it doesn't matter how close it is, having your arms raised is far from comfortable which means either a really short desk...or a desk made for touch screens which is lower anyway but with mounts to have your touch screens at an angle that is suitable for PROLONGED USE...not 5 min usage but long term use.Ummm...the position of the touch screen is a given. Notice how many touch AIO PCs are set up. They don't have the screen two feet away from the user. It's close to the user, 12-18 inches away, much like a laptop screen is. Think of it this way, 30 years ago people used to read the newspaper daily, some today, maybe you yourself. Have you ever seen someone put the newspaper at arms length away from them? No. Do you ever put a book more than arms length from you? Probably not. Do designers draw vertically at arms length? Bullocks no. Before Excel type programs, did people fill out spreadsheets at arms length? Nope. Not much creative or consumptive done without a computer is never done vertically, at arms length away. To think that's how one uses a touch screen with their desktop PC is preposterous.
you think game developers would use something as inaccurate as a touch screen? wow.....cad...just wow that is precision engineering and you think they use their fingers, my god think of the mistakes, in any event they use far more accurate tools than touch screens, which as it happens are terrible and can barely get a scroll bar down the side of internet explorer to work right.Now let me say this, have you manually tried selecting an element on a photo on Photoshop with a mouse? Unless if you have the dexterity and precision of an animal that has loads of dexterity and precision, it's not a great thing to do. Heck, even game developers use touch screens to adjust or create imagery for the game. I bet the same could be said for AutoCAD, but I'd need to see that for myself. Then there are the annoying tedious times where using a mouse, for me, gets annoying when I could just simply touch a UI element.
boom budget hit the nail on the head, and again you completely missed the point, having a touch screen that works for years and having a touch screen you have to chase after when you touch it are two very different things, for 200-300 you will be cleaning after you touch it and chasing it around the desk(unless you bolt it down) and the picture quality is just not worth the money either, so again i say touch is not cost effective for QUALITY you have to spend a lot more, you can pick up far better standard monitors with far higher contrast ratio's that are just flat out better for a lot less yet these touch screens are just not worth the money.Now, Windows 7 already had touch support better than before. I've personally spotted about more than a dozen touch AIO PCs out in the wild. Some are used for Photoshop, some as kiosks. Why? Touch is literally the most simplest thing a human being can do. I know someone who is in geriatric care that let the elderly use ipads over a mouse based PC. Why? They are able to grasp the concept of looking at something then touching it versus grasping a mouse, moving a small pointer around, and trying to navigate around with it. Touch is simple. The thing about touch screen monitors costing a bit is simply due to the fact that touch hasn't been pushed out there enough. Market saturation isn't high. Windows 8 PCs pretty much all have touch screens, which will reduce the prices down sooner than later. A 23 inch touch monitor averages about 200 dollars, about 100 more than a non-touch monitor. Considering it handles input, and a decent mouse costs 20-30 dollars, it isn't too terrible of cost trade off. This is true considering Windows 8 is built hugely for touch input, as will Windows 9, as will Windows 10. But adding touch just comes down to preference, usage, and your budget....
Touch has been around for over 20 years do you get it yet? after 20 years how many people do you know with touch screens in there homes? and were going back to dos machines here from hp if you are wondering. it's truly amazing that windows 7 and 8 both support touch...wait did i just read that hp made a pc over 20 years ago that ran on dos that supported touch...my god how modern is windows 7-8...not really is the answer.With Windows 8 coming out, there will be more touch monitors available and more as time progresses. I personally am looking at this touch screen as it literally fills all my needs for a touch screen, 27 inch, very adjustable, HDMI, web cam, and just looks seamless and clean. Yes, the price is high. That I don't get as a 23 inch monitor can cost roughly 200 dollars, but add four more inches, it's nearing a 1,000.
indeed one must think outside the box, hence why I ordered a leap motion device as i feel touch is out of date for the home, i won't need a new desk or new monitors all i need is a wee box that is the size of a usb stick, you say you want the screen closer...please do sit infront of you're screen for hours on end..i'll pass on that thanks i can do without the headaches it will cause, perhaps you need to look outside this box as well and view this debate from a different point of view.One must think outside the box. You can't take a totally different input method and try to plop it into a traditional input scenario and say it's not human ready. Of course it won't be if you'd be using two or three feet away from you for hours on end. You have to change the way things are done, change how getting to point A to B is accomplished, change the way you use technology like Windows 8. One last thing, I wouldn't disparage touch or touch screens UNLESS you've personally tried it out for yourself. Otherwise, you'd be poshing something that you don't personally know about, which kind of makes your thoughts and opinions on that subject a tad invalid, wouldn't you say?
I gave you the largest market in the world and told you they would never adopt touch...yup the business market that accounts for some staggering number of pc sales worldwide, one day perhaps they will but not any time soon and certainly not in the life span of windows 8 or 9.
the home user market which is considerably smaller by orders of magnitude still won't like the prospect of the cost and the change to their office spaces, will it make authors more productive? nope, will it make video editors more productive? somehow i doubt it but it could help...maybe, will it make the many people out there that do 3d work more productive....haha not a chance, have you tried to manipulate a 3d complex drawing using touch? moving it around the screen sure it might help but actually building that 3d model...oh dear lord i can just see all the vertices flying all over the place.(i must point out i wouldn't use the leap motion for that either) I use a pad for all my drawing in 3d studio.
i'm not disputing the many fun aspects touch has, but without considerable development in software,gaming and development software to be far more intuitive for touch it just won't be that big a hit.
one other market that barely uses touch...the IT industry as a whole, web development, software development you name it they don't use touch screen monitors they use touch input devices that is true but not screens at least not on any major level anyway, and please don't say that web developers use touch screens to write html/c# i may just swear loudly.
Coke I like windows 8 as an operating system and i do share your enthusiasm for it, but I can't stand how they went the direction of touch screen so absolutely without even paying attention to the global market better.
touch screens are few and far between and even should many more make it to market, it will be a while before the technology matures and the prices drop to frankly far more reasonable levels.
microsoft should have been paying attention, the world is in an economic downturn and people aren't spending money, forcing such foolish trends as to have consumers that are barely keeping roofs on their heads or their jobs for that matter into thinking they need this cool new touch screen is another reason amoung many it is a bad choice.
if you can afford to outlay the money for a decent work station comprising touch screens then that's great but remember there is a whopping majority just trying to keep a job and a house right now and with banks being far from friendly i can't see many of them thinking touch will change their lives.
Now ok, you're not going to simply use your fingers for highly detailed work like game designing or AutoCAD, a touch screen and stylus is always used. I guess I should has mentioned that. And IE 10 is pretty touch worthy, at least the immersive version is. Even still, the scrollbar in Windows 8 is large enough for touch.
And yes, the contrast ratio isn't too great, but that's why technological progress happens. Sure, right now 5,000:1 is sucky, but six months from now, someone else might release a much higher one. Planar is just one of few manufacturers building touch screens for desktop use. Windows 8 will just exaggerate the need for touch screens as demand will grow, and cost will go down.
See, touch has been around for a while, but it never got into the consumer household. Touch PCs, like tablet PCs at first, were best used with a stylus as I don't think they were capacitaive touch and the UI wasn't there yet. Windows 3 had a pen input version, I think 98 had one too, Xp did, 7 improved touch input very greatly, and 8 is expanding on that. Microsoft had tablet PCs before touch was mainstream, but it never got anywhere as the cost was way too high and demand wasn't there when the desktop was the mainstream and laptop technology was developing. No need for a tablet. Touch wasn't introduced as no one really pushed touch on the desktop. Touch and tablet use has been primarily in the small niche enterprise space like design and I believe government use as well.
I think that's cool you'll be using gesture with Windows 8. I was planning on perhaps buying a Kinect for Windows but then found out the Kinect won't be used as a primary input but as an input device for certain Kinect built apps. The Leap Motion seems interesting, but I'm iffy on the precision of it. Seems a bit too good to be true, we'll see. But that was before I used a touch screen with Windows 8; and that was when I realized the potential for touch for me. I personally am going into architecture and the idea of basically using a digital drawing easel, and combine hand drafting (which is primarily the hugest chunk of architecture) and technology like that; it sounds awesome. Using touch in general to interact with Windows feels right. I don't know about you, but I'm not going to starting at the screen six inches away for hours on end. It sounds like you're thinking too much in the traditional sense, which again, you can't do with touch as it isn't traditional. I object, as you probably should think outside the box on this too.
Ok wait, I'm confused. So you use a touch pad connected to your PC and use a stylus to make a 3D model? And you say using a touch screen is ineffective at this? This sounds exactly one in the same. That Planar monitor I mentioned can exactly be that touch pad but without the touch pad. I must not have context here as this sounds conflicting.
Funny you mention HTML and web development....
The new metro styled Windows 8 apps have a requirement, they must work with a mouse AND a touch screen. So if you're a developer looking to capitalize off of the Windows Store, you preferably need a touch screen to see how the real feel of the app is like. Web development is another field that is going for touch friendly design. Again, one needs a touch screen for the real feel.
As I've said before, one must think outside the box. I believe touch can and will work. You can use your finger for general navigation, and then a stylus for precise work. It can in fact be done. It just needs to be done rather than debating it. I can say all I want with my touch loving drivel to try and convince others, but I won't be doing anything unless the other side actually uses touch and explores how touch interaction is, with current touch technology, not a random experience years ago or simply using touch to interact with a UI strictly by using it like a mouse.
And you're right, without the software and development, touch won't be worthwhile. But, the world's most used platform is adopting touch from the UI, to app design, and to the internet. The same platform has caused all PC makers to put a touch screen in their new PCs from tablets, ultrabooks, and AIOs. Both software and technological development is happening, it's already here.
There is a compromise way to have a real touch experience, while leaving the arm on the desk. In the Apple world, it's called s Trackpad. But the concept hasn't caught on the Windows world. I can attest that many of the gestures that work on a touch screen, also work on a Trackpad.
Also the Trackpad gives me far less carpal tunnel than a mouse.
Why doesn't MS make a trackpad for Windows 8?
I can fly round Windows 8 using the mouse/keyboard, or the scratchpad/keyboard combo.
It is just as easy to control using a mouse as Windows 7, I've found, but the sequence of movements and clicks is different.
It's no biggie.
Which suits me just fine, as I have no desire or need for touch on a real computer (as opposed to a phone or tablet).
There such a device now. MS calls it the 'Wedge'. Accepts gestures without having to move it like a mouse.
I don't believe Microsoft has a trackpad, but they have the Wedge mouse that is reported to have gestures. There is also the Touch Mouse, that is supposedly going to be updated to have gestures for Windows 8. HP also has has something exactly like the mac's touchpad on their new AIO Envy or Spectre TouchSmart PC. You could probably buy the HP trackpad separate soon.