Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 3rd Sep 2012 00:39 UTC, submitted by MOS6510
Hardware, Embedded Systems "Efforts are split between models in which keyboards detach from screens, ones in which the keys remain attached but can be hidden behind displays, and traditional fixed clamshell designs." None of these really float my boat. They work with clunky connectors and weird hinges, while I'd much rather have Surface's nice magnetic connection. On top of that, Surface just looks way better than this stuff. Pretty clear why Microsoft felt the need to make their own hardware.
Thread beginning with comment 533635
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Why so different
by chekr on Mon 3rd Sep 2012 01:17 UTC
chekr
Member since:
2005-11-05

Am I the only one who just wants an ultrabook with a capacitive touch screen?

Reply Score: 5

RE: Why so different
by woegjiub on Mon 3rd Sep 2012 01:43 in reply to "Why so different"
woegjiub Member since:
2008-11-25

Not at all.
I would love one of those, given that it had a capable CPU, reasonable GPU, >=8GB of ram, an SSD (>=256GB), and double HD resolution.

I'd be very happy to pay 4K or so for that.


I'd settle for a monitor with more than HD resolution, and capacitive touch, though. It beats me why nobody is doing that. I'd love one at my desk.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Why so different
by ilovebeer on Mon 3rd Sep 2012 02:20 in reply to "RE: Why so different"
ilovebeer Member since:
2011-08-08

Not at all.
I would love one of those, given that it had a capable CPU, reasonable GPU, >=8GB of ram, an SSD (>=256GB), and double HD resolution.

I'd be very happy to pay 4K or so for that.


I'd settle for a monitor with more than HD resolution, and capacitive touch, though. It beats me why nobody is doing that. I'd love one at my desk.

Most people don't have $4K of disposable income laying around, and that price range isn't attractive at all to the average user.

Anyways, if there were a big enough market for it I'm sure they would make them. There's no point bothering with little to no ROI.

Reply Parent Score: 8

RE[2]: Why so different
by Laurence on Mon 3rd Sep 2012 07:31 in reply to "RE: Why so different"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26


I'd settle for a monitor with more than HD resolution, and capacitive touch, though. It beats me why nobody is doing that. I'd love one at my desk.

Probably because most users don't fancy the idea of getting RSI.

Touch interfaces make a great idea for portable devices you can rest on your lap, or in kiosks. But for day to day use on a large(ish) monitor, keyboards and mice make far better ergonomics, are cheaper and more accurate.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE: Why so different
by Alfman on Mon 3rd Sep 2012 02:43 in reply to "Why so different"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

No, you are not the only one.

I would have been a big fan of the original touchscreen tablets with integrated swivel keyboard. I longed for one entering college and the fact that it could function as both a tablet and laptop without crippling laptop functionality was awesome. But cost had always been the biggest detractor for me and probably millions of other technology seekers. If only they had been cheaper, it would have been enough to build up a healthy ecosystem back then.

Today's tablets have become affordable, which made them popular enough to build sustainable ecosystems. So I am pleased to finally have them, unfortunately though they often don't cut the mustard as a primary computing device - most modern tablet owners will still need access to another PC.

Edited 2012-09-03 02:45 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE: Why so different
by ndrw on Mon 3rd Sep 2012 04:07 in reply to "Why so different"
ndrw Member since:
2009-06-30

Unless it is a 10" netbook-like device you would likely find a touch screen very uncomfortable to use. It's simply too far, too big and too high to use (just pretend you already have it and try to "use" it).

I have a Wacom tablet. It has its own issues (like a mouse, it's detached from the screen, which feels unnatural at first) but at least it is ergonomic. It lays horizontally on my desk, next to the keyboard, and it has higher dpi than the screen so I don't have to wave my hand as much as with a touch screen.

Touch screens work very well if you can hold them in your hands or place them where you normally place a keyboard. Even this assumes that the interface is designed for minimizing user interaction (occasional touches or drags but without the whole WIMP overhead).

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Why so different
by Alfman on Mon 3rd Sep 2012 07:02 in reply to "RE: Why so different"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

ndrw,

"Touch screens work very well if you can hold them in your hands or place them where you normally place a keyboard."

That's actually why I like a tablet where the keyboard can fold out of the way. While interacting with the desktop via a touch screen should be possible, that's not exactly what I personally have in mind, which are more application specific use cases. I like to see applications where touch input can enhance a traditional paper notebook, instead of enhance the WIMP desktop to use touch everywhere.

Some examples:
For note-taking, even a simple paper notebook can rival a keyboard/mouse laptop because it is much easier to sketch out quick diagrams the "old fashioned" way. To this day, I sometimes prefer to draw things on paper and scan them in than try to enter them using a mouse.

Keyboard calculators (such as bccalc) are great but they suck at visually representing formulas. With a touch screen I had envisioned a stylus input algebraic calculator where one could write math formulas (symbolically as mathematicians intended) and the software could solve them on "paper" in a different color. It could also warn of logical inconsistencies in your note's equations or "scratch paper". It could annotate spelling corrections in the same way.

There is no reason that laptops should not also be able to do these things.


"(occasional touches or drags but without the whole WIMP overhead)."

I prefer not to have the OS exclude WIMP entirely. The exact same motivation for having multi-window to display documents simultaneously on the desktop will re-emerge on tablets - touch input has absolutely nothing to do with it. In a classroom setting I can read a book, a handout, and write in my notepad at the same time. In principal I'd like to produce the same experience on a sufficiently sized tablet. (Hint: I shouldn't need to have multiple tablets running to view multiple things at once)

Reply Parent Score: 3