Articles, Featured Articles

Function is indeed paramount to anything with regards to a User Interface.  If a user cannot make something work the way they want, they will find something else that works the way they want it to.  A decade ago, that may not have been true, but as more users become increasingly tech saavy, they are less and less willing to put up with the headaches that programs can cause for them.  This esepcially holds true if the user is hard pressed to see the reasoning behind limitations of an interface.

The concept continues along the path of a One Dimensional orientation of windows, but does an admirable job of trying to make it work easily for the user.  The multitouch pad has raised edges (a clever affordance) that allows the user to press these areas to access global operations (similar to that of the Start Button on a Windows OS) and an area that allows the user to access applications specific settings (such as opening a webpage or choosing a bookmark from within a browser).

The concept video goes on to detail how the OS would change for the multitouch to allow it to reach its full potential.  Unfortunately, this is where the input method falls flat for me.  Multitouch, for the mainstream, originated on the mobile cell platform, and became successful because it was used smartly rigiht off the bat courtesy of the iPhone.  The reasoning behind this, is that there really is no alternative on the mobile platform besides clicking or using a scroll wheel (ala blackberry, although thats now optical wheel if we are going to get technical).  Multitouch makes perfect sense on the mobile platform because there is no other input method that allows the user to navigate a UI as quickly or as easily as your own hands.  Since none of the other potential input methods used in cell phones have any advantage in terms of accuracy, multitouch’s lack of accuracy is no longer an issue.  However, when one moves to a less mobile situation, such as a desktop computer, the disadvantages of the multitouch become much more apparent, and the oft championed advantages tend to be somewhat gimmicky.

While movies and Apple may have convinced us that the way of the future is through touch technology, I’m not sold on it yet.  The ability to have all 10 fingers performing multiple tasks at one time, as 10/GUI claims for an advantage of multitouch,  is akin to forcing each user to learn to play the piano if they are to get the most out of their technology.  While there are certainly many people who would be able to adapt quite easily to multiple tasks being performed at once with both hands, there are most definetly a large number which would be stuck doing things one handed (think of how many people you know who couldn’t play a tune to save their life on piano).  The mouse, while relegated to one hand, leaves the other free to use the keyboard, something which looks like it would be uncomfortable in the 10/GUI system.  Regardless of that, the mouse offers up one undeniable advantage over the multitouch approach, and that is accuracy and versatility.

If you think of some of the applications you use on a daily basis, whether it be for fun or for work, or whatever the case may be, you will likely encounter scenarios where you would not want to part ways with your mouse.  Using Solidworks (or any 3d modelling application really) would be an exercise in frustration, not to mention the fact that I would be inclined to never use Photoshop again (not all of us are this good).

The problem with new technology is that everyone is in a rush to exclaim it as the next big thing and the solution to all the current problems, but technology rarely works like that.  Computers were supposed to make our lives less taxing, and help us accomplish work quicker so we would have more leisure time.  Instead, they allowed us to accomplish work quicker, and now we are expected to move at the speed of light, be connected 24/7, and accomplish more than ever.  I’m not trying to say that multitouch isn’t without it’s merits, and that concepts such as 10/GUI are useless, but rather that more thought needs to be taken to determining the legitmate problems in the first place.  If we are trying to fix problems that don’t exist, we are simply spinning our wheels.  If we are trying to crowbar in a technology into every product we manufacture, it is not going to work everytime.  However, if we do sit down, and think through what technology would best solve the well researched problems that have been found, then maybe we can begin to advance efficiently and quickly, instead of this trial and error system manufacturers seem so attatched to currently.