The Secret Behind the iPod Scroll Wheel

clickwheel? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-09-21 02:33 · Score: 2, Funny

Do they mean the clickwheel? Or is this actually about the previous generations with the scrollwheel?

Re:clickwheel? by ahecht · 2004-09-21 02:55 · Score: 5, Interesting

Like all touchpads (and touchlamps as well), the device measures a change in capacitance (Synaptics calls it Capacitive Position Sensing). Each section of the wheel (divided by the lightning-bolt lines) can be measured individually, so it knows which section your finger is on. From that, it is pretty easy to figure our how fast your finger is moving.
You can get more information on the geeky side from http://www.synaptics.com/technology/cps.cfm
Re:clickwheel? by hattig · 2004-09-21 03:01 · Score: 5, Interesting

Cheers! Yes, that is pretty much how I was thinking it worked.

Aside: I remember having an old Sony Trinitron 14" TV once, and it had a similar system for changing channel. It was very annoying if a fly decided to walk across the buttons, because the channels would change as the fly walked across!
Re:clickwheel? by BasilBrush · 2004-09-21 03:11 · Score: 2, Informative

As someone else mentioned, it's probably capacitance between the pad and your finger. No need for a timer. The pad with the highest capacitance gives you the absolute position of your finger, and the sequence gives you the direction of movement. The pointy shapes no doubt make the capacitance vary more gradually from one pad to the next, so that the absolute position can be determined more accurately by interpolation.

Nothing really new there... by Pig+Hogger · 2004-09-21 02:35 · Score: 5, Interesting

25 years ago, Tektronix graphic terminals had scroll-wheels for cursor movement (this was before mice became widespread). And Hewlett-Packard had an innovative scrollwheel that was usable in both directions (in conjunction with the cursor keys) on the 9836 series desktop computers.

Re:Nothing really new there... by pmc · 2004-09-21 02:45 · Score: 5, Funny

And, to bring scolling to the audio world, I have a very old (15 years) Sony Tuner that has a scroll wheel for choosing between the preset stations (up to 30). And it does the cute trick of the faster you spin the faster the choices go by. I don't think this was particularly innovative then either, but I think it's the oldest device I have with such an interface.
Re:Nothing really new there... by Aphrika · 2004-09-21 02:52 · Score: 3, Interesting

Pong had scroll wheels of a sort for cursor movement too - translating rotational into linear motion. I think that was around 30-odd years ago. Since then we've had the early 80s consoles and jog dials.

However, I find it quite interesting how old ideas are reborn - if someone said 10 years ago that there'd be a big rotational dial on the front of the biggest selling music player in 2004, I wouldn't have believed them... same with analogue controls on synthesizers which have recently made a comeback.
Re:Nothing really new there... by emorphien · 2004-09-21 02:56 · Score: 2, Informative

I never really thought much of the scroll wheel on the iPod either, but I knew it was just a variation of the track pad like my laptop has (which is also a synaptics).

--

Presently here, but not there.
Re:Nothing really new there... by Pig+Hogger · 2004-09-21 02:59 · Score: 2, Interesting

I have a very old (15 years) Sony Tuner that has a scroll wheel for choosing between the preset stations (up to 30). And it does the cute trick of the faster you spin the faster the choices go by.
Was it Marrantz who had a tuner with an electromagnetic brake that slowed-down the tuning wheel wherever a station signal was stronger???
Re:Nothing really new there... by puz · 2004-09-21 03:05 · Score: 5, Informative

The Pong system is a little different from the scroll wheel in that it senses the ABSOLUTE angle of a variable resistor whereas the scroll wheel detects RELATIVE angle of a rotary encoder. I know because I actually built a PONG system using GI's famous AY chip.

--
Download Mazes and Puzzles from www.puz.com
Re:Nothing really new there... by Bio · 2004-09-21 03:07 · Score: 5, Funny

And I had a telephone, that had a scroll wheel to dial numbers. There were 10 holes in the wheel with digits printed underneath. There was even a mechanism to rotate the wheel back into its rest position, after you moved it.
Re:Nothing really new there... by catwh0re · 2004-09-21 03:15 · Score: 4, Interesting

Another more recent (but before the original non-touch wheel iPod) are in B&O home phones, where you scroll your list of phone contacts on a very small touch-sensitive scroll wheel... and select your contact with a centre button.
The only difference in the apple design is that it's significantly larger.
On a design perspective, nothing is original, it's design brilliance however to know when to use already created design elements in contrast to making a new one (MS can you hear me?) It's also no trick that the ipod is the same dimensions as a cassette. The ipod mini.. same dimensions of a business card. (The design ethic here is: Why pick shapes that people aren't already used to having?)
Re:Nothing really new there... by amper · 2004-09-21 03:18 · Score: 2, Informative

And let's not forget Roland's "Alpha-Dial" that appears on many of their musical instrument products...
Re:Nothing really new there... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-09-21 03:42 · Score: 4, Funny

ATARI PONG scroll wheel changed my life..I now live in a basement and I'm still a virgin.
Re:Nothing really new there... by jdavidb · 2004-09-21 04:25 · Score: 4, Funny

True story

My grandfather worked for the telephone company 45 years. For a long time, his job involved dealing with customers who came in off the street.

In the days of rotary phones, the dialed number was detected by the amount of time it took the dial to return to the resting position. (Number of pulses sent as it made the trip, actually, I believe.)

So one day this woman comes in complaining that every time she dials a number which she knows is the right number, (in her words) "Some hussy comes on there and tells me there's no such number!" This woman was seriously offended by the (recorded, I think, and probably new in those days) suggestion that she was getting the wrong number, when she simply knew it had to be right.

So my grandfather handed her a phone and offered to let her make the call there in the office. The woman snatches the phone and angrily starts dialing her number -- but she's in such a big snit that every time she turns the dial around, she doesn't wait for it to finish; she grabs the dial and forces it back around to the resting position so she can get on with dialing the next number. I'm sure this technique resulted in an enormous time savings to her, probably adding a full five seconds of free time to her life if she did it for every call she made in forty years, but of course it prevented the phone from properly dialing the number since everything was based on the timing for that dial.

My grandfather started to explain this to the woman, but she was enraged and said, "Are you trying to tell me how to dial a phone?" Well, er, yes, ma'am, amazingly phone company employees probably knew a little bit more than you about how to dial a telephone. Not much more, but enough to know that what you were doing would never work. I think the woman finally got fed up and stormed out.

People are amazing.

--
Secession is the right of all sentient beings.
Re:Nothing really new there... by pthisis · 2004-09-21 05:15 · Score: 3, Interesting

In the days of rotary phones, the dialed number was detected by the amount of time it took the dial to return to the resting position. (Number of pulses sent as it made the trip, actually, I believe.)

As someone who still has a rotary phone...

It just hung up the phone briefly, once for 1, twice for 2, ... 10 times for 0.

If you have pulse service in your area still, you can dial the phone by just hitting the hangup button repeatedly--it's not too tough to get the timing down.

--
rage, rage against the dying of the light
Re:Nothing really new there... by ChicagoBiker · 2004-09-21 05:33 · Score: 5, Interesting

Amazingly, because of this system, perceived "higher priority/class" area's were given lower numbered area codes because they were quicker to dial on the rotary phone and would cause the user less aggravation and time (1 taking the shortest amount of time and 0 taking the most).
It's why New York is/was 212 and Chicago 312, etc.
909 would be considered the most unimportant place on the planet for the time.
The really privliaged and status hungry would beg, steal or borrow to attempt to get an old 5 digit number like 1-1111 or 1-1221.
Re:Nothing really new there... by mcoko · 2004-09-21 05:37 · Score: 3, Informative

Actually a rotary phone does not use timing what so ever. The turning of the dial creates a current that is sent up the line. 4 pulses sent for the number 4 and so on. Grabbing the dial and forcing it back to the starting place still sends the correct amount of digits. If you notice when you force a dial on a rotary phone you can only force it so much. The resistance that exist for the whatever mechanics make the current do not allow you to turn it back as fast as you can.

I am sorry but your story is more myth than fact.

Evidence is another reply posted where you can dial a number by clicking the hook over and over again. When you pick up the phone a current is sent up the line to the central office, because you completed a circuit by picking up the phone. The central office provides power down the line as a sort of status check for when you go off hook, hence if you try to lick a phone line you will get a shock. The point being that since you can dial a number by hanging up repeatedly you could not possibly do so in perfect time, therefore timing has nothing to do with it.

The switches that first used pulse dialing were not smart enough the handle timing. Current digital switch that use touch tone don't even use time, they use, that's right, TONES. Two actually per digit.

Imagine the keypad on your phone as a tic tac toe board. Across the top you have three tones (can't remember the freq.) and down the side you have four. The combination of two tones make a digit where they intersect.

Calls used to be switch through the network strictly by the tones. But here comes WOZ (and others) and he figures out how to take advantage of that fact and creates the blue box. Phone companies smartened up and create the SS7 network. Once your tones/digits hit you host office they are removed from the line and you call is setup by a seperate network of routers, switchs, and databased to get you to your destination. If all is clear and your call can complete (lines not busy, trunk facilities available) the switch between caller and callee are nailed up and the call is connected. This is out of band signaling. Cool stuff.

The databases are also what provide 1-800/900 service (dial an 800 number and the DB converts it to an actual POTS number XXX-XXX-XXXX), caller id, local number portability (same as 800 conversion), some verisons of remote call fowarding, and host of other cool things.

Fun with phones. Back to work.

--
www.fotoforay.com
Re:Nothing really new there... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-09-21 05:53 · Score: 3, Interesting

So close...

It was actually because it took the mechanical switches the phone company used back then less time to make a circuit connection to route a call to a popular area. Each number dialed made another connection in the final circuit, and they have to complete serially. Back then, there was an appreciable wait as the circuits were connected to get you a channel to your destination.

The phone company could not really care less about the time saved by one person dialing, but the time saved routing millions of calls to New York City every day was significant.
Re:Nothing really new there... by Angostura · 2004-09-21 06:38 · Score: 2, Interesting

Some timing, yes - but the system was remarkably insensitive. I used to force the rotary dial back when impatient, and with no problems. In fact it is very hard to force the dial back too fast.

I too vote myth, for this story.
Re:Nothing really new there... by 87C751 · 2004-09-21 06:40 · Score: 5, Informative

Actually a rotary phone does not use timing what so ever.
Kids, these days...
Standard pulse timing is 10 pps, with a window from about 7.5-12 IIRC. It's been a while since I had to adjust the little mechanical governor that controlled the rotary dial return rate. Duty cycle is 50%. Pulse too slow and it will be mistaken for a hookflash. Too fast and you'll exceed the slew rate of the switch and drop pulses. Mechanical switches are, of course, more succeptible to too-fast pulse rates. Electronic switches can probably accept faster than 12 pps, but 10 is still the standard.
The "turning of the dial" creates no current. It interrupts the circuit. So does the hookswitch, which led to being able to "dial" a phone with the hookswitch. You still had to have good manual dexterity, especially when there were higher numbers in the number you were trying to reach. This was popular in the days when a coin telephone disabled only the dial circuit and not the voice path. Nowadays, of course, you can't do this because the dial tone you hear when you pick up is generated by the phone itself, which accepts your call information and then decides how to route the call.

--
Mail? Put "slashdot" in the subject to pass the spam filters.
Re:Nothing really new there... by willpall · 2004-09-21 18:30 · Score: 2, Informative

Two things..

1. It was based on call volume, not class or priority. The few seconds saved in dialing time to high-volume areas saved a lot of switch wear and tear as the switches were mechanical--moving parts and all. (well, I guess that would be priority).

and 2. I actually live in the 909 you insensitive clod!

--
Libertarian: label used by embarrassed Republicans, longing to be open about their greed, drug use and porn collections.
Re:Nothing really new there... by SmittyTheBold · 2004-09-22 09:09 · Score: 2, Funny

So, in all reality, it did not change your life, but prevented further change.

--
± 29 dB

Why is this such a big deal? by raider_red · 2004-09-21 02:35 · Score: 5, Insightful

The scroll wheel is just a round touchpad and is based on the same technology Synapsis has patents on. It even feels the same as the touchpad on my PowerBook.

Touchpads are the best thing that ever happened to this company. They're getting licensing fees and royalties on almost every notebook sold, or they make money directly as the component vendor for the touch pads.

--
It's good to use your head, but not as a battering ram.

Re:Why is this such a big deal? by Maestro4k · 2004-09-21 02:43 · Score: 5, Informative
- The scroll wheel is just a round touchpad and is based on the same technology Synapsis has patents on. It even feels the same as the touchpad on my PowerBook.
I have a 4th gen iPod with the click wheel and after I finally figured out you just moved your finger to scroll (it wasn't immediately obvious and I've not had the opportunity to use previous versions) I've found it to be far more responsive than the touchpads I've encountered on notebooks. I have a Sony Vaio at work and I hate the touchpad on it, it's very difficult to control and way too sensitive registering double clicks even when my finger doesn't leave the surface. (Apparently pausing with your finger on the touchpad counts, I can't find a way to adjust the settings to fix it.)
So I'd have to say that with the current generation clickwheels the touchpad on the iPod is far better. It's just sensitive enough without being too sensitive and it requires no adjustment to work that way. That alone is an achievement since there are so many different finger sizes out there and different people are going to push with different pressures.
- Touchpads are the best thing that ever happened to this company. They're getting licensing fees and royalties on almost every notebook sold, or they make money directly as the component vendor for the touch pads.
And deservedly so, they obviously can make some top notch ones (iPod clickwheel) so they're really earned those fees and royalties. At least they're not an IP company making money via lawsuit. :)
Re:Why is this such a big deal? by Savage-Rabbit · 2004-09-21 02:56 · Score: 3, Insightful

Personally I rather dislike touchpads in general, I prefer a mouse or failing that something like the IBM touch point. However the iPod scrollwheel is an exception. There may not be anything new about the touchpad or scrollwheel each on its own but implementing a scrollwheel using a touchpad is a very good idea. Sometimes genius lies in re-implementing an old device using new technology.

--
Only to idiots, are orders laws.
-- Henning von Tresckow

Fingerprint Touchpad by Lord+Grey · 2004-09-21 02:37 · Score: 4, Interesting

The company that designed the scroll wheel is Synaptics. They have another product called the Fingerprint TouchPad that is basically a tiny fingerprint scanner/authentication device. I've always thought that this kind of device would be great if it was integrated into something I have hold to use, such as my cell phone or mouse. Biometric security isn't absolute security, but it can be one level of security that is nearly invisible if implemented correctly. Neat stuff.

--
// Beyond Here Lie Dragons

Up and Down vs Round and Round by wedding · 2004-09-21 02:37 · Score: 2, Interesting

Volume goes up and down, but we're all used to round nobs for that. I can think of very few instances where a up-down lever is used to control a device instead of a circular mechanism.
Car stereos, but that's relatively recent, what else?

Re:Up and Down vs Round and Round by moonbender · 2004-09-21 03:12 · Score: 4, Interesting
It depends on the situation which controller makes more sense.

Circular controllers:
- can control an unbounded parameter (just continue turning)
- can control a bounded parameter with arbitrary precision, e.g. one turn of the wheel doesn't have to go through to whole scale (ie. radio station tuning)
- set the parameter relative to it's last value
Up-down controllers:
- can not control unbounded parameters at all
- offer a precision limited by their size
- offer reference on where you are on an absolute scale (and thus a specific position always correlates to a specific value)
That said, up-down controllers can be made to emulate the behaviour of circular ones. You can make an up-down controller simulate relative behaviour by automatically returning the "knob" to the neutral position after the user is done. That way, the up-down controller can be used to set the current value +/- a certain range, and with enough phases the user can control an arbitrary range.
Obviously this is very easy on the computer, and fairly difficult with real devices. I've seen it done a couple of days ago in ChaosPro, a fractal generator. It's not the way you'd expect a scroll bar in a computer to work, though, but it's a lot better than the various virtual circular controllers some applications insist on using - circular controller really don't lend themselves well in computer GUIs, I think.
--
Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
Re:Up and Down vs Round and Round by operagost · 2004-09-21 04:28 · Score: 2, Interesting

Faders on recording consoles.
Joysticks.
Light dimmers.
Gearshifts.

--

Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.

Still, though... by StevenHenderson · 2004-09-21 02:37 · Score: 4, Funny

Regardless of how "cool" or "useful" the scroll wheel is on the Apple iPod, I still think that the one on the HP iPod is FAR better.

[/joke]

Yeah... by Blue-Footed+Boobie · 2004-09-21 02:37 · Score: 3, Interesting

Cool little article, although, I have heard of synaptics before - actually L-O-N-G before. Anyone who installed Linux on an old HP laptop can tell you that!

--
DAMN YOU OCTODOG! DAMN YOU TO HELL!

Re:Yeah... by GlassUser · 2004-09-21 02:56 · Score: 4, Interesting

Cool little article, although, I have heard of synaptics before - actually L-O-N-G before. Anyone who installed Linux on an old HP laptop can tell you that!

Yep, I remember getting a little standalone synaptics touchpad in 1996 as a novelty from a local computer junk store (microcache for anyone in Houston who knows of them - they bought the enron E monument at auction and have it in a small shrine now).

Any way, some people totally loved it (the touchpad) and one guy now has them on all his computers (even desktops) instead of a mouse.

--
funny munging

Re:Like this is news by peawee03 · 2004-09-21 02:38 · Score: 2, Insightful

Why should Apple make their own touchpad? Synaptics has much much more experience in the matter. "Let the pros handle it", so to speak.

--
I wish I could write clever and witty sigs.

Information? by brufleth · 2004-09-21 02:38 · Score: 5, Informative

This "article" just shows some pictures of what I can only assume is the touch sensitive plates under the wheels. It doesn't explain anything about them and how they work, nor does it really talk about the "design process."

Missing details by gkelman · 2004-09-21 02:39 · Score: 5, Informative

but insight as to both how Apple's design process works, and how the scroll wheel itself works.

The article doesn't say how the scroll wheel works. It also doesn't mention anything about Apple's design process...

no duh! by nordicfrost · 2004-09-21 02:39 · Score: 5, Insightful

It is a touchpas, and Synaptics makes practically all the touchpads for Laptops, PDAs and mice. I don't think a lot of people thought that Apple made the touchpad itself. AFAIK, most people know that the Apple genius behind the iPod is quality bought components from companies that make them better than you (Synaptics, PortablePlayer, Sony) combined with Apple design and user friendliness.

Mouse wheel? by millwall · 2004-09-21 02:39 · Score: 2, Interesting

The company made a straightened-out version of it for Creative's Zen Touch

It amazes me why they haven't considered making a mouse with this straightened-out version. Scroll wheels for mice would benefit from some development. Mine keeps getting stuck and makes an annoying sound when scrolling

Re:Mouse wheel? by TonyZahn · 2004-09-21 02:48 · Score: 3, Informative

It amazes me why they haven't considered making a mouse with this straightened-out version.

You mean like this perhaps?

--
- sig? who is this sig of which you speak?

Why we all love iPod: by aardwolf204 · 2004-09-21 02:41 · Score: 4, Funny

Scroll Wheel, whatever, everyone knows people get iPods because they help you get mod points on Slashdot. Speaking of which, I got my iPod last month and haven't seen any yet. Maybe it takes a while for the ultra-hip-people-database to update. Anyway, I'm expecting those mod points any day now. Infact now that I've got an iPod, a copy of FireFox, AND a gmail account I'm almost too hip for slashdot. Yeah!

</sarcasm>

--
Im dreaming ofa big bndwdth, That can resist the /.crowd.May ur days b merry & bright & may al

Re:Why we all love iPod: by merdark · 2004-09-21 03:01 · Score: 4, Funny

I don't think the words hip and slashdot belong together.

Next week on Slashdot by azaris · 2004-09-21 02:42 · Score: 2, Funny

The power-switch on the iMac. How great it is and how you can find it.

Re:Next week on Slashdot by Tenebrious1 · 2004-09-21 03:03 · Score: 3, Funny

The power-switch on the iMac. How great it is and how you can find it.

With an indepth article regarding Apple's design process, and the exciting decision whether to make the power switch click or not.

--
-- If god wanted me to have a sig, he'd have given me a sense of humor.

Nipples - the original scroll wheel by mreed911 · 2004-09-21 02:42 · Score: 4, Funny

Rub them in circles and you'll get louder, softer, or a range somewhere in between...

also works best when you have a good grip and use your thumb!

Re:Like this is news by das_katz_socrates · 2004-09-21 02:42 · Score: 2, Insightful

Oh I agree totally, you shouldn't waste time and money trying to reinvent the wheel. I just find it stupid that somebody would consider this news that apple doesn't make part of the ipod.

This just in apple doesn't make hard drives!

--
This sig has no nutritional value...

How does it work? Well it must be... by ttlgDaveh · 2004-09-21 02:43 · Score: 3, Informative

...capacitive. It must be, or something fairly similar.

It explains why the human finger can operate the wheel, but drag a BIC biro round the wheel and nothing happens.

Re:Summary "borrowed" by avalys · 2004-09-21 02:43 · Score: 4, Interesting

Obviously you don't RTFA too often - I'd say about half of the stories on Slashdot use text directly lifted from the article in the summary.

I don't see what the problem with this is. Why should someone bother writing a summary for a story submission, when there's a perfectly good one available in the article itself?

I suppose it technically is plagiarism, but considering that the story submitter doesn't really stand to benefit from it I don't see how it matters. Have you ever heard yourself say "Damn, that was a kickass summary. That story submitter must be a freaking genius!"?

No? Didn't think so.

--
This space intentionally left blank.

Re:Summary "borrowed" by Short+Circuit · 2004-09-21 02:44 · Score: 2, Interesting

That's frequently the case...I wish more people would at least prepend a "Quoth the article."

--
tasks(723) drafts(105) languages(484) examples(29106)

Thank you for this story! by teamhasnoi · 2004-09-21 02:49 · Score: 5, Funny

I've been changing songs on my iPod by rotating the entire thing around my stationary finger. I sure was having doubts about Apple until I read this - I mean, that's a ton of work.

Thank you for revealing the secret!

I'm wondering if there isn't a secret behind other things too, like my TV's remote control. It works alright, but it's tough to push the little buttons on the TV with it sometimes.

Huh? by daveschroeder · 2004-09-21 02:50 · Score: 4, Insightful

I read a couple articles elsewhere proclaiming "APPLE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR TOUCHWHEEL!!!@" only to find that Apple is responsible for it.

They conceived it, they narrowly specified its behavior, they brought it to market. Just because a contractor was involved that means Apple's "not responsible" for its creation? Apple's responsible more than ever: the corralled the capabilities and efforts necessary to make it a reality.

Re:Feeling is believing by Maestro4k · 2004-09-21 02:52 · Score: 2, Informative

If you haven't yet tried the clickwheel on an iPod yet, do it. The article is handy if you're curious about implementation, but actually using the device to navigate a huge music library will literally make you grin.

Just a bit of testimony on this, up until last week the only encounters I'd had with iPods were store demo models and I couldn't figure the bloody wheel out. I do have to say it's not immediately intuitive, having the clickable buttons threw me off, I thought you used the back and forward ones to navigate the menu. Last week I got an iPod all of my own, a 4th gen one with the clickwheel. After a bit of frustration trying to figure out how to use the clickwheel I finally noticed it moved up and down as my finger moved along it. Bingo, easy to use after that.

Based on past experiences I'd not been a fan of the design, but after learning HOW it works and using it I have to say it's exceptionally well designed. It's easy to scroll through the lists and volume control is a breeze. I can even reach down and adjust the volume on it while driving and not have to look at it. I even have to look at the radio to make sure I get the right knob so that's saying something! (Note that I do not listen to it with headphones while driving in the car, I know that's dangers and illegal in most states.)

Oh, and speaking of iPods, please click the link in my signature ... :-)

Take him up on it or even use mine. Find a conga line to help you get your referrals. That's where my iPod came from, amazing to get a free nearly $300 device. :)

Re:evidence? by Bruce+McBruce · 2004-09-21 02:57 · Score: 3, Insightful

The scroll wheel's what's made iPod such a big hit; yeah, it's got the huge hard drive in such small space and is relatively expensive, however it doesn't require all this fiddly crap about pressing a button each time you want to move one space down a menu.

iPod's ridiculously simple and intuitive, and that's what's making it superior to other products such as the iRiver and the Sonys (haha, the Sony issue still makes me laugh).

Rio wheel by Anonymous Coward · 2004-09-21 02:59 · Score: 5, Interesting

That's not a clickwheel, it's a thumbwheel. Sony actually has a patent on clicking thumbwheels in Japan. But anyway, the problem with thumbwheels is the same as mouse wheels, you have to "pedal" the thing to go through long lists. That is, you have to remove your thumb from the wheel when you've scroll all the way one direction, then put your thumb back on at the other end and scroll again.

It works, but in very long lists it is noticeably inferior to a circular wheel you can stay on. Try scrolling through your list of all songs on your Rio. It doesn't work well, and this is proably why the Rio has you select the first letter of the song first and then go to the list (at least the Karma does).

Anyone Else Hate It? by ras_b · 2004-09-21 03:00 · Score: 4, Interesting

I love the ipod, but hate the scroll wheel. I use my ipod in my car frequently. sometimes scrolling through that thing is worse then driving and talking on a cell phone. i look down, i'm one 'click' above the artist/song that i want, look at road, look down, scroll ever so slightly, end up one notch past what i want, look at road, look down, scroll ever so slightly, one notch past again, and so on.

the new click wheel looks a lot nicer and would probably solve that problem, but i have the old one.

Re:Anyone Else Hate It? by rufo · 2004-09-21 03:44 · Score: 4, Insightful

On touchpads, I find the best way to do fine movements is to just pivot your thumb - not exactly moving it, but just roll your finger while maintaing contact with the pad. I've shown this technique to several people and they all agree that it does allow for a finer control - might want to try that. (It works somewhat better on laptop trackpads with the tip of the index finger but it does work with the iPod and your thumb).

--
My English teacher once told me that two positives don't make a negative. Two words for her: Yeah, right.

Re:evidence? by mccalli · 2004-09-21 03:01 · Score: 3, Interesting

I'd like to see some independent evidence that the iPod scroll wheel is actually superior...The main attraction to designers of touch sensitive devices like Synaptics produces seems to be that they are comparatively cheap, fairly intuitive to novice users, take up little space, and don't gum up.

I have an original 5Gig iPod. No touch sensitivity here, the scroll-wheel is mechanical. So the wheel was done for design reasonss, not purely for touch sensitivity.

Also, look at the very latest iPods - I allowed myself a wry smile here, as I'd always mainted that capacity disregarded, the original iPods are better designed than all but the newest ones because they don't depend on a row of buttons at the top. Apple clearly agreed, the buttons have disappeared and the pure scroll-wheel interface has returned.

So there's two strikes regarding the wheel being chosen for design, as opposed to cost features.

Cheers,
Ian

Re:evidence? by BasilBrush · 2004-09-21 03:05 · Score: 2, Insightful

Tear yourself away from the computer screen, walk out of the house/office/dorm/classroom, and go to an electronics store and try them out. It's not some subtle difference that needs independant adjudication against a set of metrics. Using an iPod scroll wheel for the first time will make you grin from ear to ear.

look for it to show up elsewhere by Chuck+Bucket · 2004-09-21 03:07 · Score: 2, Interesting

It's such a step forward in UI I expect to see it other places soon. the move to put the play/fwd/etc buttons on the wheel just adds to the functionality. I think it would work very well on cellphones, or pdas. it's a brilliant design.

CP#$B

--
free ipod and free gmail!

Next up... by ZipR · 2004-09-21 03:07 · Score: 2, Funny

The true story behind the the Ipod's headphone jack.

Re:excellent new UI feature by Echemus · 2004-09-21 03:21 · Score: 2, Interesting

I've often wondered why cell-phones don't have some type of similar device

So did someone else it would seem...

First gen iPod has two types of scrollwheel by Etrigan · 2004-09-21 03:22 · Score: 2, Informative

I'm pretty sure that what people class as "1st Generation iPod" actually covers two differently-designed scrollwheels, assuming by 1st Gen iPod we're referring here to the ones with the buttons placed round the scrollwheel.

It may well be that the very first 1st Gen iPods used an optical encoder. However, my late-1st Gen iPod (first of the 20Mb models) definitely has some form of touchpad, as the touch ring does not move.

A closer look at iPod design by line-bundle · 2004-09-21 03:31 · Score: 4, Informative

This links give a better idea of apple's ipod design.

Electronics Design Chain

Apple is like James Watt by Trurl's+Machine · 2004-09-21 03:42 · Score: 5, Insightful

They think Apple invented the GUI, 64 bit computing, Unix and portable digital music.

While I understand your need to troll, sir - I'd like to point you to two famous inventors: Thomas Newcomen and James Watt. The latter is much more famous, as he is often identified (incorrectly) as the inventor of steam engine. In fact, the first practical steam engine was built by Newcomen, but it was Watt who has improved it to the point of triggering industrial revolution. I think Apple is a bit like James Watt in history of personal computing. They didn't invent GUI, but they improved it to the point of triggering revolution in UI concepts. They didn't invent UNIX, but they improved it to the point that even Joe Sixpack can use. They didn't invent portable digital music, but they improved it to trigger a revolution in how we purchase and listen to our music.

Re:Apple is like James Watt by Trurl's+Machine · 2004-09-21 05:25 · Score: 4, Interesting

Apple's contrbition to the "invention" of the GUI is to copy and make prettier. Show me examples of things they've invented in the GUI and I'd be shocked if there isn't prior art.

1. Pull-down menu
2. Drag'n'drop
3. Direct windows manipulation (moving & resizing)

I hope you can find now a decent posttraumatic treatment?
Re:Apple is like James Watt by Anonymous Coward · 2004-09-21 07:37 · Score: 2, Interesting

Some more, some GUI, some not:

1. Icons which stand for objects rather than actions.
2. Partial window updates.
3. Desktop switching (how people forget).
4. Peer-to-peer networking for personal computers.
5. Integration of screen WYSIWYG with laser printers (yes, Apple beat Xerox to integration with PostScript).
6. 3.5" floppies.
7. Soft eject.
8. SCSI (Mac Plus was the first).
9. Built-in synthesizer.
10. Speech synthesis in software with no added hardware. ... etc...

And let us not forget all the NeXTSTEP innovations, as Apple is largely run by NeXT nowadays:

0. 3D "chiseled" UI. WAY before anyone else.
1. Read/write CDs
2. The first usably fast, all-OO development environment (c'mon, Smalltalk on the Alto was s l o w). And still one of the very best! Amazing.
3. Display PostScript (NeXT largely coded it; Adobe went along for the ride).
4. Multi-media mail (pictures, fonts, embedded file icons).
5. Multi-media news reading (Newsgrazer drove the USENET nuts for a while).
6. VLSI used in a PC or workstation.
7. Real-time scrolling and window dragging.
8. DSP used in a PC or workstation, plus extensive, sophisticated synthesizer and sound processing internally (I'm looking at you, Amiga wannabees).
9. SCSI2
10. Real-time 3D graphics.
11. Ooh, ooh, The World Wide Web... ...man this list is gonna go on for quite a while...

Long lists by slim · 2004-09-21 03:49 · Score: 5, Insightful

The scroll wheel is a clever big of engineering alright, and it's a good way to quickly navigate medium sized lists -- maybe three or four screenfuls of choices.

However, the iPod UI designers seemed to take this as an excuse to present you with enormous lists to scroll through with the wheel. My MP3 collection is modest by the standards of most iPod owners (I've not filled 20GB yet) -- but "browse by artist" gives me a list of 209. Scrolling to somewhere near the beginning is OK. Scrolling to somewhere near the end is OK (because you can scroll right to the end, then back). Scrolling to somewhere around the middle of the alphabet is a real pain.

All they needed to do was make it heirarchical --

"Artists -> (easy scroll) -> S -> (easy scroll) -> Smiths" ... would be quicker and easier than ...

"Artists -> (difficult scroll) -> Smiths

Re:Long lists by bmfs · 2004-09-21 06:35 · Score: 2, Insightful

No!!!!!!!

Then you can't simply browse the list of artists thinking "hmmm, who am i in the mood for...?". Unlike the soundblaster wireless music remote - come on guys!!!

But perhaps they could make it an optional feature for the ipod?

Not the mechanical one, though by hacksoncode · 2004-09-21 03:58 · Score: 2, Interesting

There's one factual error in the article. Synaptics didn't design or manufacture the mechanical scroll wheel on the gen1 iPods.

The Wheel by simpl3x · 2004-09-21 04:08 · Score: 3, Informative

Bang and Olufsen used the exact same wheel on one of their telephones several years before Apple. While Synaptics might make the technology, and would have had to re-engineer aspects to suit Apple, the design itself is pre-Apple in almost every way. This would be like saying that Apple invented the mouse--they just poularized it.

Re:How does it work? Well it must be... by BandwidthHog · 2004-09-21 04:11 · Score: 3, Funny

I'm still acutely without iPod, but a friend let me take hers to the gym recently. I now consider the coolest feature being able to use the scroll wheel through fabric. I'm sure it wouldn't work with denim, but through typical cotton gym shorts, I could just reach down and draw circles on my thigh. Totally surreal. Between that and some fleshtone headphones, I could further reduce unnecessary interaction with humanity by a factor of 10!

--

Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?

Re:Summary "borrowed" by That's+Unpossible! · 2004-09-21 04:14 · Score: 2

Technically it's not plagiarism, but quoting.

No, technically it's quoting without the quotation marks or attribution. Really, that's plagiarism.

The problem is on slashdot's summaries you can't tell when they are quoting the person that submitted the article, and when that person is quoting the article directly. This is ambiguous:

Grump sent in a story saying "Ask any iPod user what they like the most about their device, and most will probably mention the scrollwheel.

Is Grump saying what is in the quotes, or is the article "saying" what is in the quotes? Either way, the author was not attributed.

--
Ironically, the word ironically is often used incorrectly.

Wildly misleading by burgburgburg · 2004-09-21 04:21 · Score: 4, Insightful

Just because Apple didn't make the parts doesn't mean they just "purchased" the iPod.

Their design team came up with a great concept, found people who could put it together relatively inexpensively (and in an extraordinarily quick amount of time). They have managed this project superbly. Everybody else (both in the MP3 player market and in computer field in general) had access to all of the elements that Apple did. None of them came close to putting together anyting remotely as functional, stylish, easy (and they still haven't)

Re:Offended by AlfieJ · 2004-09-21 06:18 · Score: 2, Insightful

The quote specifically says my grandmother. The guy knows his grandmother, you don't, and for all you know she's technologically inept.

Relax.

it's not plagiarism by vena · 2004-09-21 06:31 · Score: 2, Insightful

the source is cited.

jeez.

Re:You Know It's Funny... by hunterx11 · 2004-09-21 07:06 · Score: 4, Interesting

I'd like to know how many Apple employees actually use the one-button mouse. After all, OS X takes advantage of a two-button scroll wheel mouse; Safari even opens links in a new tab if you middle-click. And using X11 programs with a one button mouse is just pathetic.

--
English is easier said than done.

In my world by PDubNYC · 2004-09-21 07:17 · Score: 2, Insightful

Jog dials are the ones on VCR's and the like that only turn up to a 1/4 turn in either direction to control the fast forward and rewind and then snap back into place.

Perhaps I am wrong, but in my world i never think of a jog wheel spinning all the way around, just back and forth. So I would have to say, "No, I do not remember when they called scroll wheels, jog wheels."

Get the facts straight! by sl0wp0is0n · 2004-09-21 09:38 · Score: 2, Informative

The optical sensor that Microsoft's (and others') optical mice use, is made by Agilent. Gary Gordon, who works at Agilent, invented the optical mouse. Microsoft just happens to license the technology.

--
My other dog is a Wienerschnitzel.

Slashdot Mirror

The Secret Behind the iPod Scroll Wheel

77 of 350 comments (clear)