[IxDA Discuss] Scenarios for multitouch displays?

[Taneem Talukdar]

Great points. Just two thoughts:

I totally agree with the security issues but I think that some of these
apply in general to using computers in public, regardless of whether it's a
touch surface or not - one could also read your emails if you're using a
laptop at Denver airport, for example (the display on the surface screen is
not going to be any bigger or easier to read). You also need to remember to
take your card with you after paying at debit self-service stations (such as
in your grocery store or a gas stations). Smart designs there have been used
to address the issue, and smart designs like the one you have suggested can
be used for touch interfaces too. Thus, I'm pretty hopeful that security
issues are not going to be a showstopper with products like this.

Personally, I've moved my personal computing and communication
environment entirely to portable devices. I don't want to be tied to
one location -- or work posture, for that matter. The only reason I
tolerate my TV is that I don't want to ask friends and family to
huddle around my laptop screen whenever we watch Dr. Who. Otherwise,
I want to be able to carry my digital environment wherever I decide
to go.

Another thought I had is that, in the spirit of looking into the future, you
don't need to think of the Surface machine as storing your data. It's simply
an interface to the electronic warehouse of information and applications
available to you in your house. Thus, you don't need to be bogged down by
portability issues. Your information is accessible from multiple locations
(be it Surface in the living room, your laptop at work or your iPhone when
you're out jogging).

Cheers,
Taneem Talukdar



On 6/1/07, Will Parker <wparker at channelingdesign.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Jun 1, 2007, at 7:21 AM, Taneem Talukdar wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Before I continue with the assumption that for this discussion,
> > security
> > issues are moot, I just wanted to say that I'm not sure why
> > security is such
> > a big deal to start with. It seems fairly certain that you would
> > need some
> > kind of authentication system before you could do many of the
> > things like
> > what the videos on the Surface website show.
> <SNIP>
>
> First of all, thanks to Pauric for suggesting this fruitful topic.
> For my part, I will stop referring specifically to the Microsoft
> multi-touch table device unless the occasion warrants, and instead
> use "multi-touch table" for this class of device.
>
> I'd like to differentiate between three aspects of security here.
>
> First, let's say that all aspects of physical and data security
> inside the device are Solved. (BTW, I hereby dub this handy notion
> Pauric's Assumption. It's got a beat, you can dance to it.)
>
> The next aspect is protection of external data assets. A lot of
> scenarios being discussed here involve laying devices containing
> personal data (including wallets, key-ring data chits, and credit
> cards) on a publicly-accessible table for extended periods of time.
>
> So far, none of these scenarios has addressed how the multi-touch
> table  _reliably_ alerts the weary, jet-lagged passenger in the
> Denver airport at 3:20 AM that he's paid for whatever and HE SHOULD
> PICK UP HIS BLOODY ID  CARD -- please, sir, NOW, before that shifty-
> eyed gent who's been loitering nearby for the last four nights pays
> another visit. Solving this issue is key to widespread adoption of
> tab devices in electronic commerce.
>
> Not so long ago on this list we thrashed out some ideas for ATM
> security design. Much of what was said in that thread applies, but
> not all. I'll come back to that in a separate thread when I have more
> time, but one simple-minded requirement would be 'Customer must
> remove the ID device from the table to finalize the payment.' Instead
> of mouse-up, we can think of card-up events.
>
> The third aspect lies in the public nature of multi-touch tables. As
> myself and others have pointed out, the initial Microsoft positioning
> for multi-touch tables is not in the privacy of the living room or
> the conference room, but the wide-open spaces of an airport lounge.
> Shoulder Surfers can now relax, because they can easily Read UR
> EmailZ + ChartZ D00D from anywhere within 3 meters. (I predict a
> small but thriving market in multi-touch table optical filters that
> limit off-axis viewing.)
>
> > As for product ideas -- I just spent a few minutes tapping my
> > fingers on the
> > flat surface of my desk and moving around imaginary documents and
> > emails ...
> > from this *extensive* testing, I think I'd be pretty comfortable with
> > removing my computer (and my phone) and replacing it with a Surface
> > like
> > machine in my cubicle (what an unexciting application, I know).
> >
> > Another good use would be at home where you would be able to use the
> > internet without "going on the computer". Just replace your regular
> > living
> > room table with one of these (assuming that it's robust enough for
> > this
> > environment). Then while relaxing in your living room, this table
> > could
> > serve as everything from displaying the TV guide, displaying a
> > virtual TV
> > remote (never lose the remote again!), allowing you to make phone
> > calls
> > without needing a regular phone (VOIP!), to opening a webcam
> > connection with
> > a friend, or a mini-browser window to check the weather.
>
> Sooo, what you _really_ want is iPhone 2.0, but with a 30" screen and
> weighing 50-65 pounds? 8-}
>
> Personally, I've moved my personal computing and communication
> environment entirely to portable devices. I don't want to be tied to
> one location -- or work posture, for that matter. The only reason I
> tolerate my TV is that I don't want to ask friends and family to
> huddle around my laptop screen whenever we watch Dr. Who. Otherwise,
> I want to be able to carry my digital environment wherever I decide
> to go.
>
> > I think that's the kind of thing that's quite realistic, and is the
> > kind of
> > applications that Surface-like products are uniquely suited for.
>
> I agree, if we can get this down to:
> - a sturdy, portable 17" form factor for general use,
> - the current MS design for kiosk applications, and
> - a drafting-table size for professional use.
>
> Oh, and a whiteboard format to keep executives and Jack Bauer fans
> happy.
>
> > On the flipside...
> >
> > I also think it's tempting to ascribe applications to this that
> > really,
> > could be easily done on regular computers (but people don't).
> <SNIP>
>
> I'm not so enamored with the scenario of 'manually' (virtumanually?)
> transferring data from device to device as shown in the multi-touch
> table+camera+handheld scenario. Looks cool, but if I have a batch of
> wireless devices (WiFi, Bluetooth, etc), why do the _mobile devices_
> require a separate computer as a sort of 50-pound wireless dongle?
> Why can't we make them smart enough to Just Work Together? Is it
> really a stretch to make mobile devices that understand how to
> silently share data appropriately with other devices owned by Self |
> Family | Friends | Colleagues | Others?
>
> Please note: I'm not saying any specific multi-touch table platform
> is deficient in this area, but that this particular demo scenario --
> for ANY multi-touch platform -- should be considered For
> Entertainment Purposes Only.
>
> - Will
>
> Will Parker
> wparker at ChannelingDesign.com
>
> "I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If
> that were the case, then Microsoft would have great products." -
> Steve Jobs
>
>
>