Introducing the new Apple iPerson complete with multi touch and volume control, doesn’t it feel good to touch, doesn’t it feel good to touch, doesn’t it feel good to touch.

My world is so digital, I have forgotten what that feels like.
It used to be hard to connect when friends formed cliques, but now it’s even more difficult to connect now that clicks form friends.

But who am I to judge…

I face Facebook more than books face me hoping to book face to faces, I update my status 420 space to prove Im still breathing; failure.
To do this daily means my whole web wide world would forget that I exist. But with 3000 friends online only 5 I can count in real life, why wouldn’t I spend more time in the world where there are more people that LIKE me. Wouldn’t you?

Here it doesn’t matter if I am an amateur person, as long as I have a pro-file, my smile is 50% genuine and 50% genuine-HD, you will need blu-rays to read the whites of my teeth, but im not that focused.

Ten tabs open, hoping, my problems can be resolved with a 1600 x 1700 revolution, this is a problem with this evolution, doubled over, we used to sit in tree tops, till we swung down and stand up right, then someone slipped a disc, now we’re doubled over at desktops.

From the Garden of Eden, to the branches of Macintosh, Apple picking has always come at a great cost.
iPod, iMac, iPhone, iChat, I can do all of these things without making iContact.

We used to sprint to pick and store Blackberries, now we run to the Sprint store to pick Blackberrys, it’s scary.
I can’t hear the sound of mother nature speaking, over all that Tweeting, and along with it is our ability to feel as it’s fleeting.

You would think these headphone jacks inject in the flesh the way we connect, the disconnect, power ON. So we are powerless, they got us love drugged. Like e-pills, so we e-trade, e-mail, e-motion like e-commerce because now money can buy love, for 9.95 a month – click!

To proceed to checkout – click! To X out where our hearts once were – click!
I’ve uploaded this hug, I hope she gets it – click!
I’m making love to wife, I hope she’s logged in – click!
I’m holding my daughter over a Skype conference call while shes crying in the crib in the next room – click!

So when my phone goes off in my hip, I touch and I touch and I touch, because in a world where there are voices that are only read and laughter is never heard or I’m so desperate to feel that I hope the technologic in reverse the universes so the screen can touch me back, and maybe it will, when our technology is advance enough to make us human again.

It sure look impressive. But the whole time I've been wondering why don't they just use a mouse? Having multi touch doesn't seem to enhance the experience. I can see myself physically pushing the opposing player if he/she is physically blocking me controlling my ships. There's a good reason most board games are not real time.

Seriously though the camera person need to learn how to focus the camera. If it was for dramatic effect then it failed miserably.

so this is a google tablet... half the price of an ipad.. rad.
does it do what i need it to do?
seriously, i ask you guys because the lay out of amazon and other sites like it drives my dyslexia/dyscalculia CRAZY. my brain thinks im trying to decipher hieroglyphics. >> ^KnivesOut:

I bought a Nook Color, and rooted it, which for non-nerds means I replaced the Barnes & Noble default OS with a standard Android ROM. This means I can load regular 'droid apps on it, by accessing the Amazon App-Store and Android Market.
Why? Because it was only $250, compared to the $500+ for an iPad. Yes, it's not as "nice" as an iPad, but:
A. I hate apple.
B. I like saving money.
C. Droid is cooler, and easier to code against than iOS, but that's just my opinion.
There are other options in a similar price range (this one is pretty nice.)
I just have a hard time with the $500 price-point on an iPad.

I bought a Nook Color, and rooted it, which for non-nerds means I replaced the Barnes & Noble default OS with a standard Android ROM. This means I can load regular 'droid apps on it, by accessing the Amazon App-Store and Android Market.

Why? Because it was only $250, compared to the $500+ for an iPad. Yes, it's not as "nice" as an iPad, but:

A. I hate apple.
B. I like saving money.
C. Droid is cooler, and easier to code against than iOS, but that's just my opinion.

There are other options in a similar price range (this one is pretty nice.)

I just have a hard time with the $500 price-point on an iPad.

You have been awarded 1 Power Point for fixing the embed code for Dead Pool video multi touch screen. Thank you for helping maintain VideoSift's reliability.

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

So what your saying is it's more like a PC and less like a console. As such, there is always give and take...the give being you can buy more and, more importantly, less phone. The analogy caries on as doing graphics on that scale is still relatively expensive in terms of hardware cost, much akin to the early days of consoles and computers. Non-standardized hardware usually means wider adoption rates enabling people to reach different platforms of performance for their need. It is the reason we don't all compute on Nintendo powered hardware, PCs won the technology arms race. Moreover, being that phones aren't really designed with gaming solely in mind, they resemble PCs, more than consoles even more so. There will always be a market for "one simple hardware configuration", but I think the market is larger for people who want tiered models

Right and it makes life hell for developers. Having previously developed for Symbian and WM, and recently starting with Android, I have experience with this.

In the PC market, you can assume that there will be at least a keyboard and mouse as input. On Android, you can only assume a single-touch screen. There may be a trackball, or an optical trackball (ick), but no guarantees. The people with these devices want applications that will use the input methods on their devices. Not easy to test as a developer.

Reviews regularly request multitouch despite few Android devices supporting it, especially those of HTC. Nexus One and Desire multitouch is a nightmare to try and implement, due to the semi-broken hardware. Note that even Google Maps, the poster child for Android, isn't using multi-touch correctly on Android (i.e. if you put 2 fingers on points on the map and pinch, those 2 points aren't in the same place at the end, and you can't pinch and drag at the same time either).

I haven't tried iPhone development, perhaps with the new resolution and hardware specs, it's starting to suffer from the same issues. Selecting the target market for Android is certainly difficult though unless you target the lowest common denominator, which will rarely have a "wow" factor.

There's many apps coming shortly that interacts with a lot of video and audio editing software. Which to me, is a god send. A remote, multi-touch display linked to Logic Audio, running plug-ins, came a lot sooner than I ever expected.

>> ^nock:

Yeah, it did flash great - up until it crashed.


It didn't crash. You should read the blog where this was posted first. There he mentioned he pressed the home button by accident.

I don't think the iPad is pressure sensitive, it's either "touch" or not. The hardware expects fingers, not a stylus, so pressure on a small area will be ignored. It's definitely not art friendly.

Also the demo would have been more impressive if both hands were used, one for drawing and the other for the multi-touch gestures like zooming and scrolling.

It would have been even better if the guy could draw.

grubert is given a troll hat and shown the door.

Okay I'll go now.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

It's really easy and commonplace to look to the past and say "oh that's just common sense- of course that was the right way to do it."

The truth is that no one was making a phone that was a finger driven multi-touch, all screen "the device is the screen" device.

Now everyone seems to be- and I think that's great. But credit where credit is due. The current crop of smart phones have borrowed heavily from the iPhone in just about every way.


>> ^rottenseed:
Right...and all that really matters is what's under the hood (bonnet). At the end of the day, you have 2 good cars to choose from in your analogy. Google didn't invent the search engine, but what they did with it was revolutionary. It's ok to take an idea and build upon it. Your only comparison seems skin deep. Besides, in my opinion, the iphone's "look" is the lowest common denominator. It's not flashy, it's not sexy...it's a bit slippery though. It's not like they had a revolutionary design. Their design was based on simplicity. Which works. And you can't patent simplicity.>> ^dag:
A closer analogy would be that if everyone was driving motorized trikes -and then someone invents the Ford Mustang. Then all the motorized trike makers decide to start making Camaros.
>> ^rottenseed:
I see the shape is the same...and they're both black. They also both have icons. That's like saying 2 cars are the same because they have 4 wheels, 4 doors, and windows.

I can imagine the producer whispering to them "Play with the multi-touch surface more! Make stuff grow and shrink for no reason!"

>> ^demon_ix:
The most common sentiment about the Nexus One is "I hate the iPhone, Apple and iTunes, but I'm not buying a touch-screen phone without multi-touch ". Apple are wise to hold on to that patent like that.


They don't own the patent on multi-touch, it's been around for waaaay longer than Apple's products with it.

There is something legal about it not appearing on the Nexus One in the States though, as it IS enabled for multitouch in Europe... not sure what it is, but it demonstrates the stupid impediment to advancement legal shite can be.

The most common sentiment about the Nexus One is "I hate the iPhone, Apple and iTunes, but I'm not buying a touch-screen phone without multi-touch ". Apple are wise to hold on to that patent like that.

What if I want to type ? the fact is for most pc interaction you dont need to use a mouse. really fast people can use a keyboard way faster than a mouse on its own. I think the reason people use a mouse for general pc interaction is because its incredibly simple and intuitive.

This system to me looks far more complicated than a mouse not because its "new" but because you have to have 2 hands on the serfice and you have up to 10 graphical points of interaction on the screen you allso have to be thinking about 2 hands not just one , manny people strugle to use 2 hands on a piano granted this is infantly more simplistic than that but its still more complex than 1 hand on a mouse.

I would like tactile force of keys of some kind , I think a good solution would be a mostly flat keyboard but the serfice is touch sensitive ( they do exist already just not that refined) you can have it so that soft touching would do multituch and give access to all the benefits of multi touch systems / wacom pads. however it would be able to be used 100% like a old school querty keybord along with a mouse.

If you observe history of PC HCI devices its a simple fact that people are not going to drop there learned method of interaction , unless it is Radically more eficent , if its within 30% more efficiency people would rather just stick with the old and comfortable HCI device. ~( this explains the reason why a pc keyboard is accentually a 1860s design. http://home.earthlink.net/~dcrehr/IMAGES/sgtablesm.jpeg what's funny is the first ever type writers key interface is not that dissimilar to the most modern of laptops)

people are generaly open to different methods of interaction if it is a compleaty new or perceived as a different device , or there is no better way to control the device at point of the device invention.

I think Mind controle of Pcs would be a good compliment to keybord , mouse , / keybord no mouse but maby thats 10 years away.


Interestingly and not so unsurprisingly the whole "Still using something that is fairly shitty way of doing things but it works" is mirrored all the time in the progression biological evolution.

Seems like pretty much everyone has a similar view of this concept - the multi-touch sounds good, the one dimensional window management sounds horrible.

With Windows I can have a dozen windows open and know, with a quick glance at the taskbar, what programs and files are open. With this concept it seems really awkward to see what applications are open and where they are in the line up - I would have to zoom out and look at all of the open windows to find the single one I want to work in.