Slashdot Mirror


Will Your Next Touchscreen Be Touchless?

forgot_my_username writes "The MIT Media Lab is developing a motion screen computer. It looks back at you. It measures light and gestures, and uses those to control the interface. 'Imagine every pixel on your LCD screen emitting light could also be receiving light,' said Ramesh Rakar, an Associate Professor at the Media Lab. They even mention the health benefits of not touching displays."

31 of 121 comments (clear)

  1. I prefer my mouse. by commodore64_love · · Score: 3, Funny

    I can use my computer without barely moving at all. It's the perfect tool for my lazy self. ;-)

    --
    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    1. Re:I prefer my mouse. by wampus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Just think, with this no-touch screen, sitting infuriatingly still becomes a requirement for your computer to continue doing what it was doing.

    2. Re:I prefer my mouse. by dingen · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The bandwith of 10 fingers is a lot higher than a mouse with just one pointer and a few buttons. You can potentially transmit a lot more instructions in a lot less time using your hands, if only we figured out a proper way to make it work.

      --
      Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
    3. Re:I prefer my mouse. by buruonbrails · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I prefer the keyboard. It's still the most effective input method and the fastest way to manage your computer and smartphone (provided you learned the hotkeys and commands).

    4. Re:I prefer my mouse. by e2d2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I wish websites would understand this. I can actually input text that is not my name or address. I don't want to click click click. I want to click, type or better yet tab then type for input. For instance, the idea of navigation is so ingrained than typing the word "pass" to get to the password features has been replaced with "search screen for place to click, now click, now click again, once more, now type".

    5. Re:I prefer my mouse. by sslayer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The bandwith of 10 fingers is a lot higher than a mouse with just one pointer and a few buttons. You can potentially transmit a lot more instructions in a lot less time using your hands, if only we figured out a proper way to make it work.

      Yes, but it already exists: it's called a keyboard.

    6. Re:I prefer my mouse. by commodore64_love · · Score: 2, Interesting

      >>>The bandwith of 10 fingers is a lot higher than a mouse

      You mean like a keyboard? Yeah they perfected that technology back in the 70s with TRS-80s (#1 computer at the time), Apple IIs, and Atari 400/800s which replaced previous toggle-switched computers with a 10-finger interface where you could type words directly on a CRT! (or TV). It was a great advancement in personal computers.

      The problem with that 10-finger interface was the high learning curve which made people have to memorize all kinds of esoteric commands and key strokes, or constantly refer to a manual (Alt E == create text box in Word for DOS). The simplicity of the mouse was found to be better.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    7. Re:I prefer my mouse. by eln · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Sure, except many websites don't handle tabs in a sane manner. Some end up jumping to different input fields seemingly at random, some move from an input field to the little "What's this?" link next to that input field, some move to some completely unrelated link, or to the submit button even though you're only halfway through the form, or any number of zany things. If websites were designed properly, keyboard shortcuts like tab would work as intended. Too bad so few websites are designed with anyone but an IE 8 user (with Flash player and unlimited bandwidth) clicking a mouse in mind.

    8. Re:I prefer my mouse. by bynary · · Score: 2, Insightful

      ...giving you 'hover' semantics on top of touch and pressure.

      How much more energy does it take to keep something hovering over a surface as compared to landing said something on the surface? I would imagine that fatigue (of the fingers, hands, forearms, and etc.) would be a much bigger problem should non-touch, gesture based navigation become widespread. Right now it's our wrists, imagine waving your arms in the air for 6 to 8 hours a day.

      --
      http://www.bynarystudio.com
    9. Re:I prefer my mouse. by dingen · · Score: 2, Informative

      Obviously making your screen the touch surface will never work, for exactly the reason you give. But that doesn't mean that the touch technology itself couldn't work for a desktop computer.

      Look at this for example.

      --
      Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
  2. Calibration by Trip6 · · Score: 5, Funny

    I hope there's a sensitivity calibration - I wouldn't want me shaking my fist at an outrageous story inadvertently reformatting my hard drive.

    --
    I hate being bipolar; it's awesome!
    1. Re:Calibration by netsavior · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "shaking your fist at an outrageous story" should be done UNDER the desk.

  3. Ooh... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Forget this "touchless touchscreen" nonsense. Combine this with the various clever stuff being done in lenseless digital imaging, and we will finally achieve the dream... A Telescreen in every house.

    Look for it in the next dubiously compatible revision of HDMI: "Secure audience reporting protocol" an HDMI spec extension allowing your TV to report the number and approximate demographics of viewers to your Blu-ray device or cable STB. Pay-per view programs can now control the number of viewers, V-chip 2 can now detect child-size viewers and automatically halt display of R-rated content(sorry midgets, its for the good of the children)! Neilson will be completely obsolete!

    What could possibly go wrong?

    1. Re:Ooh... by VGPowerlord · · Score: 2, Informative

      1984's vidscreens were like that if memory serves.

      *whoosh*

      --
      GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
    2. Re:Ooh... by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Somebody else suggested advertising that watches its watchers. I said kill it with fire.

      I should have the same reaction to this idea, and I do, but I'm not even going to say it. Because this is inevitable. This isn't funny at all. It'll happen, as surely as the RIAA will sue somebody. It will be delayed while Apple behaves as Apple usually does and radically overvalues their own patent, to the point that Taiwanese and Korean manufacturers refuse to license it, but it will still happen. If Samsung pays up and starts manufacturing these, I foresee a MPAA stampede to exploit it.

      Shit, they'll try to use it to plug the analog hole! Detected something that looks like a camera in front of the screen? Refuse to play back. After that it'll take a camouflaged camera with a military-style anti-reflective treated lens on it to take a video of a movie.

      And it's inevitable.

  4. Health Benefits by Yvan256 · · Score: 5, Funny

    They even mention the health benefits of not touching displays.

    Especially for my co-workers. The last one who touched my display got stabbed in the hand by a spork.

  5. It looks back at you? by Yvan256 · · Score: 4, Funny

    The MIT media lab. is developing a motion screen computer. It looks back at you.

    What are you doing, Dave?

  6. Sounds familiar... by Angst+Badger · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How many fingers do you see, Winston?

    --
    Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
  7. Obligitory H2G2 by Conspiracy_Of_Doves · · Score: 5, Funny

    A loud clatter of gunk music flooded through the Heart of Gold cabin as Zaphod searched the sub-etha radio wavebands for news of himself. The machine was rather difficult to operate. For years radios had been operated by means of pressing buttons and turning dials; then as the technology became more sophisticated the controls were made touch-sensitive — you merely had to brush the panels with your fingers; now all you had to do was wave your hand in the general direction of the components and hope. It saved a lot of muscular expenditure of course, but meant that you had to sit infuriatingly still if you wanted to keep listening to the same programme.

    ....

    Another voice broke in, presumably Halfrunt. He said: "Vell, Zaphod's jist zis guy you know?" but got no further because an electric pencil flew across the cabin and through the radio's on/off sensitive airspace. Zaphod turned and glared at Trillian — she had thrown the pencil.

  8. This could be bad for pron by forgot_my_username · · Score: 2, Funny

    Hypothetically, if I knew someone who may have at one point or another visited a site with risque adult material....
    well, I see potential interface issues
    ...
    right, I am off to register touchlessporntube.com

    1. Re:This could be bad for pron by disi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Right, I remember this one scene in the movie Minority Report where they move pictures along on a big glass-screen. Try to do this kind of stuff on a touchscreen...

  9. This is the first step toward "eye focus" ads by Culture20 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Get the public used to the idea of computer vision input for everyday tasks, and suddenly adware starts including drivers for the cameras (just in case you forgot to install the drivers yourself).
    "People seem to keep looking at the upper right hand corner of the ad window. Move most of the content there, and the subliminal content to the bottom. Horizontal mirror image for Mac OS X and Ubuntu 10.4"

  10. Re:what ever happended to "vocie recognition"? by netsavior · · Score: 2, Informative

    have you ever worked in a cubicle next to a sales person? When they "rightsized" our department they relocated us to in-between a call-center and a sales floor. It was pure hell people yammering on at the telephone alllll day. Now add to that everyone also yelling shit at their computers, and see how much productivity you gain.

    If it won't work for business, it will never catch on.

    Now how about voice control for home? Will it work while I watch a movie? because I never game without a movie or at least loud music playing in the same room...


    If it won't work for games, it will never catch on.

    The holy grail for user interface MUST be silent or close to it, in order to catch on fully. This is why people keep trying stupid alternatives, because the reality is that the "obvious" ones are actually just as bad as the "silly" ones.

  11. Re:this by NitroWolf · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I wouldn't mind it being a camera, just for the simple fact that then I could video conference and have it look like I'm actually looking at the person, instead of the screen BELOW (or above) the camera.

  12. Just wait... by thijsh · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I've seen a concept of this once where the screen was what they called a 'surface camera' I think. The idea was that you can use it as webcam, input device but also as a scanner... you just put a piece of paper against your screen and you have an instant copy you can edit. And i can imagine they could also extend this with an infrared pen or something like that to create a touchscreen that can also be used as a high-resolution drawing tablet. Just wait until Wacom builds a screen with tech like this and people will go crazy for it.

  13. Re:Why do researchers by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Claiming buttons are good does not publish any papers; everyone knows this. If you claim some kind of button substitute is good, you can publish two papers. One making the claim and then another comparing it with buttons in a user study and showing that, actually, buttons are better. If you're really clever, you can then publish a third paper on the methodology for evaluating button substitutes, and a fourth paper on potential problems with future button replacements. Guess which route academics prefer.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  14. Software solution by gmuslera · · Score: 2, Interesting

    A webcam (or maybe 2 for 3d gesture recognition) is the only hardware device needed, no special hardware that senses with not very fine resolution where are your fingers and usually not with how much intensity are pressing. Think in Microsoft Surface, or better yet, in Sixth Sense technology. Moving the game to mostly software land gives a good potential for features, at least if cpu is enough.

  15. Re:Sanitary... by Dog-Cow · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It would be better to invent people who are not total idiots and assholes regarding proper hygiene. Day to day, there are no diseases you can pick up through touch that your immune system cannot handle with ease. Unless, of course, you are a total idiot that never exercises his immune system.

  16. I feel a sneeze coming on... by tomzyk · · Score: 2, Funny

    Just think, with this no-touch screen, sitting infuriatingly still becomes a requirement for your computer to continue doing what it was doing.

    Aahhh aaahh AHHH ACHOOO!

    You have just motioned that you want to reformat your D partition. Is this correct?

    "What?! No I didn't!!"

    You nose appears to be pointing towards the YES button and your emphatic gestures indicate the CLICK action. Formatting now.....

    --
    Karma: NaN
  17. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion