doering@kodak.UUCP (Paul F. Doering) (04/10/90)
We're getting involved here in a debate on the merits of the handwriting-
recognition capabilities of the newly announced Sony Palmtop portable
computer. There seems to be a general admiration for the technology Sony
has mastered, leaving us -- as Gary Ericson has observed -- discussing the
relative efficiencies of the keyboard and the handwriting interface: a
keyboard on a tiny portable computer is too small for efficent use, so a
handwriting interface is preferable. (Have I been faithful to your
position, Gary?)
I find that two emerging technologies -- handwriting and document scanning
-- are counter-human. If there is one task at which humans are NOT good, it
is proof-reading. Character-recognizing interfaces turn me from a data-
enterer into a proof-reader, and the handwriting interface is by far the
worse from that perspective. Consider the process: I draw a character. While
I am drawing the next (or at least THINKING about drawing the next), the
system is trying to recognize my input. It then makes its best guess
about my intended input and displays that guess. At the very moment my mind
is looking forward, the system requires that I look backward to confirm the
system's recognition. Counter-human.
If you'd like a demonstration of the dilemma, try this. Using a pencil and
a pad, write out the characters of the reply you want to make to this
posting, while a colleague reads back to you the character you have most
recently written. You will soon discover that the future/past confusion in
the data-flow will slow you to a crawl. Now, would you really want to make
ALL your computer entries that way?
Gary, I haven't solved your problem. Itty-bitty keyboards are truly a
bad approach to input. I say that handwriting recognition is no better,
but for a different reason. Can we admit that we don't have a solution?
Opting for a new bad technology over an old bad technology is progress only
for the academicians and hackers. It won't solve the user's problem, and
it won't sell computers.
--
========================= ======================================
Paul Doering (for self) Man will never arrive,
doering@kodak.com man will be always on the way.
========================= =============== -Carl Sandburg =======bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) (04/11/90)
I don't see why it has to be viewed as an either/or proposition.
Forms, such as govt forms, are easier filled in by hand. Until they
are all put on-line (at which time they'll be easier to do with a
keyboard I guess) it's a good application of handwriting technology.
It might still be a good thing whenever you deal with the public and
can't demand everyone walking into the Post Office (e.g.) know how to
type.
Another good application is telephone work, ever try to type while
talking on the telephone? Much easier to take a note handwritten
because it only requires one hand. I'm sure there are other similar
applications. (I know about one-handed keyboards, they've been around
for years and have never caught on except in warehouse/inventory work,
too much special training I guess.) So, jobs which spend a lot of
their time taking notes over the phone (receptionists, telemarketing,
emergency services) might be attracted to this technology.
But I don't think it will replace the keyboard for general text input.
Too slow and error-prone, as has been noted, easier to demand typing
skills which aren't hard to acquire.
It's funny how there's always this small contingent of people who are
so bugged by typing that they're sure every new technology (voice,
handwritten etc.) will replace keyboards.
Forget it, a *LOT* of people have learned how to type just fine, it's
not hard, for most jobs you don't have to be very good even to beat
the heck out of handwritten or voice input. Ever notice that typists
aren't exactly a highly paid skill class? Like, 60WPM with one error
per page pulls in less than most of you pay in taxes every week.
It will be a lot easier (and more useful, in my estimation) to require
some very rudimentary typing skills of high school graduates. Nothing
fancy, the ability to enter a single page of text with no errors (that
is, correcting all errors) into a simple word-processor (cursor keys,
delete key) in, oh, 30 minutes.
So why bother? But for special applications other forms of input can
be far superior (eg. touch-screens for public information booths,
voice for hands-busy/eyes-busy such as pilots or lab workers,
hand-written for single handed input of short entries, forms.)
-Barry Shein
Software Tool & Die | {xylogics,uunet}!world!bzs | bzs@world.std.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202 | Login: 617-739-WRLDKPURCELL@liverpool.ac.UK (Kevin 'fractal' Purcell) (04/11/90)
On 10 Apr 90 15:01:18 GMT Paul F. Doering (rochester!kodak!doering@edu.cmu.cs.pt) said: >We're getting involved here in a debate on the merits of the handwriting- >recognition capabilities of the newly announced Sony Palmtop portable >computer. [deleted] >Character-recognizing interfaces turn me from a data- >enterer into a proof-reader, and the handwriting interface is by far the >worse from that perspective. Consider the process: I draw a character. While >I am drawing the next (or at least THINKING about drawing the next), the >system is trying to recognize my input. It then makes its best guess >about my intended input and displays that guess. At the very moment my mind >is looking forward, the system requires that I look backward to confirm the >system's recognition. Counter-human. Why should the machine recognise stuff character by character. When I write I tend to think in complete words and write them down in one operation. If a a computer uses handwriting recognition for input then there is know reason that it shouldn't try to recognise complete words (the technology is already here -- look how many people have fairly good spelling checkers these days). This would also reduce the amount of mistakes in recognising letters, especially if the common diagrams and trigrams are taken into account (a la typo on Unix systems). A combination of shape, connectivity, velocity, timing, and pressure (using a pressure sensitive stylus) and these higher level processes should lead to remarkable accuracy. [deleted] >Gary, I haven't solved your problem. Itty-bitty keyboards are truly a >bad approach to input. I say that handwriting recognition is no better, >but for a different reason. Can we admit that we don't have a solution? >Opting for a new bad technology over an old bad technology is progress only >for the academicians and hackers. It won't solve the user's problem, and >it won't sell computers. Most people can edit a piece of text by crossing words/letters out, moving them around and adding new text between the lines. Even my old thesis advisor could do this well, but he never liked the keyboard for input and editing. Even with a mouse you loose a lot of the direct feel for the process. Combine the flexibilty of handwriting recognition, the size of a calculator and the user interface of an Apple Mac and you could sell a lot of these to people to replace notebooks, diaries, Filofaxes. But why stop at character recognition: computer-assisted sketching will be a major application for these devices. Most architects I know (i know a few) dislike computers for the initial design work of a building. They'd much rather work on a knapkin or the back of an envelope that to use a CAD station, even if they will use CAD exclusivley later in the project. The need a device that is responsive, flexible and immediate as a pencil and paper. But imagine a device that is as good as a pencil but can then go on to tidy up the drawings, add shading (in a controlled manner), take simple measurements of the drawing, convert free hand drawings into object oriented drawings, and add components from a library of pre-drawn objects or previous sketches. And this device can be pulled out of a pocket and used on site. And so on ..... I'm sure Apple are already thinking about it. >-- > ========================= ====================================== > Paul Doering (for self) Man will never arrive, > doering@kodak.com man will be always on the way. > ========================= =============== -Carl Sandburg ======= ------T-h-e--N-S-A--p-r-o-b-a-b-l-y--r-e-a-d-s--a-l-l--t-h-i-s--s-t-u-f-f------ Kevin 'fractal' Purcell S U R F A C E S C I E N C E C E N T R E kpurcell @ liverpool.ac.uk Liverpool University, Liverpool L69 3BX God is in the strange attractors. I speak only for myself
dennis@CS.WASHINGTON.EDU (Dennis Gentry) (04/11/90)
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 90 10:14:50 BST From: Kevin 'fractal' Purcell <KPURCELL%liverpool.ac.uk@NSFnet-Relay.AC.UK> Subject: Re: Handwritten vs typed input And so on ..... I'm sure Apple are already thinking about it. It seems more likely that of any computer companies, NeXT might already be thinking about it. Apple is having a hard time even upgrading its OS to do things Unix has done for years. It seems even more likely that a CAD company or some other applications developer is thinking about this.