Apple calls multitouch Mac a "research project"

So we didn't get the multitouch iMac today that some might have been hoping for, but Steve Jobs did drop one tasty hint about the oft-rumored technology. During the Q&A portion of today's keynote, somebody referred the iPhone's multitouch sensing and asked, "what about for the Mac?" Steve, surprisingly, replied. "Makes sense for the iPhone, not sure it makes sense in the Mac. Classify that as a research project." So there you have it, straight from the horse's mouth: Apple is at least considering letting you get all touchy touchy with your Mac's screen, and you can't ask for much more than that, right?

[Gil @ Aug 7th 2007 2:48PM]

That's because the iPhone uses capacitive sensors for multitouch. That system isn't that well suited for large screens.

[Richard A. @ Aug 7th 2007 2:49PM]

Apple.com main page just refreshed with today's product revelations!

http://www.apple.com

[Tim Goldsmith @ Aug 7th 2007 2:53PM]

"Makes sense for the iPhone, not sure it makes sense in the Mac."

i think that makes it sound like they aren't considering it, and to say that we can "classify it as a research project" is just a way of him saying forget about it for a long time

[Nick @ Aug 7th 2007 5:30PM]

i would agree... but it would make sense for the mac tablet that they sent in a patent for couple years ago.

[Homeboy @ Aug 7th 2007 2:56PM]

A multi touch interface for an iMac would be superb. but instead of touching the screen with you fingers you slide them on a multi-touch touch pad on a table. After all who would want to stand up sliding their fingers all across a gigantic 30 inch cinema display?

[LegendZ28 @ Aug 7th 2007 6:25PM]

Having to touch a touchpad (rather than the screen) flies in the face of the technology, the whole point is to be able to interact with things on screen as if they are actual objects.

[Johnson Rice @ Aug 13th 2007 9:21PM]

I totally disagree, a multi-touch tablet surface that is not a touchscreen, is a GREAT first start. I would love it if my wacom could use my fingers and if I could use my whole hand and use the same finger motions I get on my iphone. Also it would be nice in a photo situation to have what apple DIDN'T get, a rotate motion, as is presented in Jeff Han's TED presentation.

In fact, look up the Jeff Han video, his angled screen is great, but imagine two options, touching the screen itself, as in that video, or rotating the screen from 45 degrees to 90 degrees (flush with the wall) where you would then back away from the screen, and use a remote touching surface to control the screen. (I'd sit on the couch with a tablet on my lap squishing away with my fingers)

Although, I kind of do that sometimes now...

[js @ Aug 7th 2007 3:01PM]

It might be a research project for Applebots, but for Microsoft it's already a reality.

[Mike Cohen @ Aug 7th 2007 7:07PM]

an extremely expensive reality the size of a coffee table and stolen from Jeff Han

[Harbinger @ Aug 7th 2007 4:25PM]

I realize js is a troll and all, but on what planet where the iPhone has multi-touch and the Surface is an unreleased product is Microsoft leading?

[Matt @ Aug 7th 2007 5:38PM]

Harbinger's Question: "...on what planet where the iPhone has multi-touch and the Surface is an unreleased product is Microsoft leading?"

Matt's Answer: On the planet where the iPhone is small and the Surface is big. They use completely different methodologies to perform the multi-touch function and really aren't comparable. The Surface can detect cameras or cellphones just by laying them down on top of it. The Surface can then automatically connect to that device using Bluetooth and begin opening files from it. Can your iPhone do that? Totally different tech and Microsoft is ahead (for a change).

[Kenban @ Aug 8th 2007 12:48AM]

Just want to point out how Microsoft's "reality" works. Microsoft uses a system in which several cameras track the surface from below which requires the image be projected. This is why it was done in a table. There are a lot of possible problems with this but what it comes down to is that its not actually a touch screen device.

[Twitchy @ Aug 10th 2007 8:32AM]

Don't forget that it requires cash reserves greater than what two grown men can collectively shake one rather large stick at.

[roc ingersol @ Aug 7th 2007 3:10PM]

a multitouch imac that you can pull off the stand and use as a tablet would kick unholy amounts of ass. particularly now that they've got the wireless keyboard and mouse.

plus, they could move the power supply out of the 'chin' and into a traditional brick, and make the whole device alot better looking.

[tb @ Aug 7th 2007 8:05PM]

hell yes, make it a tablet with a dock (and power the dock with a brick, that way when you travel th dock stays there and the brick can still be used with the itablet

[james @ Aug 7th 2007 3:25PM]

STEVE calls multitouch a research project.

[Miles @ Aug 7th 2007 3:30PM]

Yeah, Microsoft already has made working multi-touch monitors that are around as thin as a regular LCD screen.

I'll look for it on Channel 9 and post it here.

Anyways I don't see much use for multi-touch on the desktop, but maybe that's just me.

[Jay @ Aug 7th 2007 3:38PM]

You are incapable of writing a mobile phone article without mentioning the iPhone, nor a PMP article without mentioning the iPod.

So why doesn't this article mention Surface?

And why doesn't your keyword include a single Surface article (but a couple of Apple articles - including the usual "Will they possibly one day think about trying this?!?!?!?!?")?

[wickedpheonix @ Aug 7th 2007 3:49PM]

Surface isn't entirely there yet. Last time I saw, they needed cameras to see what was being placed on the screen which makes it entirely not possible for home use, and is extremely inelegant as a solution. Meaning, Apple wouldn't do something like that, and therefore Surface doesn't deserve a mention in the same paragraph as the... well, if I said it it would be putting it in the same paragraph wouldn't it? :P

Multi-touch on a desktop computer right now only makes sense for very large screens, meaning a screen that you would operate while standing up, not sitting down. As of yet Apple apparently doesn't want to put a MultiTouch keyboard in a desktop so that iMac won't be going stand-less anytime soon (and a good thing too, I mean imaging trying to play a "legacy" full-screen game or use Boot Camp...)

[Radioheaddickie @ Aug 7th 2007 3:58PM]

This is somewhat disappointing. A month with my iPhone, and gesture based computing already feels like second nature to me (keyboard included). When I'm doing about multi-tasking and otherwise not paying attention, I'll sometimes reach towards my laptop screen futily trying to pinch or double tap. I'm curious if anyone asked SJ if it "makes sense" to slap on a touchscreen on a MB?

[steve @ Aug 7th 2007 5:06PM]

tablet anyone?

[Nick @ Aug 7th 2007 5:33PM]

http://www.engadget.com/2005/05/10/apples-patented-the-tablet-mac/

[G-stylez @ Aug 7th 2007 5:21PM]

Why would anyone want a touch screen iMac... do you really think it will be affordable at this time? Maybe a touch screen tablet/notebook. HP has a touch screen computer... umm SUCKS. You still need to use the mouse and keyboard.

About "SURFACE"... not even out... and it's 10k. don't even compare please

[Matt @ Aug 7th 2007 5:37PM]

So...buy a new iMac after today to replace your other iMac, then buy another iMac when this one comes out, great logic.

[Kenban @ Aug 8th 2007 1:00AM]

Microsoft's Surface cannot actually tell what objects that are placed on it are. What it does is use its cameras to find tags placed on objects. Similar to a barcode they just provide the system with a number which is then looked up in a table. If the tag falls off, gets dirty, or the object is placed so the tag does not face down then Surface has no why of telling what the object is. The two are totally different technology and I really have no clue why people continue to compare them.

[Collin H. @ Aug 7th 2007 6:02PM]

I think we're making it more than it really is. Steve probably had that little grin on his face that says, "Eh, maybe."

[chrisco2k3 @ Aug 7th 2007 6:14PM]

http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/994.jpg

[Chris @ Aug 8th 2007 11:06AM]

When Steve says that it's a research project, I don't think he means they are currently working on it. Rather he's being nice and saying the equivalent of, "yeah, we'll have to think about that one." At least that's how I take it. Ergonomically, it only makes sense on a tablet. Forget it on the iMac, Cinema displays, or laptops.

[Tobin @ Aug 9th 2007 12:25PM]

Is it just me, or did engadget turn into an Apple fanboi rag? Every other article posted is about Apple or Steve Jobs.