Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google Handwrite

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 80 posts

Re: Google Handwrite

#71

Post by tsahyt »

From a technical point of view this is remarkable. Seems like the recognition works really well, and that's great.

However, from a usability point of view this is probably awful. I've had an app on my phone for a while now that doesn't do handwriting recognition but just stores the handwritten stuff as images. Using that without a proper pen-like stylus is a pain. Writing with your fingers just doesn't really work. Fingertips are just not accurate enough for this kind of movement, which is precisely why we guide a pen with multiple fingers instead of just one.

Additionally it's much slower than just typing it out, even on the sucky on-screen-keyboard that you're provided with these days.

So it's slow and surprisingly hard to use. And frankly, I don't see styluses making their big comeback next year. People are just too addicted to touching things with their fingers.

Re: Google Handwrite

#72

Post by dazbradbury »

OK, so Google want to improve their handwriting recognition. Fine. But from a users point of view this just tells me one thing:

- Using an on-screen keyboard is such a pain for people that Google changed their HOMEPAGE to accommodate this.

Why does this irritate me?

1) None of the latest generation of smartphones are coming out with a hardware keyboard. The best are always keyboardless.

2) Stylus-based input, which is the other extremely fast form of text entry, has all but died out (I know some products still exist - but it was essentially dead when capacitive screens won out).

Hence, we've gone backwards from 10 years ago. It was faster for me to send a text/email from my phone 10 years ago then it is today. That is hugely disappointing.

Re: Google Handwrite

#73

Post by asto »

dazbradbury wrote: post #72

OK, so Google want to improve their handwriting recognition. Fine. But from a users point of view this just tells me one thing: - Using an on-screen keyboard is such a pain for people that Google changed their HOMEPAGE to accommodate this. Why does this irritate me? 1) None of the latest generation of smartphones are coming out with a hardware keyboard. The best are always keyboardless. 2) Stylus-based input, which i…

Yes, this exactly. I desperately want to move from my Blackberry to an android phone but all the best phones seem keyboard-less. Typing on a touch screen is a major annoyance for anything more than typing a search string or sms.

Re: Google Handwrite

#74

Post by hessenwolf »

asto wrote: post #73
dazbradbury wrote: post #72

OK, so Google want to improve their handwriting recognition. Fine. But from a users point of view this just tells me one thing: - Using an on-screen keyboard is such a pain for people that Google changed their HOMEPAGE to accommodate this. Why does this irritate me? 1) None of the latest generation of smartphones are coming out with a hardware keyboard. The best are always keyboardless. 2) Stylus-based input, which i…

Yes, this exactly. I desperately want to move from my Blackberry to an android phone but all the best phones seem keyboard-less. Typing on a touch screen is a major annoyance for anything more than typing a search string or sms.

Go horizontal and use two thumbs. You get pretty quick. There are likely other techniques.

Re: Google Handwrite

#75

Post by 6ren »

ericdykstra wrote: post #3

Fun feature. Would be killer with support for non-latin based language. Imagine walking down a street in Japan, seeing a restaurant, and wanting to search for reviews. Oh no! It's written in kanji and you have a hard enough time reading basic words, much less names. Open up Google on your phone, write the kanji and add the japanese word for review behind it, and off you go. Great potential, anyway.

Using the camera would remove a step - have you seen word lens? http://questvisual.com/us/ (though it doesn't seem to support kanji).

Re: Google Handwrite

#77

Post by danyork »

I'll note that despite the Techcrunch headline about Google Handwrite accepting cursive handwriting, it doesn't really do so. In fact, Google's help pages specifically say you should use block printing versus cursive. I tried some cursive and the recognition didn't work all that well. However, the block printing was generally quite accurate.

I wrote about some of my views on this at: http://www.disruptiveconversations.com/2012/07/google-now-le...

I actually see a great value to it for times when I'm walking around a conference with my iPad and want to do a quick Google search. I can't really use voice (i.e. Siri) and I can't use two hands to type. This handwriting could be an interesting option.

Re: Google Handwrite

#78

Post by raldi »

jenius wrote: post #62
raldi wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why speculate when we can race?

Is this a serious comment or are you trolling? Don't tell me you think hand writing is faster than typing...

Well, let's put it to the test. Not at a desk, of course, but while walking, or using one hand while the other's holding a baby, or in the back seat of a taxi.

Edit: I forgot to mention, the test will be carried out by a 62-year-old Egyptian grandmother.

Re: Google Handwrite

#79

Post by jrockway »

w1ntermute wrote: post #66
jrockway wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, OK. When I read the description of DroidWing I wasn't sure what the point of converting EDICT to some other format was. I will look into this further. Edit: Hey, the Kenkyusha dictionary is only $500 on Amazon! http://www.amazon.com/Kenkyushas-New-Japanese-English-Dictio...

That's a hard copy, and an old edition at that. The digital version (which is what you need for DroidWing) is only $270[0], or free if your ethics are flexible. 0: http://www.amazon.co.jp/%E7%A0%94%E7%A9%B6%E7%A4%BE-EPWING%E...

Thanks. They might consider using less expensive paper when printing dictionaries in the future :)

Re: Google Handwrite

#80

Post by jenius »

stcredzero wrote: post #70
jenius wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is totally incorrect, eye tracking is not sufficiently advanced to be in any way useful in terms of entering input. There exist 'visual keyboards' for people that are paralyzed which allow them to select a key based on where they are looking. These, while a fantastic tool to help disabled people, are not even close to approaching the speed we achieve using a manual keyboard. There's an example here - your eye ha…

> This is totally incorrect, eye tracking is not sufficiently advanced to be in any way useful in terms of entering input. Actually, you are totally incorrect. If you look back at the thread, I am not proposing eye tracking as a sole means of input, but as a means of providing contextual information to other means of input. > I realize my first comment was kind of mean and sarcastic, but that was because this idea is…

Hey sorry this is so late. Didn't realize what you meant by contextual input or how that could be useful, but you're right - I can't deny such a fuzzy statement. It's somewhat possible that this could help something sometime in the future, definitely. Apologies for calling you incorrect. Eye tracking is however not efficient or useful as a main input for typing and will very likely not take a leading role in helping to recognize word/sentence input to computers.

On the second statement, I meant my original comment about google handwriting, the one at the top of this tree - not your comment about eye tracking. So I apologize again - I must have not been clear in the way I stated that and I'm sorry you took offense.

Post reply on HN