HP responds to Jobs about touchscreen PCs
Steve Jobs has never been averse to exaggeration or verbal misdirection when discussing features publicly. However, Hewlett-Packard's Ken Bosley has taken issue with Jobs' recent comments on touchscreen PCs.During the recent Back to the Mac press event, Steve had this to say: "...Touch surfaces don't want to be vertical. It gives great demo but after a short period of time, you start to fatigue and after an extended period of time, your arm wants to fall off. It doesn't work; it's ergonomically terrible."
Bosley responded in an interview with DVICE. He admits that a touch interface probably wouldn't be optimal if it were the only input mechanism for a vertical screen. However, he emphasizes that each of the TouchSmart machines offers users multiple inputs, including keyboard, mouse, and touch. Users are free to use whichever they like.
Bosley also notes that the orientation of the screens on its machines can be adjusted for use with touch. For example, its touch-enabled laptops are convertibles with screens that flip around and lay flat, essentially turning it into a tablet. Similarly, the desktop screens can be made more horizontal. Despite this, HP's TouchSmarts are generally not considered to be huge sellers, especially the laptops.
Bosley's arguments do lend credence to the idea of a touch-enabled iMac with an adjustable screen (like the one seen in a recent Apple patent). Such an arrangement would provide the horizontal surface that lends itself to touch. Would you want such a convertible desktop machine? Have your say in the comments.
![TUAW [Cafepress]](https://web.archive.org/web/20101106052522im_/http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Patrick M. Hausen said 11:06AM on 11-03-2010
Jesus ... history repeating itself again.
http://ftp.sunet.se/jargon/html/G/gorilla-arm.html
Kind regards,
Patrick
Reply
rek said 11:11AM on 11-03-2010
I don't know about y'all, but I sit more than arm-length away from my displays. I use 2 x 20" cinema displays, and if I sat closer I wouldn't be able to see everything without turning my head! I suspect you 27"-30" folks are in the same boat. So in my case, a touchscreen just wouldn't make any sense. YMMV.
Reply
drange said 11:19AM on 11-03-2010
"Would you want such a convertible desktop machine? Have your say in the comments."
No, I wouldn't want a convertible desktop, I simply don't see the point. How would I use it in touch mode while it is flat, standing up? Doesn't make sense... Sitting down while it is flat doesn't work either. Sitting down while it is vertical, well I think it's already been established that doesn't work for longer periods.
I really love touch input, but it's just not technology for desktops.
Reply
mabhatter said 12:35PM on 11-03-2010
These HP touch "desktops" would be really good for Kiosk work.
The whole thing comes down to SOFTWARE. Trying to mix "mouse" GUI with "finger" GUI just doesn't work. What you end up with are products like HPs touch screen convertible laptops. The screen and gui elements are too small to use your fingers, so you have to use a pen (at that point it might as well be a mouse) or the available apps for touch mode are so limited you end up using it as a "laptop" most of the time, not a "touchscreen".
The HP touch screen laptops have been cheaper than iPads for a while, without the right software, it's just a parlour trick.
This is where the Microsoft hemogeny is coming apart. they expect HP to step up and pay to develop and bundle apps to make "their" touch screen compelling, but why would HP get into consumer software when the same company will turn around and sell it to other OEMs, or Microsoft will buy them out and give it away for free? Windows users don't want OEM custom software, they want Windows, exactly the same, all the time... trying to be distinctive is just a black eye in a crowded market. (that's also why desktop linux failed so comletely, OEMs don't have expertise other than making disk images and copying drives... OEMs don't have "software" departments anymore)
Liquidmark said 12:52PM on 11-03-2010
"How would I use it in touch mode while it is flat?"
How about if it is laying flat on your desk and you touch it that way. Seems to have worked with keyboards and typewriters for about a hundred years or so...
jennyp said 1:27PM on 11-03-2010
"Sitting down while it is flat doesn't work either"
Why not? This is how I use a pen and paper...
Tim Owens said 11:31AM on 11-03-2010
"For example, its touch-enabled laptops are convertibles with screens that flip around and lay flat, essentially turning it into a tablet."
This statement makes me think HP has no clue what they're doing and won't be bringing any iPad competition anytime soon. This idea that a convertible tablet is a hot item is a stale idea about 5 years past its prime.
Reply
travisgamedev said 11:35AM on 11-03-2010
When Steve speaks, everyone listens. Even his enemies. They feel they have to fight everything he says. It's funny. A full computer with a touch screen would have to do it right for it to work. It would have to turn into an iPad when disconnected and a Mac when connected. But then what would you connect your iPad to? One day, Apple will figure it out and let the rest of us know how it can work.
Reply
Marc said 11:45AM on 11-03-2010
Having multiple inputs is the key. You don't have to rely on a single method all the time.
When you want to point at something on a screen, sometimes your hand is on the mouse and you click it. But sometimes it feels more natural to just touch the screen.
10.7's Mission Control would be a good example. When you see the window you want, just reach up and touch it.
And if you feel like your arm is going to fall off, then get some exercise for Pete's sake. Sheesh. :)
Reply
treelo said 11:54AM on 11-03-2010
Yeah, I'm gonna go with thirty years of ergonomic research over "go do some curls if it hurts, ya wuss".
The touch interface is here, just not in the form that is compatible with the cursor-based desktop OSes out there.
Jimbo von Winskinheimer said 11:59AM on 11-03-2010
I fully agree, Marc. I'd guess that over 90% of the time you'd be using mouse and keyboard for input, but there might be time that you'd want to do things with touch. I think it would especially be useful when doing collaborative work, with 2 or 3 people at the monitor trying to do some organizational work, you wouldn't fight over the mouse to reach over and move an object.
Sean said 12:44PM on 11-03-2010
The problem with having all of those forms of input is that the interface has to become redundant and inefficient in order to work properly. A button sized for a finger appears gargantuan when you point a cursor at it.
Marc said 1:34PM on 11-03-2010
There already are redundancies for keyboard and mouse.
Most applications let you use either to do the same thing. But some tasks are easier to do with one or the other. Same goes for touch screens.
Andy W. said 12:42PM on 11-03-2010
Touchscreen desktops are an answer in search of a question. I can't think of anything that I'd do much better with a finger than with a mouse or trackpad -- it's certainly not worth stopping what I'm doing, moving the keyboard and mouse out of the way, sliding the display down, poking at it, then moving it back.
They're cool for kiosks, but I don't see the need for other desktop tasks. I cannot think of a single task I perform on my desktop Mac that would be better with a touchscreen.
Reply
Shunnabunich said 11:51AM on 11-03-2010
Kinda funny, since Bosley didn't refute a thing Jobs said. He merely admitted that, well, yeah, you're going to have to go back to the bog-standard keyboard and mouse anyway if you want to get anything done without exhausting your arm. Maybe he's trying to indirectly bash the iPad for...not using a mouse? HAHA!
Reply
Josh said 11:53AM on 11-03-2010
I think a Touchsmart computer would be great if you used it right. It's not good for daily use, really, we just don't have the need nor the arm/neck strength to pull off. However, the one place I think it would be perfect (other than at kiosks, obviously) is for a DJ. Instead of lugging around a bunch of equipment, you bring your monitor, mic, and any necessary cables (power cable, line in, line out should be all you need). you lay the screen at a 15-ish degree angle and go to work. The DJ wouldn't be constantly looking down at it, so it could be close to flat, it'd be a big enough screen, and has the power to run any program and store any file they need.
And yes, I am aware I will likely get chewed by the purists here for suggesting anything other than ol' fashioned turntables. Oh well.
Reply
mack said 12:28PM on 11-03-2010
So tell me why you need a computer that switches between mouse and multi-touch to do this DJ thing, rather than just using a hub with a WiFi or Bluetooth interface and an iPad app that you can use to control it from anywhere in the room?
mack said 1:23PM on 11-03-2010
A bit like this... http://bit.ly/a1UG9C
no name said 12:02PM on 11-03-2010
Yes... a client of mine has one of these touch screen HP computers. It's bloody AWFUL.
Reply
Kelmon said 12:09PM on 11-03-2010
No, I am not interested in a touchscreen desktop computer. In this respect I am quite in agreement with Steve that I just don't think the concept works. However, I do think that this generally has to do with the role that the computer is expected to fill. As a means of interacting with a kiosk device, or perhaps a computer acting as a media hub, perhaps the concept works. But for myself I don't see the benefits for writing documents and therefore I would never pay extra to have a touch interface.
Reply