A touchscreen by itself does not a better device make

I spent a wee bit of time using the WiBrain UMPC today, mostly to set it up for daily use. My eyes are slowly getting used to the 4.8-inch SVGA display and I can navigate quite quickly using the trackpad and mouse buttons. As I used the touchscreen, I noticed that my palm was brushing up against the trackpad since I'm right-handed and the pad is at the bottom right front face of the device. Using some settings in the Synaptics software, I've minimized the ill-effect somewhat, but it's still an annoyance, so I stopped using the touchscreen for a while. Smoother sailing.

The lack of using the touchscreen combined with some other upcoming touchscreen devices and jkk's awesome Eee PC touchscreen hack got me thinking about the effective use of a touchscreen on a mobile device. I'm starting to scratch my head now in wonder. Not about touchscreens; in principle, I think they're very useful. After all my Samsung Q1P is used daily and it has a touchscreen. I've never once used a mouse with it, so clearly I like the touchscreen. But what about some of these other devices like the WiBrain, the Belinea and even jkk's Eee PC? I'm not seeing the compelling reason to have touch on these devices.

Maybe I'm a bit of a purist, but here's how I see it. Of course I welcome your feedback and thoughts too; there's no right answer here.

• I've already stopped using the touchscreen on the WiBrain for three reasons. One: the trackpad is causing cursor float as I use the touchscreen with my right hand and the stylus. Two: the device is clearly designed for two-handed use and it works better with the trackpad and mouse button combination. Three: since I can't ink on the device, the touchscreen is only good for an inferior navigation method. Truth be told: I think the touchscreen is unnecessary in this device since it's limited in function and there are better usability options.

• The Belinea is essentially a Nanobook sub-notebook: it adds touch to the 7-inch screen and the full keyboard. But it's not a convertible screen, so it's like having a touchscreen on a standard notebook. How long do you think it will be comfortable to navigate or select menu items on a notebook screen that's perpendicular to your work surface? If you're holding the notebook, it's probably even less comfortable. Again, a convertible (or better yet a slate) would benefit from the touchscreen, but a sub- or standard-sized notebook?

Again, maybe it's just me and my preference for true tablet devices. There's quite a bit of hype over touch right now and while I embrace touch-computing on a daily basis, adding a touchscreen to a device doesn't mean the device is made better. The right applications, operating system and ergonomics come into play here for continued touchscreen use and acceptance.

For sake of argument, let's pretend I had a Belinea in my hands. I'd likely hold it by placing my hands on both sides of the base, where the keyboard is. Sure I could remove one hand and tap on various controls to nav around say in Internet Explorer. It's great for hopping from link to link. What if I needed to type a URL however? Remember, this is XP Pro so there's no inking on that touchscreen. I'd have to put the device down and tap out the URL address, click Enter and then I could go back to holding the device to "touch-surf". Doesn't sound effective to me. I'm not trying to trash any of the above mentioned devices here, I'm simply questioning what the value of the touchscreen is. I don't think it's much from a user perspective; perhaps the device manufacturers would be better off by not including it and keeping the price more in check.

Again, I fully believe in touch-computing, but it's not just the touchscreen alone that adds the value. The right combo of other attributes is a must to justify the inclusion of a touchscreen. Thoughts?

Comments

[jhall]

I know what you are talking about. I bought a Fujitsu p1120 Touch screen subnotebook. I wanted to use it like a tablet pc. I found out that I should of bought a real tablet. The reason I went with the p1120 is because of the price. I think the design for a touch screen sub notebook would be great if the screen folded onto the back of the device or rotated like a convertible. I think you are seeing low cost devices with touch screen that are not usable as a tablet because of the cost factor. Look at notebooks and look at convertible tablets. There is a premium for the tablet. I am looking for a 2nd or 3rd generation tablet or convertible. I think the only way to get a affordable tablet is used. Look at the Toshiba m200, it is going for $500.00 now. I bet when it was new it went for $1800.00 Living on thee cutting edge is expensive. Just look at at the early iPhone adopters. There will always be a better device. I would like to buy the latest and greatest, but it takes a big pocket book.

[bluespapa]

I was thinking of that Fujitsu as I was reading Kevin's comments. We can recognize when a design is elegant vs. when a feature is put in because a committee said to put it in. Some of these devices are designed by people who aren't even considering using them, and some are designed by people who want and are excited by what they are constructing.

I read frequently people who refer to their Q1, and I've read people who checked out the replacement Samsung Ultra UMPC, but I've yet to read someone who really loves the split keyboard.

Nevertheless, I am excited by the arrival of new approaches, new technologies, and new attempts to assemble them for market, so long as a stinker product doesn't make people think there's no market in portable devices.

[Woadan]

Kevin, I had wondered how the touch-pad being off-center might impact your usage. Now I know! :-b

I have to agree, that the simple addition of a touch screen is not enough, in and of itself, to make a compelling argument for its existence. At the least, the manufacturer could have installed Tablet Edition.

Woadan

[Lugus von Thierfeld]

My two cents - I use an active digitizer tablet convertible daily and appart from inking notes in OneNote which I do a lot, controling it with a pen is much less comfortable than with a touchpad and a keyboard. We shouldnt forget that the whole idea of Windows as an OS is based on keyborad and a two button mouse. I cant imagine for example not having a touch screen on my PalmOS Treo where the OS was originaly made to work only with a touchscreen (the first Palm PDAs till the Tungsten W) and a keyboard was added only later as an input alternative. I personaly dont see a use of a touchscreen on larger form devices that are not convertible and I completely agree with Kevin on this. I think that touchscreens are useful on small portables such as phones and PDAs whose form factor doesnt allow a comfortable keyboard. The UMPCs as a relatively new form factor stand somewhere in the middle. I am still not convinced about the use of a UMPC. No matter how hard I try to think, a UMPC doesnt fit anywhere in the Tablet+PDAphone combination.

[Steve Paine]

"it's not just the touchscreen alone that adds the value"

What value are you looking for? If its inking capability then obviously a touchscreen inst going to help in most cases but what about the other scenarios? In-car use for example. I also use touchscreen with two hands for some fast mouse action (mostly on notebook style devices with xp at 800*480 on 7") My kid loves drawing. I use it for annotating. Drawing over live presentations?

Finally, a touchscreen brings the important 'choice' element.

What advantage does *not* having a touchscreen bring?

[James Kendrick]

Steve, it has to be easy to use, in fact it can't get in the way of any other features of the computer. I agree with Kevin, there needs to be something in addition to the touch screen to make it compelling. Like the Origami Experience on UMPCs for example. I have used notebooks configured with touch screens and find I am never using it. You need the additional functionality to use it in my experience.

[Steve Paine]

How can a touchscreen get in the way of other features? That doesn't make sense.

Having a choice is the key here (as you always say James!!) and there are, as I've already pointed out, some good reasons for having a touchscreen. You may only use a touchscreen for inking, James, but there are other scenarios out there.

Don't knock the touchscreen fellas. We need more, not fewer input methods and usage scenarios.

Cheers!
Steve.

[Woadan]

Steve,

I can see a slate (or in a pinch a convertible in slate mode) being used for the activities you mention. In fact, that's where they shine.

How easy is it to draw on a regular notebook which has a touchscreen installed? The bigger the notebook, the more awkward it becomes.

It's nice to talk about having choice. But if choice doesn't include convenience or ease-of-use, choice becomes a moot point.

Since choice also bumps up the price of the unit (we know that price sensitivity is one of the driving issues driving people from adopting the smaller devices), exactly what are you trying to promote?

Woadan

[Steve Paine]

I deal fairly exclusively with 7" screen devices so I'm not really thinkin about laptops but of all the UMPCs i've had, in every form factor, i've always used the touchscreens.

Take the Everun. Its got a good mouse pointer and a keyboard and in two-handed mode you rairely use the keyboard but as soon as you put it on your dashboard, the useage model changes.

A lot of people wanted touch on the OQO o2 too. They left it off and now there's no way to use the device without either opening the keyboard or getting an active digitiser pen. No ability to use on-screen keyboards, navigations software or touch-optimised web pages. (e.g. Slimserver GUI.)

The most suprising one for me was the HTC Shift. The touchscreen on that is really nice and one can use it far faster than a mouse or the mousepad. You'll see me using it a lot in this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PyF7n5OBrDo

I also used the SH6 a few months back in a press conference and the touchscreen was perfect for quickly moving dialog boxes around and as the shutter release button on my Canon software. I wasn't using any special 'touch' software at all. I just found it a nicer option.

I agree that in bigger notebooks with heavy screens it might get too wobbly to be useful but there are a lot of scenarios already being used and a lot of scenarios to discover. Did you know, for example, that the screen on the Nanobook can fold flat. You could use it for annotating with no problem.

And finally, think about the scenarios that haven't even been discovered yet. Just look at how many people have watched the JKKMobile video of the touchscreen on the EEE PC. 81,000 views in 3 days. Wow! That must indicate some interest in it right?

As for the price...ASUS have proved that its not the components are in a UMPC that determine the price, its the quantities you sell. Touchscreen Belinea = Amtek T770 but its less than half the price!

Sorry guys... you haven't convinced me!

Steve

[GoodThings2Life]

Steve,

Juse as we haven't convinced you, you haven't convinced me that having touch is useful. Please allow me to be very specific.

Where I work we use Dell Latitude D620/D630 and D820/D830 model laptops. They do not have touch, nor are they convertible. If I took one of those and added touch to the display, they would be very cumbersome to the user. In order to use them, the user must put a lot of stress on the display and its hinge, and they must either fold the display down to the desk (making it awkward to see) in order to use it, or hover over it with one hand supporting the screen and the other touching it. In the process, they would be elbowing the keyboard and touchpad or awkwardly avoiding it.

This is not useful, and I'm pretty sure people would think I were insane for all my pro-touch support. On the other hand, having a genuine TabletPC is fantastic, because of the inking functionality. Touch is a nice bonus on newer tablets, but it's not the big selling point. The point of using inking and touch is to avoid the keyboard and mouse, and that's why Tablet PC's are so successful.

Regards,
Aaron

[Kevin C. Tofel]

Interesting discussion. Steve, as I said in the thought post, there's no right or wrong answer, but I have point out the way your commentary is coming across (at least to me). I'm not sure if you mean it this way, but essentially, I'm hearing you say that any device with a touchscreen is better than one without. I could be misinterpreting your thought process here and if so, I apologize.

Assuming I'm not, that line of reasoning would be valid if I said the opposite, i.e.: devices don't benefit from touchscreens. Clearly, as a Samsung Q1P user and based on my post, that's not how I feel, nor what I've said above.

What I'm saying is that a touchscreen by itself doesn't add enough value to justify having it in a device. Yes, some devices clearly benefit. Let's use your own example of in-car use. I have a 7-inch touchscreen in my car for the GPS and other controls and yes, it's effective. Why? Because it's the easiest (and only) input method for that scenario. Additionally, the UI is optimized for the least amount of input and fewest touches. Definitely, the touchscreen adds tremendous value there.

On some of the other devices I mentioned, you're not going to get nearly the same value. That's my premise here: adding a touchscreen to a device doesn't necessarily make it better in and of itself. In some cases it's a novelty or cool hack... nothing more. Choice is indeed good, but not every device can offer every possible choice; nor should it.

[Woadan]

Steve,

If you routinely would use a notebook or convertible in your car, you are actually making a case for a slate-only device. Because a notebook is awkward and because a slate is heavier.

I wonder what purpose JKK was adding a touchscreen to his Eee for? Because he felt it needed one, or just to show he could do it? And I also wonder why so many people have visited his site. Is it because of the novelty, or because of a genuine interest in an Eee with a touchscreen?

I haven't yet seen a UMPC sized device for which anyone can justify a keyboard, even on a convertible. I think the Eee with a touchscreen is more a novelty than anything else.

Having said that, I know the masses have spoken and they want a keyboard. (Some will say need, but I think that is not the case.) But the usage scenarios you have been speaking about aren't crying out for a keyboard, they've been crying out for a touchscreen.

Woadan

[Steve Paine]

Aaron, Woadan, Kevin. Thanks for responding. Good discussion.

I just want to re-iterate (I said it in my comment) that I agree, bigger laptop devices don't benefit much from touchscreens. So, Kevin, i'm not saying 'any device with a touchscreen is better than one without.' I thought we were talking about mobile devices. Sorry. (Although the amount of times I touch the screen on my wifes laptop is humorous!)

Focusing on mobile devices then....do you agree with me? Touchscreens add possibilities without any disadvantage?

Maybe some of you are worried that people don't get the ideal touchscreen experience and will be unimpressed by touchscreen tech in general? I wouldn't worry about people getting a sub-optimal touchscreen experience just yet. We're in the early-adopter stage at the moment so mobile device buyers are fairly forgiving and fairly experimental with their devices. In fact, they generally get excited about these capabilities. (example: jkk eee pc) and it could help to create more early sales. COnsidering that any Xp or Vista is finger-controllable at 180 or less DPI out of the box, I wouldn't want to deny anyone of that capability. Add the fact that all versions of windows can be retro fitted with touch scrolling on FF, gestures, navigation software, paint programs, touch-interfaces and skins for media players...ok. You get my point there.

There is also another (rather dubious) advantage to adding a touchscreen - Marketing. Be it 'riding the touchscreen wave' or just for product differentiation, it is, in general, a good thing in this early market.

So once again, ignoring laptops 10"> and bigger, yes, I believe that the touchscreen can bring advantages in nearly all cases and has no disadvantages.

Woadan. I'm not sure why you say this: "I haven't yet seen a UMPC sized device for which anyone can justify a keyboard, even on a convertible"

Regards all.
Steve.

[Woadan]

Steve,

It's always bothered me that all the tech critics complained about the lack of a keyboard. And especially when you consider that Microsoft's specs for the Origami did not require one, it is bewildering. (I guess they just want a reason to hate them, and the lack of a keyboard gives them a convenient emotional handle.)

At any rate, nobody has posited a use for the 7" or smaller screens that absolutely calls for a keyboard. And many, nearly all in fact, of those uses are where a touchscreen shines best. So that is why I haven't yet seen an absolute need for a keyboard.

And while it might be good to be "riding the wave", at least for now I think the addition of a touchscreen "just because" is a price increase that isn't necessary.

The Eee has been selling well because it meets the price "sweet point" as well as overall utility of the device. Sadly, the Windows-based UMPCs have yet to do that. (The overall utility may be there, but the price is prohibitive.)

I haven't played with a Unix/Linux-based tablet yet. How well do they do inking? If they suck at it, then that's another reason to avoid touchscreens on something like the Eee.

Woadan