71–80 of 95 posts
Here's a brief article about Tactus: http://www.theverge.com/2012/6/5/3064674/tactus-technology-p... Looks like the button locations are fixed for now, but they're hoping to make them adjustable in the future.
If you could make the grid small enough, it wouldn't mater that they were fixed if you could activate regions to form whole buttons.
There isn't much information on the actual implementation on the website, but if you could make the surface depress-able or not depending on the context requirement, then the variety of applications is endless: Think of the blind, being able to use tablets to read with Braille(non depress-able), or the piano idea from above( depress-able).
the way I see it, physical buttons have two uses one is tactile navigation: the ability to find out what part of the screen you're touching and navigate it without vision. the second use though is activation feedback, a button has to be able to be navigated separately from its activation. unless these protrusions can tell whether they are pressed or not, it still seems useless to have a lumpy touchscreen... so I real…
"While touchscreens provide a versatile user experience, they provide no tactile experience for consumers. Vibration haptics and similar solutions try to simulate a sensation of touch, but all are "feedback" technologies, vibrating only after touching the screen (even if they are touched in the wrong place or by mistake). In contrast, Tactus' technology creates real, physical buttons, where users can rest their fingers on the buttons, as on a mechanical keyboard, and input data by pressing down on the keys. Tactus is the only solution to both "orientation" and "confirmation" problems that are inherent in touch screens."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I tend to agree with you on this. It's a great idea, but not an amazing idea. And the reason is simply that we can think of what a better version would look like - polymorphic buttons. I wonder if that's actually a good criteria for defining game changing innovation - that you can't think what a better version would look like.
I've personally been fantasizing about improved tactile touchscreen features since the iPad came out, but that didn't change the fact that it was a "game changing device". So I suspect that's not a great standard to judge by. The fact is that every step in technology allows you to see farther ahead. To complain that the mountain you stand on isn't as tall as the one it allows you to see is ridiculous.
In my defence, I'm not complaining about it, just agreeing with the guy I replied to that I was somewhat disappointed. I was then curious why I was disappointed, and wondered whether my rationale was generalisable. It probably isn't.
Very interesting and a bit scary. Think about it, a screen that can reach out and change its shape. That almost guarantees some (software) application misuse if they are given access to screen control. But on the other hand, gaming would be more interesting with something more to interact with than just what is displayed on screen. It will be interesting to see what becomes of this.
I expect a rogue app, that, upon detecting that phone is laying with its display down, starts to move the phone by imitating snake's muscles. and phone runs for the exit and beyond!
Still, the idea of a million smartphones collectively climbing out of their nightstands at full moon and then crawling towards some supervillain's cave, as fast as their little bubblescreens will carry, is definitely hollywood material!
It's a cool technology, but i think it won't be more useful or productive than a regular touch screen. How are you gonna swipe on a bumpy touch screen?
This will be huge for automotive touchscreen applications: I have no doubt it will save lives. With current touchscreen interfaces, you rely almost solely on visual cues and feedback to make correct inputs. Not a good situation while driving, when you need as much visual attention as possible focused on the road. The best interfaces for operating complex or dangerous machines have fixed, haptically identifiable refer…
Similar to kiba's comment below, but perhaps a step in between, it would make sense for car designers to look at other similarly complex machines that require the operator's constant attention to the outside world before innovating blindly. HOTAS (Hands on Throttle and Stick) as a concept has been adopted almost exclusively in fighter aircraft - and extended into Formula 1 and Indy cars as well - for this exact purpo…
Also consider the amount of training that goes into becoming a fighter pilot, vs. learning to drive a car. Powerful interfaces are complex and require a lot of training to manage properly under stress--which is when it is most important to do it right.
That said, modern cars do have a lot of controls on the steering wheel: all the typical blinkers, brights, horn, etc. and now often radio controls, cruise control, telephone Bluetooth controls, even gear shifting paddles.
HUD has been tried in cars before, but never caught on. Drivers tended to find it more distracting than helpful. Most of the information for driving does not need to be so..."contextual", the way that, say, a missile targeting system does. Anything that intercedes itself directly between the driver's eyes and the outside world could be dangerous.
I do agree with you that the touchscreens in the dash are frickin awful UI design. I think they are like the "store" setting on LCD TVs--their main job is to look cool in the showroom.
The video can be found here: http://vimeo.com/43431035 I really dislike the voice-over they have, but that might be personal preference. It just sounds like a regular person imitating a professional voice actor to me.
This will be huge for automotive touchscreen applications: I have no doubt it will save lives. With current touchscreen interfaces, you rely almost solely on visual cues and feedback to make correct inputs. Not a good situation while driving, when you need as much visual attention as possible focused on the road. The best interfaces for operating complex or dangerous machines have fixed, haptically identifiable refer…
http://www.uspto.gov/web/patents/patog/week20/OG/html/1378-3...
Go to the full text and then the images area and you get to see more detailed diagrams.
The video can be found here: http://vimeo.com/43431035 I really dislike the voice-over they have, but that might be personal preference. It just sounds like a regular person imitating a professional voice actor to me.
I know this is a fraud, and it's only because of the voice-over.