john lewis <johnlewis@???> wrote:
> It really worries me when I see TV progs with these fancy interfaces
> on computer thingies that allow some character to slide a finger across
> screen and things move around or as in a program about Egyptian
> archaeology which showed satellite images that could be zoomed into by
> (it looked like) pinching the screen.
>
> That ain't computing as I know it ;-(
What should it be? Punch cards and switches? :-)
Touchscreen is just another interface, that's been around since the
1960s, and in common use on mobile devices for the last 15 years.
Graphics tablets have been in common use for much longer, and are
basically the same idea, except the 'touch' surface is different from
the 'display' surface.
If you have a small form factor device, it's a lot more accurate and
usable than a 'mouse touch pad' or cursor keys.
Why is being able to touch an icon on the screen so worrying (other
than the fingerprints that are left behind)?
Some systems track your eyeballs to work out what you're looking at
(I've seen this demoed in fighter jets, where the interface needs to
be as streamlined and natural as possible so the pilot can react
quickly to threats).
Home game consoles can track your full body movement to determine
what you want to do.
Pinching an image to zoom is conceptually no different from grabbing
a slider with a mouse pointer and sliding it. If you're doing a
presentation, then manipulating the screen directly is more engaging
for the audience than you hiding behind a laptop and fiddling with a
keyboard.
> I know that some of the stuff they do on progs like NCIS is trickery
> and they can't really hack into someone's mobile phone and follow
> the user around in seconds
They don't need to hack the phone to do that. The phone provider knows
where the phone is all the time it is in contact with the network.
The delay is in contacting the phone company, but given the erosion
of privacy rights in the last decade, it wouldn't surprise me if that
has all been automated by now.
There are applications which allow you to share your location in real
time with your friends. Useful when you want to meet up somewhere but
are too disorganised to arrange an exact time and place.
(and I have to say that for something that pretty much allows you to
give away all your privacy (
http://xkcd.com/596/ ), Google Latitude
is pretty well designed, allowing you to precisely control how much
information you share with each person - you can allow Bob to see
exactly where you are, but restrict Alice to seeing only your nearest
town and hide yourself completely from everyone else. If only all
social apps were equally fine grained).
> But I still don't blog, twitter, use social networking or
> store data in the 'cloud'. Mainly because I don't trust the providers,
> not even google, to provide a secure system.
'Cloud' is just another way to spell 'Internet', there's nothing magic
about it. I don't trust them, but I do use them because they're useful
(as per my talk on using Amazon/Google for backups a few months back).
My backups are encrypted before I upload, and it provides relatively
cheap, fully automated, off site backups for my data. As long as Amazon
doesn't go down and lose all my data at the same time that my own
servers go down and lose all my data, then I'm fine.
'Cloud' services like Google Maps are really useful. Specify a location
in my desktop browser, and it's shared with my phone so that I can use
the phone as a satnav to find the place when I'm out and about. I can
also find shops/restaurants, and read reviews or find phone numbers
very easily.
And anyway, isn't a mailing list just a form of social networking?
Except you don't get to know who the list of 'friends' are that
you're posting your rants to :-)
> I had a look at the Asus Transformer, on paper at least, when it was
> announced and thought it a bit gimmicky - not one thing or tother. But
> then I don't really know what a 'fondleslab' really is like, I've not
> even seen an actual bit of kit in the flesh so to speak (and what a
> ghastly name they seem to have acquired).
PC World, Comet, or pretty much any mobile phone shop will have plenty
on display which you can freely fondle the flesh of... (but make sure
you find a place which has a wireless connection).
It's useful when I want to consume information. If I want to read in
bed, or out in the garden or on a train, it's more convenient than
using a laptop (I prefer real paper for 'books', but sometimes I want
to read websites). If I'm wandering around the office, or in meetings,
a flat tablet is lighter and less obtrusive than a laptop.
When I want to do lots of typing, there's the keyboard available to
make that easier, without me having to carry around a laptop and a
tablet (I could use pen and paper, but that just means it may need
typing up before I can share information with other people).
It's useful, and fills a niche. It doesn't replace a laptop, but it's
more convenient for what I want to do. The only thing I can't get it
to do yet, is drive a USB webcam to my telescope, so I may need to
get a laptop for that.
Damn, this has turned out longer than I meant, so apologies. However,
the point of my own 'rant' is that I don't think the latest generation
of devices is particularly radical - it's just the obvious culmination
of twenty years (at least) of gradual improvements in hardware, software
and networking.
The ASUS Transformer (back to the point!) is something I've actually
been waiting for for ~10 years. It's like my Psion 7 (clamshell design,
touch screen, UI optimised for a small mobile device), but it doesn't
require fiddling around with an IR port to my mobile phone for wireless,
plus the screen detaches from the keyboard.
If you want to complain about these newfangled devices, then you're
ten years too late :-)
--
Be seeing you,
Sam.
