone). That's what most people will see, and thus, any of the "second generation" touch interfaces will be compared with the iPhone.

"But ... by specifically mentioning the iPhone here, whatever Microsoft does with touch support in Windows 7 will always be seen as a response to the iPhone and not as an evolution of the work Microsoft's actually been doing for years."

Actually, there's no logical requirement that it be one or the other.  It can be both.  

In fact, Paul almost acknowledges as much when he says, "Now, there's no doubt that Apple's experience with touch support on the iPhone (both good and bad) will influence future touch tech from Microsoft and other companies."

Yes, "influence" as in, they pretty much have a carbon copy of the iPhone in development.  They just have to.  It would be negligent not to.  And it's a good thing (keeps apple working hard).

What I want to know is, how is Paul going to spin away his prior attacks on the iPhone virtual keyboard when MS's copy has the same thing?  Real keyboards are toast on phone-sized devices.  Should be fun to watch Paul cook up some excuse for a 180-degree turn in his views.

@ cesjr

"What I want to know is, how is Paul going to spin away his prior attacks on the iPhone virtual keyboard when MS's copy has the same thing?  Real keyboards are toast on phone-sized devices.  Should be fun to watch Paul cook up some excuse for a 180-degree turn in his views."

The difference is Microsoft already provides for several input methods, three built in, and an API for extensibility. Don't like the keyboard? Use Graffiti, or Transcriber.

The difference is that Apple took the time to get it right.  

The difference is that Apple didn't release junk technology, promising that it would get it right eventually.

The touch functionality on the iPhone is 100% better than any touch technology I've ever used... and I would guess this is the same for 99.9% of Americans.

@UnnDunn

The difference is that all of those options you mentioned (Graffiti, Transcriber) really really suck, and they are so complicated and un-user friendly that the mass population will NEVER use them.

More options is not necessarily better.  How can ANYONE not know this?  

Oh, come on! Give me a break. This is the same thing you said with desktop search. Microsoft showed it off in some PDC a long time ago, then it took them AGES to deliver anything. In the meantime companies that actually created and released products did so. But when it shows up in Windows you said, oh this is others taking credit for something Microsoft already did. In that case others already had desktop search products out there, full products, working products way before the demo at PDC. But Microsoft demos it and it's them that invented it? Again, they mention touch and you talk about them having been working with it for a long time. You think Microsoft is the only one working with touch screens? I'm sure if you look at history they are not pioneers of the industry. They have a touch screen on their tablets. Big whoop! Touch screens have been around for ages. Long before Microsoft ever dreamed of doing anything with them. The tablet's touch screen and software for touch screen technology Microsoft copied from existing technology a long time ago. There is no invention on Microsoft's part that is of any merit and therefore needs your watchful eye to preserve some perceived injustice by others supposedly re-writing history.

Apple delivers a product with some innovation as far as how the user interacts with the screen, touch and software. The product is out there. Microsoft announce some dumb-ass coffee table. Where's the dumb-ass coffee table? It was announced at some trade show. While Apple already has some kick-ass touch technology out there in people's hands with an actual existing product. Yet, you sigh over the thought that people will not give credit to Microsoft for something they haven't innovated with? Microsoft has a touch screen, plain old touch screen on tablets. Nothing exciting. Apple is pushing boundaries with the technology with real products. Why did they mention the iPod? Because they are taking Apple's lead. Simple. There may be some announcement of Apple's touch technology in OS X, maybe with the new MacBooks coming soon. Of course Microsoft can point to this "blog post" by saying, hey we already talked about this when Apple announced a real product.  They have nothing to show for it. It's something that will be in Windows 7 (due in 2020?) and it's something they are doing because, as per their modus operandi, they follow. Some dumb-ass blog post saying, hey we got some cool stuff coming in Windows 7. Big deal. They have nothing to show for it.

No one is saying Apple invented anything. They innovate and push the technology and software that works in conjunction with that technology. Microsoft have nothing but a simple touch screen. Apple had this with the Newton, a long long time ago. Many other companies, even before Apple had this. I re-iterate, Apple did not invent this. Microsoft is a copier company. Hence the blog post you're commenting on. Microsoft fanboys are so delusional and out of touch, it's a concoction of emotions for anyone following their blog posts of grandeur.

@drylight

"Apple delivers a product with some innovation as far as how the user interacts with the screen, touch and software. The product is out there. Microsoft announce some dumb-ass coffee table. Where's the dumb-ass coffee table?"

Touche.

Pingback from  Windows 7 (Vienna) sarà Touch « Geeketto

Will you please stop with the who's first crap? There are few true innovations today. And sometimes the impact on society is greater with the refinement and re-packaging of innovation, rather than the initial innovative development. Dan Bricklin invented the spreadsheet, but the Excel of today is a couple of quantum leaps beyond the initial innovation. Can't everybody share credit for advancing good ideas?

When it comes to touch computing, I remember a public library system that used a touch screen back in the 80's. And I was involved in a point of sale system that used similar technology in the 90's. And the popular Watcom graphics tablet added pressure sensitive features way back when.

I watched the Dell video and was particularly disappointed with the lack of innovation shown there. The resolution of the touch screen went from a 1-2 inch grid (you could see the wires on the screen at the library), to sub-pixel resolution. Nice. But the interface was still a single point and click device (a mouse). The innovation is the capacitive touch screen, not the software. What I saw was some pretty sexy hardware that has been 'glued' on to Windows.

There wasn't anything shown that I don't already do with a mouse. In fact a mouse icon would occasionally appear on the screen to allow the left click, right click choice. What does this do to the 1-button/2-button mouse debate? From what I saw in the video, Windows has changed very little in the Tablet PC Edition. The existing mouse interface has been extended to the finger.

When I see Microsoft Surface, I see software innovation. Multiple input devices (fingers or mice or multiple people with multiple fingers?). This is a new user interface element. The core of the operating system will be modified to exploit these capabilities. I see Tablet PC as a new bunch of API's added to the existing mouse API's.

The iPhone is using this same capacitive screen technology and is using two fingers to grow a window. My guess is that there is more to follow. I've seen patent applications on the web for ideas like being able to use the back of the device as touch sensitive input as well. So now you get more of a two handed solution.

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter who was first. We're all in this together, feeding off one another. What's wrong with that? It keeps getting better everyday. Seems like a good plan to me.