Microsoft's "Pseudo-Transparent" and Fold-Up PCs

waderoush writes "At the CHI 2009 conference, which wrapped up yesterday in Boston, Microsoft researchers showed off two radical prototypes that push the boundaries of user interfaces. One was a 'pseudo-transparent' iPhone-like device called nanoTouch, which has a trackpad on the back rather than a traditional touch screen and gives visual feedback in the form of a simulated image of the user's finger (the effect is like looking straight through the device). The other was a folding dual-screen device called Codex that can switch automatically between landscape, portrait, collaborative, or competitive modes depending on its 'posture' or orientation. If Microsoft doesn't build such devices itself, 'somebody else will, so it's really important to understand what the issues are,' said researcher Ken Hinckley."

Comments

Gorilla Arm for the 21st Century

[AKAImBatman]

The nanoTouch is designed to be held by the edges in one hand while you operate the trackpad with the index finger of your other hand. The cleverest touch, so to speak, is that the device uses "pseudotransparency" to provide visual feedback--basically, the "cursor" is a life-size picture of a finger that tracks with the position of your actual finger, as if you were looking through the device with X-ray glasses.

I'm sure that will be hugely useful on a bus or train as I'm attempting to hold on to the railing with one hand, and use my device with the other. (I won't even mention usage in cars, because you're not supposed to be doing that. :-P)

Dear Microsoft, allow me to introduce you to the flaw in your scheme. Or should I say, two flaws?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opposable_thumbs#Importance

NEXT!

Codex consists of a pair of OQO mini-tablet PCs, each with a 3-inch-by-5-inch screen, mounted in a hinged device with built-in sensors that can detect how the hinges are oriented. The sensors are important because Hinckley's whole concept is that a dual-screen device should be able to switch configurations on the fly depending on what "posture" it's in.

So it's a Nintendo DS with accelerometers? It's not that the idea is completely without merit, but I'm not sure how much it really pushes the envelope. And the example they gave of two people working across the table "battleship style" would not be something the unit could configure "reflexively" with its sensors as it cannot distinguish "tablet PC on table" from "book on table" from "battleship" modes. The user would still need to tell it what to do.

If Microsoft doesn't build such devices itself, 'somebody else will'

Well, I can guarantee that Microsoft won't build the devices. Innovation has never been their strong suit. Their usual M.O. is to wait until someone else demonstrates a good concept, then throw a ton of resources at making a better version. Once all competition is eliminated, the software or device stagnates. (No new ideas are being generated.)

Hinckley's comments strike me more as Microsoft trying to be prepared for anything new Apple might throw at them. A possibly reaction of sorts to the number of times they've been caught with their pants down. Except the problem is that these ideas seem kind of random with no clear focus on where they might be going. In result, Microsoft is going to miss the boat again when a competitor (not necessarily Apple) introduces Yet Another(TM) great advancement in interface technology.

Personally, I see a lot more promise in technologies like Siftables. Emerging new interface schemes that will be a core part of the next generation of user interfaces. The final product will probably look a lot different from the units we see today (much like touch screens evolved until we got devices like iPhones and DSes), but the core concept will be what drives the next generation.

Meanwhile, Microsoft is spending their time contemplating their collective navels. "Oh hey, look! Touchscreens and accelerometers are becoming industry standard! Those must be the next generation of technology!" No, that's what we call *THIS* generation.

Re:Gorilla Arm for the 21st Century

[Anonymous Coward]

If this had an apple logo on it you'd be standing in line to buy one.

Re:Gorilla Arm for the 21st Century

[Ender_Stonebender]

I'm not sure what point you were trying to making linking the the Wikipedia article on thumbs. This technology allows for a PDA that can be used without a stylus and without your thumb getting in the way of the screen. I think this is great, as I often miss the button I intended to hit when using my thumb rather than the stylus on my smartphone. I am somewhat disinclined to believe that an index finger is dextrous enough to cover the whole screen of a typical modern PDA, though.

As for Codex, it's not a DS with an accelerometer. It's a DS with a position sensor in the hinge, and (apparently) the ability to turn both screens to the outside. Tablet PC on table - hinge at 105 degrees, screens to the inside; book on table - hinge at 180 degrees; battleship mode - hinge at 0 degrees, screens to the outside. I'm not sure how you think that even a simple program would have trouble distinguishing between these.

Re:Gorilla Arm for the 21st Century

[AKAImBatman]

I'm not sure what point you were trying to making linking the the Wikipedia article on thumbs.

Circle back to the previous paragraph where I mentioned the problems of using this device with one hand. Opposable thumbs allow humans to manipulate small keyboards and touchscreens efficiently with one hand while the device sits firmly in the palm. Which is an important aspect of small device operation.

The nanoTouch requires a less secure hold. One that would make one-handed operation difficult and may lead to the device getting dropped with alarming regularity.

Regular touchscreens can still provide the needed dexterity with two hands. Humans are quite adept at using the index finger in a precise manner and without nearly as much obstruction as the use of the thumb.

Re:Gorilla Arm for the 21st Century

[Random BedHead Ed]

Allow me to pose a question to you: If Apple is built entirely on hype rather than substance, then how did they manage to convert so many former Apple haters to their cause? Maybe, just maybe Apple has earned support from the market by making superior products.

I don't know. I was watching a TV ad this week, and a pretty technically savvy guy named Giampaolo said Macs are just about aesthetics, not computing power.

Re:Gorilla Arm for the 21st Century

[Ender_Stonebender]

You didn't make your point very clear in your first paragraph - it sounded like you were just saying "using this thing one-handed is going to be a pain in the ass and I think people will drop it all the time", which is something that happens frequently with PDAs in those environments today (mostly because people are holding onto railings/poles with their elbow and attempting to use the PDA with the stylus). Now that I know that your issue with it is that you think it will be harder to hold onto, thus making the dropping problem worse; I agree with you on that point. Actually, allowing (but not forcing) a pointer controlled with a small trackball like is used on Blackberries might solve the "hard to use one handed because thumbs are wide" issue just as well and without requiring a looser grip on the device.

Re:Gorilla Arm for the 21st Century

[Random BedHead Ed]

Hm ... I got an "Interesting" mod. While the karma is appreciated, I have somehow failed to be "Funny." Let me ruin the joke by explaining it: you really shouldn't get information about Macs from a painfully staged Mac comment in a Microsoft ad. Da-dum-dum! Thank you.

Re:Gorilla Arm for the 21st Century

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not very kind of you to assume he must be a mindless Apple fanboy because he offers constructive criticism.

It doesn't mean he's an Apple fanboy, it's that he's clearly an anti-Microsoft fanboy. The "Microsoft is never innovative and always copies somebody else" argument is a slashdot catechism which literally means he'd be happier if it came from another company (maybe not any other company, but another company). Apple is the only other company he explicitly called out by name as being innovative (he also mentioned Siftables, which I might humbly suggest are also difficult to operate one-handed on a subway in its current form). Then he creates a strawman assertion attributed to Microsoft and snarks at it. It's entirely laid out before us that he'd be happier with it being Apple than Microsoft. Which is fine, but there's no pretending it isn't happening.

Aside from that, it is a little ridiculous that Microsoft won't produce these because Microsoft isn't innovative seems to imply that these things...made by Microsoft...are innovative. The innovation already happened here, and thus the problem is bugfixes/polish, mass-producing, and marketing these things; or there is no innovation, in which case Microsoft shouldn't have a problem producing them. It's self-contradictory, or at least missing a step -- maybe it's really that Microsoft is innovative but is too risk-averse to give the go-ahead to innovative products.

The other criticisms are of varying quality -- one-handed subway use is fair criticism, the opposable thumbs one might be valid but I think it's worth investigating whether it just presupposes some things about UI design from experience with touch UI designed for thumbs, but the DS with accelerometers argument is a red herring because it's missing the obvious hinge sensors (which the article explicitly mentions).

That's not at all to say that I think these things are going to come to pass. I worry about whether it's really more intuitive to touch something from behind than to just pull out a pen (which is definitely less fun than direct-touch), especially with a simulated finger that may not behave quite like my own and very probably doesn't look much like my fingers. And as for the dual-screen thing, I just don't think that's the optimal direction to go in. I mean, the collaborative/competitive aspect could be cool, but I'd hope the direction we steer would allow two independent devices to operate kind of like that. I guess what I'm saying is I'd like it to work more like the Siftables the GP mentioned. See, I'm not completely down on him :).

Re:Gorilla Arm for the 21st Century

[David Gerard]

Microsoft launched Surface, its tabletop computer system, in the UK yesterday.

People will use the touchscreen computer "the same way they have interacted with everyday items their entire lives," said Philippa Snare of Microsoft UK, "with hands and with gestures." Instead of a keyboard or mouse, the techno-table uses a 30-inch touch-sensitive screen that also reacts to objects placed on it. Photos are automatically downloaded from cameras or phones. A spilt cup of coffee causes the "I'm a PC" guy to appear on the screen and start shouting at you for ruining his shirt, and your fourth Big Mac of the day causes him to keel over with a heart attack and the system to blue-screen. Users then make an appropriate gesture.

Unlike conventional computers which only one person can use at a time, Surface is a "multi-touch" system allowing several people can use the screen at the same time. Stealing someone's data is as simple as sliding your phone onto the screen. "We've made it completely compatible with popular gadgets such as Windows Mobile and Zune."

Surface will appear in communal areas such as shops, hotels and pubs first, allowing the public to get used to the new technology and see how it responds to pints being poured over it and kebabs in the coin slot.

Surface is part of Microsoft"s vision of the Digital Home. "Imagine your television, your refrigerator, your gas boiler running Windows Vista - I mean, Windows 7. What could possibly go wrong?"

Re:Gorilla Arm for the 21st Century

[Divebus]

NanoTouch? Can Microsoft at least come up with their OWN names for this thing? Why not iPhoneWannabe if they're going to be that blatant?

Slight Error In Summary

[elefantstn]

One was a 'pseudo-transparent' iPhone-like device called nanoTouch, which has a trackpad on the back rather than a traditional touch screen and gives visual feedback in the form of a simulated image of the user's finger (the effect is like looking straight through the device). The other was a folding dual-screen device called Codex that can switch automatically between landscape, portrait, collaborative, or competitive modes depending on its 'posture' or orientation.

The other was not called 'Codex,' but rather 'shuffleClassic.'

nanoTouch!

[Fast Thick Pants]

Sounds like an improvement over last years' disaster, the Microsoft PowerbookNewton.

(Actually looks pretty damn cool.)

noitavonnI

[Chardish]

!tfosorciM ,sknahT !evitiutni yletelpmoc eb ot gniog si ecived eht fo edisrednu eht gnihcuoT

Hmmmmmm

[reidiq]

This is Microsoft's version of a 'Reach around'

Re:Hmmmmmm

[causality]

This is Microsoft's version of a 'Reach around'

While doing what they so often do to their customers, that's the least they can do!

Link to vid

[religious freak]

Here's the vid so you don't have to search for it. (Wish folks would link to a vid in TFS).

Looks like Microsoft is actually starting to get serious about research, but I still don't know if this is all that compelling to be a breakthrough worth the effort of such a large corporation - they should be working on something bigger like Google or Apple, and coming out with major innovations every year or two (my opinion)

But, I suppose it's a start. Best of luck to them, I think innovation is great and every company should do more of it.

Re:Link to vid

[EvanED]

Looks like Microsoft is actually starting to get serious about research...

"Starting to"? MSR is one of the biggest single contributors to CS research out there, and has been for a long time.

(Note that MSR is almost entirely distinct from what I typically call MS Corporate, which would include things like product research. Sometimes there will be something that moves from MSR to Corporate, like the SLAM work moving into the Static Driver Verifier, but MSR is still quite autonomous.)

Re:Link to vid

[causality]

Here's the vid so you don't have to search for it. (Wish folks would link to a vid in TFS). Looks like Microsoft is actually starting to get serious about research, but I still don't know if this is all that compelling to be a breakthrough worth the effort of such a large corporation - they should be working on something bigger like Google or Apple, and coming out with major innovations every year or two (my opinion) But, I suppose it's a start. Best of luck to them, I think innovation is great and every company should do more of it.

I'm deliberately speaking in very general terms here. Incremental improvements are also a good thing, and in fact I would expect large behemoth corporations to try to "play it safe" by doing it this way instead of trying too many radically new things that might be a complete flop. It's really the smaller, more "nimble" corporations that seem to be more willing to go for the breakthroughs and radically new ideas, even though for them the success of such things can mean the difference between liquidity and bankruptcy.

The other comment by EvanED in this thread is spot on. I do not like Microsoft and I have plenty of solid reasons to criticise them. Having said that, their research division is one thing they got right. The kind of autonomy afforded them, combined with the immense cash reserves of a company like MS, has indeed produced some useful things. I only wish that the design and functionality of the operating system were similarly de-coupled from marketing, at least to a greater degree than the current arrangement.