If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Touch-Screen Monitors Compatible With 7 or XP?
Looking at all the new PCs (not just laptops) coming out with touch
screens, I have to wonder if retrofits are going to be possible for Windows 7 and/or XP systems? I'm thinking something where the finger on a screen acts like mouse - with tab to click - on, say, a 1900x1200 monitor. -- Pete Cresswell |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Touch-Screen Monitors Compatible With 7 or XP?
"(PeteCresswell)" wrote in message ... Looking at all the new PCs (not just laptops) coming out with touch screens, I have to wonder if retrofits are going to be possible for Windows 7 and/or XP systems? I'm thinking something where the finger on a screen acts like mouse - with tab to click - on, say, a 1900x1200 monitor. -- Pete Cresswell If you Google you'll find lots of info, like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKGM8XqLhBA |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Touch-Screen Monitors Compatible With 7 or XP?
On Fri, 15 Feb 2013 10:15:00 -0500, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Looking at all the new PCs (not just laptops) coming out with touch screens, I have to wonder if retrofits are going to be possible for Windows 7 and/or XP systems? I'm thinking something where the finger on a screen acts like mouse - with tab to click - on, say, a 1900x1200 monitor. I don't have a touch screen monitor, but my guess is these things are not going to go over too well on a desktop PC. Why would I want to stretch my arm out and poke a screen when it's much easier to use a mouse. On the other hand, if I had a tablet or even my laptop on my lap, a touch screen is easier that trying to fiddle with a mouse. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Touch-Screen Monitors Compatible With 7 or XP?
Hi Wolf
Wolf K wrote: The issue is precision. Your finger's touch surface is about 1/4" in diameter, more or less. How old are you, mine is the double.;-) The mouse pointer is actually a square (large enough to display the arrow), whose active area is a few pixels in diameter. The image of the mousepointer is a square, but the hotspot is exactly one pixel, if you want to do a click the mouse-up have to be within a certain distance from the mouse-down in order to be recognised as a click. When you do drawing or things that respond to a mouse-down the precession is one pixel exactly. -- Best regards Asger-P http://Asger-P.dk/software QLaunch is a must try, 12 new tools. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Touch-Screen Monitors Compatible With 7 or XP?
Wolf K wrote:
On 2/15/2013 10:15 AM, (PeteCresswell) wrote: Looking at all the new PCs (not just laptops) coming out with touch screens, I have to wonder if retrofits are going to be possible for Windows 7 and/or XP systems? I'm thinking something where the finger on a screen acts like mouse - with tab to click - on, say, a 1900x1200 monitor. Touch screens are already available on laptops and all-in-one desktops, but I suspect that they won't be nearly as useful as people think. It's just the latest thing. I suppose it depends on your definition of "useful". I use a tablet for my day-to-day biz needs, and I use the hell out of *that* touch screen -- but at home, on my workstation, it would be pretty inconvenient to have to reach across the desk to poke the monitor every time I needed to click something. (On the flip side of that, my tablet came with a keyboard that works as a sort of docking station, effectively turning it into a laptop. I use it at home when necessary.) As for touch screens being the "latest thing" (which you are almost certainly right), they have been available for a couple of decades (at least), it's only now that they're becoming "hip" (or whatever). The issue is precision. Your finger's touch surface is about 1/4" in diameter, more or less. The mouse pointer is actually a square (large enough to display the arrow), whose active area is a few pixels in diameter. There's no way you can have that kind of precision with your finger tip. Thus, a touch-operated GUI will use a lot of real estate (for tabs, eg) compared to a mouse- or touch-pad operated one. The physical size of the screen is more important than the resolution, I think. Minor detail: the hotspot for any cursor is 1 pixel. But I agree with you; trying to poke (for example) Winamp's close button (a tiny button next to 2 other tiny buttons) with my finger is an exercise in frustration. I wrote an app specifically for use on tablets, and I had to make the buttons (relatively) *huge* for them to be useful. I was issued an iPad as part of my work on a volunteer board, and have found that its touch screen is woefully lacking. The iPad is good for reading documents, handy for casual photography, OK (just barely) for video-phone, but not for real work. I mean, you can take notes if you really want to, but a real keyboard and mouse is much more convenient. My tablet runs Windows. (Normal x86 Win7, not the new ARM Win8.) I use it for data entry in Excel while I'm on the road. It's better than when I was using a laptop. Bottom line: a touch GUI is good for a two or three operations, such as opening an app or paging through a (short) document, but not good enough for anything else. To each his own, I suppose. I've used my tablet for data entry, internet, programming, games, and reading without any problems beyond "minor inconvenience". (But note that I don't normally use it at home.) Postscript: even for reading documents, the iPad is mediocre. Paper is much easier to handle, not least because it's much lighter. It's storage of documents that makes the iPad a viable device. As a substitute for paper it's merely average IMO. While individual books may be lighter, I wouldn't want to carry around several dozen books, whereas my tablet's weight doesn't increase no matter how many books I have stored there. (I actually *prefer* digital formats to dead tree format.) -- So it's sorta social. Demented and sad, but social. Right? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Touch-Screen Monitors Compatible With 7 or XP?
Wolf K wrote:
On 2/15/2013 10:15 AM, (PeteCresswell) wrote: Looking at all the new PCs (not just laptops) coming out with touch screens, I have to wonder if retrofits are going to be possible for Windows 7 and/or XP systems? I'm thinking something where the finger on a screen acts like mouse - with tab to click - on, say, a 1900x1200 monitor. Touch screens are already available on laptops and all-in-one desktops, but I suspect that they won't be nearly as useful as people think. It's just the latest thing. The issue is precision. Your finger's touch surface is about 1/4" in diameter, more or less. The mouse pointer is actually a square (large enough to display the arrow), whose active area is a few pixels in diameter. There's no way you can have that kind of precision with your finger tip. Thus, a touch-operated GUI will use a lot of real estate (for tabs, eg) compared to a mouse- or touch-pad operated one. The physical size of the screen is more important than the resolution, I think. I was issued an iPad as part of my work on a volunteer board, and have found that its touch screen is woefully lacking. The iPad is good for reading documents, handy for casual photography, OK (just barely) for video-phone, but not for real work. I mean, you can take notes if you really want to, but a real keyboard and mouse is much more convenient. Bottom line: a touch GUI is good for a two or three operations, such as opening an app or paging through a (short) document, but not good enough for anything else. Postscript: even for reading documents, the iPad is mediocre. Paper is much easier to handle, not least because it's much lighter. It's storage of documents that makes the iPad a viable device. As a substitute for paper it's merely average IMO. It's horses for courses. My iPad with its touch-screen is fantastic. I can read books in car-parks, watch movies, listen to music; and recently I've plugged it into my home hi-fi and listened to BBC podcasts through a top-notch speaker system. I play games on planes, once sat at a table outside the Αθηναιων *ολιτεια cafe in Athens, looking up at the Acropolis and using the cafe's wi-fi to query the Net about things. Fantastic! But I also have my desktop at home. On that I do all kinds of things, but they don't seem to require a touch-screen. That's my seasoned use of modern IT. It works for me. Win7 on the desktop; iOSX on the pad. Am I missing something? I sure feel to be more on-line than I was five years ago. Ed |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Touch-Screen Monitors Compatible With 7 or XP?
Wolf K wrote:
On 2/15/2013 2:28 PM, Ed Cryer wrote: [snip my comments] It's horses for courses. My iPad with its touch-screen is fantastic. I can read books in car-parks, watch movies, listen to music; and recently I've plugged it into my home hi-fi and listened to BBC podcasts through a top-notch speaker system. I play games on planes, once sat at a table outside the Αθηναιων *ολιτεια cafe in Athens, looking up at the Acropolis and using the cafe's wi-fi to query the Net about things. Fantastic! But I also have my desktop at home. On that I do all kinds of things, but they don't seem to require a touch-screen. That's my seasoned use of modern IT. It works for me. Win7 on the desktop; iOSX on the pad. Am I missing something? I sure feel to be more on-line than I was five years ago. Ed Well, watching movies, surfing the web, etc, isn't a touch screen thing, it's a device thing. I've used the iPad occasionally for web searches, it's OK for that. But generally, I just don't find the iPad versatile enough. Its worst fault: only one app open/visible at a time, and no way to switch apps without going through the home screen. As for watching movies, I dislike small screens. FWIW, I don't consider Utoob stuff to be movies. ;-) As document reader, the iPad is not ideal. The screen is too small, and when I zoom a PDF page to make the text readable, I may lose some of the document. The app should automagically reflow text to always fit the screen. Like Ctrl+ ;-) But then, no technology is ideal. I feel a king with an iPad. It's a staggering piece of equipment to carry around in a bag. All the books, films, documents, music, + access to the whole world's history and knowledge at your finger-tips. You can even use it as a satnav. I have a secret dream of inventing a time-machine and going back to tell Archimedes about the future. I dream that neither myself nor the time-machine would impress him too much; but the iPad would blow him away. Ed |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Touch-Screen Monitors Compatible With 7 or XP?
On Fri, 15 Feb 2013 11:17:58 -0500, Wolf K wrote:
The issue is precision. Your finger's touch surface is about 1/4" in diameter, more or less. The mouse pointer is actually a square (large enough to display the arrow), whose active area is a few pixels in diameter. There's no way you can have that kind of precision with your finger tip. Far into the future, evolution will be delivering humans with ultra-pointy fingers. Just kidding. I'm quite sure science will find a way to make a wireless interface directly to our brains. -- Char Jackson |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Touch-Screen Monitors Compatible With 7 or XP?
On Fri, 15 Feb 2013 17:48:13 -0600, Char Jackson wrote:
On Fri, 15 Feb 2013 11:17:58 -0500, Wolf K wrote: The issue is precision. Your finger's touch surface is about 1/4" in diameter, more or less. The mouse pointer is actually a square (large enough to display the arrow), whose active area is a few pixels in diameter. There's no way you can have that kind of precision with your finger tip. Far into the future, evolution will be delivering humans with ultra-pointy fingers. Just kidding. I'm quite sure science will find a way to make a wireless interface directly to our brains. And in that era, the brain is what will evolve to be ultra-pointy. A moment of seriousness: it seems that the Windows 8 interface and touchscreen interfaces are definitely in the ' chacun son got' realm. I'm somewhere in the middle of things. I'm neither as positive as the ones here (and in real life) who like tablets et al, nor as negative as the haters. To me, as some in this thread seem to think, the different devices have different fields of application, and both are fine (well, good enough, at least) when restricted to the places where they work best... -- Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch) |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Touch-Screen Monitors Compatible With 7 or XP?
On 16/02/2013 3:17 AM, Wolf K wrote:
On 2/15/2013 10:15 AM, (PeteCresswell) wrote: Looking at all the new PCs (not just laptops) coming out with touch screens, I have to wonder if retrofits are going to be possible for Windows 7 and/or XP systems? I'm thinking something where the finger on a screen acts like mouse - with tab to click - on, say, a 1900x1200 monitor. Touch screens are already available on laptops and all-in-one desktops, but I suspect that they won't be nearly as useful as people think. It's just the latest thing. The issue is precision. Your finger's touch surface is about 1/4" in diameter, more or less. The mouse pointer is actually a square (large enough to display the arrow), whose active area is a few pixels in diameter. There's no way you can have that kind of precision with your finger tip. Thus, a touch-operated GUI will use a lot of real estate (for tabs, eg) compared to a mouse- or touch-pad operated one. The physical size of the screen is more important than the resolution, I think. I was issued an iPad as part of my work on a volunteer board, and have found that its touch screen is woefully lacking. The iPad is good for reading documents, handy for casual photography, OK (just barely) for video-phone, but not for real work. I mean, you can take notes if you really want to, but a real keyboard and mouse is much more convenient. Bottom line: a touch GUI is good for a two or three operations, such as opening an app or paging through a (short) document, but not good enough for anything else. Postscript: even for reading documents, the iPad is mediocre. Paper is much easier to handle, not least because it's much lighter. It's storage of documents that makes the iPad a viable device. As a substitute for paper it's merely average IMO. If you can use a smartphone you can use a touch screen. I have fat fingers but have no trouble fingering up MS Windows 8 on my Lenovo ThinkPad Twist. I'm loving it, it's heaps better, not just in Metro but also on anything in the desktop too, and scrolling is zillions of times better with the finger and when I'm getting lots of popups its so much easier to poke them with the finger than move a mouse around. In practice, I'm finding a finger for most things is better than the mouse but there's a couple of areas where the mouse pointer is better, I use both and effortlessly switch between them. |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Touch-Screen Monitors Compatible With 7 or XP?
On Fri, 15 Feb 2013 10:15:00 -0500 "(PeteCresswell)" wrote
in article Looking at all the new PCs (not just laptops) coming out with touch screens, I have to wonder if retrofits are going to be possible for Windows 7 and/or XP systems? I'm thinking something where the finger on a screen acts like mouse - with tab to click - on, say, a 1900x1200 monitor. How much money do you have? Wacom makes gorgeous monitors that are touch sensitive. I'm not sure fingers work with them - there's a stylus. They're aimed at the graphics arts market. If you've ever watched the Orange County Choppers TV show, the designer there uses one. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Touch-Screen Monitors Compatible With 7 or XP?
"Jason" wrote:
"(PeteCresswell)" wrote: Looking at all the new PCs (not just laptops) coming out with touch screens, I have to wonder if retrofits are going to be possible for Windows 7 and/or XP systems? I'm thinking something where the finger on a screen acts like mouse - with tab to click - on, say, a 1900x1200 monitor. How much money do you have? Wacom makes gorgeous monitors that are touch sensitive. I'm not sure fingers work with them - there's a stylus. They're aimed at the graphics arts market. If you've ever watched the Orange County Choppers TV show, the designer there uses one. Are you thinking about the Wacom Cintiq 24HD at ~US$2300? 1920x1200, 24" display, 16:10 ratio, and 2048 levels of pressure resolution. No, I don't have one (drool...) but as I read the specs it's not a touch-sensitive screen. Joe |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Touch-Screen Monitors Compatible With 7 or XP?
On Sun, 17 Feb 2013 07:57:46 -0500 "Joe Morris"
wrote in article "Jason" wrote: "(PeteCresswell)" wrote: Looking at all the new PCs (not just laptops) coming out with touch screens, I have to wonder if retrofits are going to be possible for Windows 7 and/or XP systems? I'm thinking something where the finger on a screen acts like mouse - with tab to click - on, say, a 1900x1200 monitor. How much money do you have? Wacom makes gorgeous monitors that are touch sensitive. I'm not sure fingers work with them - there's a stylus. They're aimed at the graphics arts market. If you've ever watched the Orange County Choppers TV show, the designer there uses one. Are you thinking about the Wacom Cintiq 24HD at ~US$2300? 1920x1200, 24" display, 16:10 ratio, and 2048 levels of pressure resolution. No, I don't have one (drool...) but as I read the specs it's not a touch-sensitive screen. Joe I don't have one either and am drooling too. I recently updated the driver for my old Wacom Intuos tablet for Win 7 and they now have incorporated gestures into the interface. They work surprisingly well. Jason |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Touch-Screen Monitors Compatible With 7 or XP?
"Jason" wrote in message
... On Sun, 17 Feb 2013 07:57:46 -0500 "Joe Morris" wrote in article "Jason" wrote: "(PeteCresswell)" wrote: Looking at all the new PCs (not just laptops) coming out with touch screens, I have to wonder if retrofits are going to be possible for Windows 7 and/or XP systems? I'm thinking something where the finger on a screen acts like mouse - with tab to click - on, say, a 1900x1200 monitor. How much money do you have? Wacom makes gorgeous monitors that are touch sensitive. I'm not sure fingers work with them - there's a stylus. They're aimed at the graphics arts market. If you've ever watched the Orange County Choppers TV show, the designer there uses one. Are you thinking about the Wacom Cintiq 24HD at ~US$2300? 1920x1200, 24" display, 16:10 ratio, and 2048 levels of pressure resolution. No, I don't have one (drool...) but as I read the specs it's not a touch-sensitive screen. Joe I don't have one either and am drooling too. I recently updated the driver for my old Wacom Intuos tablet for Win 7 and they now have incorporated gestures into the interface. They work surprisingly well. Jason I've had my Sony VPCL116FX All-in-one desktop for a couple of years. I got it at the local MS store in our mall. It came with Win 7 and has touch screen and works fine. I find I seldom use the touch screen function since it's easier to use my cordless mouse. It came with full TV capability using Windows Media Center. Even has on screen TV guide and I can record on the computer's hard drive. I won't upgrade to Win 8 because the evaluation program shows that several things including the TV function won't work with Win 8. Last month I got on line a LG 42” 3D HDTV that’s “smart”. It’s really kewl! I can access the internet on it and the 3D really looks good. It came with 6 pairs of glasses. Not that many programs in 3D but Consumer Reports recommends them as they only cost a little more that the 2D versions and have a better picture even in 2D. Than if 3D comes out more I’m already set. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Touch-Screen Monitors Compatible With 7 or XP?
In message , Panic
writes: [] I've had my Sony VPCL116FX All-in-one desktop for a couple of years. I got it at the local MS store in our mall. It came with Win 7 and has (MS = Microsoft?) touch screen and works fine. I find I seldom use the touch screen function since it's easier to use my cordless mouse. It came with full That's interesting. TV capability using Windows Media Center. Even has on screen TV guide and I can record on the computer's hard drive. I won't upgrade to Win 8 because the evaluation program shows that several things including the TV function won't work with Win 8. Last month I got on line a LG 42” 3D HDTV that’s “smart”. It’s really kewl! I can access the internet on it and the 3D really looks good. It For those with binocular vision (2 similar eyes and the brain wiring to use both of them at once) [so-called 3D TVs etc. are actually two-image, not true 3D]. came with 6 pairs of glasses. Not that many programs in 3D but Consumer Reports recommends them as they only cost a little more that the 2D versions and have a better picture even in 2D. Than if 3D comes out more I’m already set. I'm intrigued how they _can_ be "better ... even in 2D". -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf "Mr. Spock succumbs to a powerful mating urge and nearly kills Captain Kirk." - TV Guide description of Amok Time Trek episode. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|