fozzard@boulder.Colorado.EDU (Richard Fozzard) (03/23/90)
I just read about Sony's recent announcement in EETimes of the Palmtop computer w/fuzzy logic to do character recognition using a "light pen". It also claims to have a variety of "personal info mgt" software built in (word processor, graphics, scheduler, calculator, etc) and sells for $1400. Is this the Ultimate Laptop some of us here have been lusting for? For now, it only handles Kanji characters, but if it can recognize 3500 Kanji ideographs, it seems a simple matter to get it to manage the <100 ASCII chars most of us use. Anyone know anything more about this device? rich ======================================================================== Richard Fozzard "Serendipity empowers" Univ of Colorado/CIRES/NOAA R/E/FS 325 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80303 fozzard@boulder.colorado.edu (303)497-6011 or 444-3168
garye@microsoft.UUCP (Gary ERICSON) (04/10/90)
>Not to mention the even larger marketplace of poor typists throughout >the world! I agree that a handwriting interface could be very important for oriental languages with huge character sets, and that it could also help those who can't type or who are computerphobics largely because of the keyboard interface, but I think everyone keeps missing a much more important point. I've read and heard many people saying that it would be handy to have computing power in a carry-around size. But in the same breath, palmtops are decried because they are too small. Why? Because it's too difficult to type on a keyboard so tiny. And then when a new palmtop comes out with a non-keyboard interface, it's only discussed from the point of generically comparing a keyboard and handwriting interface. And then, of course, the handwriting interface is pushed off in some specialized corner because, of course, typing is much more efficient than writing by hand. It seems to me, though, that the revolution here comes from the fact that a handwriting interface is *much better* in a handheld size like this than a tiny keyboard would be. I think that when people begin realizing this, these devices are going to explode in popularity. Not because it's good for non-typists or strictly pictorial languages, but because it finally opens the door to computers you can carry in your pocket. >>Definitely an interesting development. >Definitely an understatement. Most definitely. Gary Ericson - Microsoft - Work Group Apps
davidc@vlsisj.VLSI.COM (David Chapman) (04/11/90)
In article <54020@microsoft.UUCP> garye@microsoft.UUCP (Gary ERICSON) writes: >... And then, of course, the >handwriting interface is pushed off in some specialized corner because, of >course, typing is much more efficient than writing by hand. I don't know about you, but I get serious writer's cramp after only about a page or so of writing. Maybe it's just because I'm left-handed, but a keyboard is so much more efficient for me (3-4x) that a stylus interface just isn't going to work. Having that *plus* a keyboard would be nice. >... I think that when people begin realizing this, >these devices are going to explode in popularity. Not because it's good >for non-typists or strictly pictorial languages, but because it finally >opens the door to computers you can carry in your pocket. Again, since I'm left-handed there is a pretty large minumum size for any kind of a notepad, electronic or otherwise. I need a place to put my hand while I write at the left margin. Palm-sized won't work unless I have a place to put it down. And then I probably wouldn't need a palm- sized computer. Of course, the converse of small is more powerful. If they can fit that much power into a palm-sized computer, then the laptops will be proportionally more powerful. And I can't argue with that. Hmmm, maybe I should learn Hebrew or Arabic and write right-to-left... -- David Chapman {known world}!decwrl!vlsisj!fndry!davidc vlsisj!fndry!davidc@decwrl.dec.com
brendan@batserver.cs.uq.oz.au (Brendan Mahony) (04/11/90)
garye@microsoft.UUCP (Gary ERICSON) writes: >>Not to mention the even larger marketplace of poor typists throughout >>the world! >are decried because they are too small. Why? Because it's too difficult >to type on a keyboard so tiny. And then when a new palmtop comes out with >a non-keyboard interface, it's only discussed from the point of generically >comparing a keyboard and handwriting interface. And then, of course, the >handwriting interface is pushed off in some specialized corner because, of >course, typing is much more efficient than writing by hand. If typing is so much more efficient why were there so few typists prior to the "computer revolution". People use computers because being able to "edit" what you write is more efficient than not being able to. People use keyboards because that the only way to get to a computer. Most of them never get much beyond pecking with two fingers. Sure it's possible to type at 200 words a minute, but can you think at 200 words a minute. For me and most I think a keyboard only gets in the way. It fill up my desk and cramps my fingers. This handwriting interface is going to put keyboards back in the typing pool where they belong. Brendan -- Brendan Mahony | Department of Computer Science | University of Queensland | Australia |
conte@crest.csg.uiuc.edu (Tom Conte) (04/11/90)
In article <3223@moondance.cs.uq.oz.au> you write: > garye@microsoft.UUCP (Gary ERICSON) writes: > > >>Not to mention the even larger marketplace of poor typists throughout > >>the world! > > >... And then, of course, the > >handwriting interface is pushed off in some specialized corner because, of > >course, typing is much more efficient than writing by hand. > > ... > This handwriting interface is going to put keyboards back in the typing pool > where they belong. > Oh, I am afraid I disagree. My handwriting speed is considerably slower than my typing speed. There're several explanations for this: the brain has to perform a more complex set of motions per letter for handwriting than for typing, and the amount of physical work (watts) for pressing a key is less than that for writing by hand (barring poorly-designed key- boards). Another reason is the error in processing of a keystrike is much less dependent on transmission (input) speed than handwriting, since handwriting quality tends to degrade with speed. (I would expect using the Sony to be painful-- we just don't have the skill to decode handwriting perfectly in real-time.) The Dvorak keyboard was supposed to solve the speed problem of the QWERTY keyboard layout [the QWERTY keyboard was designed to *slow* *down* typing speed, as the first typewriters were mechanical and would jam at high speeds -- at least the way I heard it, if this is a myth, let me know]. The Dvorak never caught on. It wasn't that much of an improvement in speed to justify the learning time needed. I predict that the situation for handwriting interfaces will not be popular for the above reason: no increase (in fact a decrease) in speed. Note this is not true if the user is writing in Japanese. Sony will have success selling this in Japan, but it I predict no success to latin-aphabet language users. Other input devices will come. The mouse was an experimental toy until Smalltalk and the Alto, and eventually the Lisa/Macintosh put it on all of our desks. The five-key chorded keyboard never made it outside Xerox PARC, sadly. The `glove' is coming. Some day, the implant. ------ Tom Conte Center for Reliable and High-Performance Computing conte@uiuc.edu University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, Illinois
brendan@batserver.cs.uq.oz.au (Brendan Mahony) (04/12/90)
conte@crest.csg.uiuc.edu (Tom Conte) writes: >The Dvorak keyboard was supposed to solve the speed problem of the QWERTY >keyboard layout [the QWERTY keyboard was designed to *slow* *down* typing >speed, as the first typewriters were mechanical and would jam at high speeds >-- at least the way I heard it, if this is a myth, let me know]. The >Dvorak never caught on. It wasn't that much of an improvement in speed >to justify the learning time needed. I predict that the situation for >handwriting interfaces will not be popular for the above reason: no increase >(in fact a decrease) in speed. Note this is not true if the user is writing Handwriting won't replace keyboard input because of the learning time needed? Interesting proposition, especially in illiterate USA. You cunningly omit the main thrust of my argument, that most people do not need the extra speed of the typewriter keyboard. It is the extra speed of the keyboard whose improvement in speed is hard to justify the learning time needed. You have to teach people to write, or they'll never learn to read, but you don't have to teach them to type. Only data input professionals need that sort of speed, and most of them would be out of business if the computer could read the scrawled memo's of executives etc. >Other input devices will come. The mouse was an experimental toy until >Smalltalk and the Alto, and eventually the Lisa/Macintosh put it on all of >our desks. The five-key chorded keyboard never made it outside Xerox PARC, >sadly. The `glove' is coming. >Some day, the implant. You may want the computer to be an intrusion and an inconvenience in your life, but me I want the computer to do the work and make it easier for me to do things better, not differently. -- Brendan Mahony | brendan@batserver.cs.uq.oz | Department of Computer Science | University of Queensland | Australia |
mec@cbnewsj.ATT.COM (michael.e.connick) (04/12/90)
In article <3223@moondance.cs.uq.oz.au> brendan@batserver.cs.uq.oz.au writes: > >are decried because they are too small. Why? Because it's too difficult > >to type on a keyboard so tiny. And then when a new palmtop comes out with > >a non-keyboard interface, it's only discussed from the point of generically > >comparing a keyboard and handwriting interface. And then, of course, the > >handwriting interface is pushed off in some specialized corner because, of > >course, typing is much more efficient than writing by hand. > > This handwriting interface is going to put keyboards back in the typing pool > where they belong. But even with the small keyboard of the Atari Portfolio, I can STILL type faster than I can write clearly! By writing clearly, I mean printing clearly enough so that I have no trouble figuring out what I wrote when reading it later. I still think even 4 fingered hunt and peck typing is going to beat out handwriting everytime for speed of input. ----------------------------------------------------- Michael Connick mec@mtfmi.ATT.COM 201-957-3057 AT&T Bell Labs MT 3F-113 (Dept. 79151)
baez@x.ucr.edu (john baez) (04/13/90)
In article <3237@moondance.cs.uq.oz.au> brendan@batserver.cs.uq.oz.au writes: >You may want the computer to be an intrusion and an inconvenience in your >life, but me I want the computer to do the work and make it easier for >me to do things better, not differently. Better is differently. You want things to be done a bit better but not too differently; that's a matter of taste. Myself, being a neophile, I like better and don't care how differently. I have limits on how much time I can spend learning new tools (an important limitation these days), but I don't care if the tools are radically different, except insofar as radically different tools take longer to learn. Its interesting to think back: since 1986 I learned: 1) How to use the Macintosh, primarily to write math papers. 2) How to use TeX, UNIX and Sun workstations, at first to write math papers. Subsequently, LaTeX. 3) How to use email. 4) How to use usenet news. 5) How to use Mathematica. This is not meant to be impressive; I'm not really into computers for their own sake and only learn stuff when it seems clearly useful. But as a result I spend my days quite differently than I used to, and I live much more in cyberspace. I like it, too! I may waste time reading usenet news, but its a worthwhile waste of time if you know what I mean. It's just interesting to think how many basic tools I've learned in this span, basically just minimally keeping up with progress. Do you call this differently or better.
brendan@batserver.cs.uq.oz.au (Brendan Mahony) (04/13/90)
baez@x.ucr.edu (john baez) writes: >Better is differently. You want things to be done a bit >better but not too differently; that's a matter of taste. >Myself, being a neophile, I like better and don't care >how differently. ... >It's just interesting to think how many >basic tools I've learned in this span, basically just >minimally keeping up with progress. Do you call this >differently or better. Okay, it is fair to change your ways if it allows you to do better, but think on this. I'm sitting in a dark lonely lab, confronted by rows Sun workstations, two to a desk, almost no room left for anything else. Piled haphazardly, in the spare spaces are the various manuals and bit of notes that allow me to do my work, which really is little more than writing down my thoughts and shuffling them into some sort of order. Outside the sun is shining, it is ~25 deg cel. Back when I didn't have these mighty Suns to help me, I would have been outside sitting under a tree and scribbling on a notebook. But since the stuff has to go onto the Sun eventually and no-one is going to transcribe it for me, here I am. Is this really that much better, or is it more different. Less different, more better if you ask me. Ah the bird beckon, farewell. Brendan -- Brendan Mahony | brendan@batserver.cs.uq.oz | Department of Computer Science | University of Queensland | Australia |
pfeiffer@nmsu.edu (Joe Pfeiffer) (04/14/90)
brendan@batserver.cs.uq.oz.au (Brendan Mahony), in <3223@moondance.cs.uq.oz.au>: |If typing is so much more efficient why were there so few typists prior |to the "computer revolution". People use computers because being able |to "edit" what you write is more efficient than not being able to. |People use keyboards because that the only way to get to a computer. |Most of them never get much beyond pecking with two fingers. Sure it's |possible to type at 200 words a minute, but can you think at 200 words |a minute. For me and most I think a keyboard only gets in the way. It |fill up my desk and cramps my fingers. | |This handwriting interface is going to put keyboards back in the typing pool |where they belong. They make us learn to write in the second grade, whether we want to or not. Typing is an elective taken by geeks in high school, when it's much harder to imprint new paths in the brain. That's why there are so few competent typists. I type poorly, with all ten fingers (better than hunt and peck, but thank God for the delete key). I can type faster than I can write, and can read the result. It's easy for me to believe a better interface can exist, but I haven't seen it. Writing isn't it. -Joe.