In Defense Of The Stylus
techcrunch.com
In Defense Of The Stylus
1–10 of 33 posts
Re: In Defense Of The Stylus
#2http://www.pcworld.com/article/188223/the_long_fail_a_brief_...
Maybe the lack of success has been due to poor implementation, but I wonder whether styluses are just inherently problematic:
1. Truly reliable handwriting recognition always seems to be just over the horizon, and I wonder whether it always will be. Honestly, I often can't read my own handwriting. Sure, you can store handwriting as "ink," aka a bitmap, but that's like choosing a fax as your file format.
2. Switching from stylus to finger to (possibly) keyboard is awkward. You need someplace to put the stylus, and it makes one-handed operation pretty difficult.
That said, I actually think I'd enjoy having a stylus for input sometimes. I hope that someone eventually figures out how to put all the pieces together. (Too bad that Microsoft Courier didn't make it.)
Re: In Defense Of The Stylus
#3Real, shipping stylus-based computers -- not just mockups or concepts like Alan Kay's 1968 Dynabook -- go back to at least the late 1980s, with the GRiDPAD: http://www.pcworld.com/article/188223/the_long_fail_a_brief_... Maybe the lack of success has been due to poor implementation, but I wonder whether styluses are just inherently problematic: 1. Truly reliable handwriting recognition always seems to be just over th…
But yeah switching is a pain. and the interaction vocabulary has to be rewritten for stylus input.
Re: In Defense Of The Stylus
#4That said, imagine if styluses (styli?) were mass produced and available as ubiquitously and cheaply as pencils. Lose one? No problem, there's another one on the table over there.
In that case, I can see styluses catching on big time, and as noted in the article, their precision would give them huge inherent advantages over fingers.
Re: In Defense Of The Stylus
#5Real, shipping stylus-based computers -- not just mockups or concepts like Alan Kay's 1968 Dynabook -- go back to at least the late 1980s, with the GRiDPAD: http://www.pcworld.com/article/188223/the_long_fail_a_brief_... Maybe the lack of success has been due to poor implementation, but I wonder whether styluses are just inherently problematic: 1. Truly reliable handwriting recognition always seems to be just over th…
As to iPad's the same issues shows up, using a Stylus on top of a screen is less accurate than using a separate tablet, not to mention it's resolution is terrible for creating real art. Sure, it's better than a cellphone, but fingerprinting is plenty for most people's level of artistic talent.
PS: My sister is a graphics artist and she get's sub-pixel accuracy with a cheap qualcom tablet. Covering up part of the immage your working on is reasonable, but when using pen on paper she often rotates the paper to minimize the effect which slows things down with clunky computer controls.
Re: In Defense Of The Stylus
#6Re: In Defense Of The Stylus
#7My main problem with the stylus is that it's so easy to lose; who wants to carry around a separate part with their device? That said, imagine if styluses (styli?) were mass produced and available as ubiquitously and cheaply as pencils. Lose one? No problem, there's another one on the table over there. In that case, I can see styluses catching on big time, and as noted in the article, their precision would give them h…
Re: In Defense Of The Stylus
#8My main problem with the stylus is that it's so easy to lose; who wants to carry around a separate part with their device? That said, imagine if styluses (styli?) were mass produced and available as ubiquitously and cheaply as pencils. Lose one? No problem, there's another one on the table over there. In that case, I can see styluses catching on big time, and as noted in the article, their precision would give them h…
Re: In Defense Of The Stylus
#9We learned that most people who were happy with pen-based computers had gotten them at a steep discount. They felt that the products had shortcomings but that was ok because they were so cheap.
The only two exceptions--pen-based computing products that had found significant success at their MSRP--were Wacom and Palm/Handspring.
The key to the mystery was handwriting recognition. 100% recognition is impossible, even for humans. But while we accept human misses, there is pretty much no tolerance for misses in a computing interface. With a miss, the value of the pen input (speed and natural feel) is lost in the need to correct.
Wacom succeeds because it does not even try to do handwriting recognition.
Palm/Handspring succeeded by inventing new motions for per-letter entry that people had to learn (called Graffiti). This reversed the user expectation: if the recognition failed, many users would assume it was their own fault for not doing the Graffiti entry properly. They wouldn't blame the machine, so their opinion of its value did not suffer.
Styluses are still hugely popular for animators, artists, and some graphic designers. Wacom is still going strong. But any computer that relies on a stylus for text entry is probably doomed to fail.
Re: In Defense Of The Stylus
#10Real, shipping stylus-based computers -- not just mockups or concepts like Alan Kay's 1968 Dynabook -- go back to at least the late 1980s, with the GRiDPAD: http://www.pcworld.com/article/188223/the_long_fail_a_brief_... Maybe the lack of success has been due to poor implementation, but I wonder whether styluses are just inherently problematic: 1. Truly reliable handwriting recognition always seems to be just over th…
I've actually been pleasantly surprised by the recognition in Windows 7 and 8. But it needs to be more flexible - who wants to write in a little field? Note-taking should stay rich, it should transcribe in the background, make the text searchable, and keep the layout and such in a bit of simple hidden html or the like. But yeah switching is a pain. and the interaction vocabulary has to be rewritten for stylus input.