Apple iSlate, iTablet , MacBook Touch: Will it support gesture interaction & haptic feedback?

Soldier Knows Best produces great tech-oriented videos. Here's his spin on all of the rumors about the possibility of the Apple iSlate.


I just inherited a 10 month-old Mac Book, installed Snow Leopard and upgraded to iLife 2009. I'm so used to touching the screen on my HP TouchSmart PC that I found myself touching my Mac Book screen from time to time, especially when I was editing video clips in iMovie. I think the latest version of iMovie was designed with touch/gesture interaction in mind!

From what I can tell, Snow Leopard and iLife 2009 will be able to support a range of touch interactions, if not gesture input as well.

Here are some rumors that have been conjured up and distributed on the web:

The Exhaustive Guide to Applet Tablet Rumors (Matt Buchanan, Gizmodo, 12/26/09)
Apple Expects to Sell 10 Million Tablets in First Year (Pete Cashmore, Mashable, 1/1/10)
iGuide Emerges as Another Potential Apple Tablet Name (Adam Ostrow, Mashable, 12/29/09)
The Tablet (John Gruber, Daring Fireball, 12/31/09)
"And so in answer to my central question, regarding why buy The Tablet if you already have an iPhone and a MacBook, my best guess is that ultimately, The Tablet is something you’ll buy instead of a MacBook."
Apple Owns iSlate.com Domain: The Mystery Deepens (Dan Nosowitz, Gismodo, 12/25/09)
What is the Ultimate Role of the Apple Tablet? (Arnold Kim, MacRumors, 12/31/09)

• 153+ comments to the above MacRumor post

iPad, iTablet, iSlate, or MacTab  (Cruz Miranda, 8/31/09)

Why am I excited about this?

I want to see if the iSlate would be good for collaborative educational games, assisted technology, augmentative communication, and alternative assessment for students who have multiple/severe disabilities.

That is a huge goal, so I'm going to start simple.  I am not giving up on Windows 7 multi-touch programming. I just have an urge to find out for myself what works, what doesn't, and what platform works best for specific "personas" and "scenarios".

I plan to make a little app for the iPhone/iPod Touch, based on a game I made several years ago, "Shoes Your Battles" for a game class. I think I'd like to make this game for the Apple iTablet!

The first version of Shoes Your Battles created with Game Maker, and the second version was in Flash, back in the days of ActionScript 2.0.  I started on third version, one that could be used as an advergame for people to play while shopping for shoes during shoe sales, but it never got past the planning stage.  

The idea for the third version came to me when I my elderly aunt came to visit from out-of-town and just had to go shoe shopping on the day after Thanksgiving.  It was extremely difficult to figure out what was on sale, how much it cost, after taking off the previous mark-downs and what was on sale that had a price that was not yet marked down.  

Adding to the confusion was the fact that there were few salespeople and herds of women.   It was madness.  There were pairs of shoes in the wrong boxes, boxes of shoes and no way to quickly find out the true prices!   We were in the shoe department for hours, and it wasn't as fun as you'd think. If you've been in a crowded women's shoe department to buy that special pair of shoes during a fantastic shoe sale, you'll know what I mean.

At any rate, I wanted my little "Shoes Your Battles" game to help with this dreadful scenario, by somehow incorporating a shoe shopping advisor and a means to figure out the REAL sales prices of those awesome, to-die-for shoes. Unfortunately, the technology wasn't where it needed to be at the time- I am always dreaming up things that are too d--- futuristic!

4 years later, we have iPhones and SmartPhones and 3G internet and RFID and ubiquitous WiFi and the Wii and more women who like to play games and...and... The time is ripe.

Apple better come up with the iSlate!

SOMEWHAT RELATED


Thinking about post-WIMP HCI
It is always important to re-visit wisdom from the past when thinking about new interfaces and means of technology-supported human interaction.  Here are a few resources from the field of Human-Computer Interaction found on the HCI Vistas website:
The Prism of User Experience  -A nice graphic metaphor to help the conceptualization process. (Denish Katre, 2007)
Journal of HCI Vistas: Multi-disciplinary Perspective of Usability and HCI
Personas as part of a user-centered innovation process Lene Nielsen, 1/08 HCI Vistas Vol-IV
10 Steps to Personas (Lene Nielsen, 7/07, HCI Vistas Vol-III)

Josh Blake's' Nice Multi-touch and Natural User Interface Applications for Surface (Cross-Post )

Information from Josh's YouTube channel:
"This is a video of some of the cool multi-touch and Natural User Interface (NUI) applications I designed and developed for Surface and Windows 7." The InfoStrat.VE map control for WPF and Surface is available for free at http://virtualearthwpf.codeplex.com.
I especially like the moving ring-menu concept, as it facilitates smoother collaboration between people on an interactive table or surface, where flexible orientation control is important.

At 3:15, the demonstration of Josh's ink-shape recognition begins. This is a feature that would be great to incorporate in my applications for children with disabilities who have some fine-motor limitations.

Josh's Blog:  Deconstructing the NUI
Josh's Recent Post about post-WIMP concepts:
Metaphors and OCGM
Josh works at InfoStrat

The Post-WIMP Explorers' Club: Update of the Updates, Morning of 12/31/09

What is the Post WIMP Explorers Club?  
I came up with the name of this semi-fictional club as a way to organize my thoughts (and blog posts) regarding the development of a new metaphor for post-WIMP applications and technologies, related specifically to natural user interfaces, natural user interaction design, and off-the-desktop user experience.  


Update, morning of 12/31/09:
Josh Blake, author of the blog "Deconstructing the NUI", posted Metaphors and OCGM  this morning.  It fleshes out post-WIMP concepts, addressing metaphors & interfaces.  The premise is that NUI metaphors will be less complex than GUI (WIMP) metaphors.    My feeling is that on the surface, this will hold true, especially for consumers/users and people creating light-weight applications and software widgets.  


Underneath the surface,  where designers and developers brains spend more time than users & consumers, things might be more complex.  Why? The technology to support the required wizardry is more complex.  With convergence, the creation of new technologies, applications, communication systems, and even electronic entertainment, is  now dependent upon the work and thinking of people from a wider range of disciplines.  Each discipline brings to the table a set of terms rooted in theory, and even research practices.

Update,  late afternoon, 12/30/09:

Richard Monson-Haefels response to Ron George's "Part 2".  The concept of OCGM might be growing on him now... OCGM: George's Razor : "If Ron George can explain how OCGM encompasses Affordances and Feedback than I'll be convinced that OCGM works for NUI. Otherwise, I think OCGM is a great start that would benefit from an added "A" and "F"." -Richard   

• OCGM relates to Occam's Razor.  It is helpful to read a bit about it if you are are interested in the post WIMP conversations. (The link is to an an article from "How Stuff Works", via Richard Monson-Haefel.)

UPDATE 12/30/09  -- This post is part of a discussion between several different bloggers, and was written before Ron George wrote his latest post, Welcome to the OCGM Generation!  Part 2, which I recommend that you read now, or within the same time frame, as this post.   Since I'm not ready to write "Part 2" of this post, I tweaked what I had and added some links to a handful of my previous posts that touch on this and related topics.  The links can be found at the bottom of this post.




START HERE FOR THE "ORIGINAL" POST FROM  12/29 & 12/20/09:


Background
About a year ago I responded to a conversation between Johnathan Brill, Josh Blake, and Richard Monson-Haefel discussing "post-WIMP" conceptualization regarding natural user interfaces and interaction, otherwise known as NUI.  The focus of the discussion was on Johnathan's post, "New Multi-touch Interface Conventions". At the time, we were reading Dan Saffer's book, Designing Gestural Interfaces, and contemplating new ways that technology can support human interaction and activities in a more natural, enjoyable, and intuitive manner.  

A few days later, I shared some of the concepts from the discussion on a post on this blog, "Why "new" ways of interaction?".  The post includes video of Johnathan Brill discussing PATA, a post-WIMP analogue to assist with multi-touch/gesture based application development, which he describes as follows:
Places
"Lighting, focus, and depth, simplified searching and effecting hyperlinked content."
Animation "Using animation to subtly demonstrate what applications do and how to use them is a better solution than using icons. Animations makes apps easier to learn."
Things "Back in the days of floppy disks, objects helped us organize our content. This limitation was forced by arcane technology, but it did have one huge advantage. We used our spatial memory to help us navigate content. Things will help us organize content and manipulate controllers across a growing variety of devices."
Auras "Auras will help us track what we are tracking and when an interaction has been successful."
(For reference, I've copied some of my responses to the first discussion, which can be found near the end of this post)


A year later....
What has changed?   Everything post-WIMP has been covered like a blanket by the NUI-word.  "NUI" now functions as a generic term for anything that is not exactly WIMP.  There is a sense of urgency now to figure out how best to conceptualize post-WIMP interfaces and interactions.  Newer, affordable technologies enable us to interact with friends and family while we are on-the go. Netbooks, e-Readers, SmartPhones, large touch screen displays, interactive HDTV, and new devices with multi-modal I/O's abound.  Our grandparents are on Facebook and twitter from their iPhones.  Our world no longer requires us to be slaves to the WIMP mentality.


So what is the problem?
The technology has moved along so fast that application designers and developers have not had a chance to catch up. (The iPhone is an exception.)  The downturn in the economy has made it difficult for many to take the leap from traditional software or web development and gain new skill sets.  On top of it all, most of us over the age of 15 have been brainwashed from years of working within the constraints of WIMP. It doesn't matter if we are users, consumers, students, designers, or developers.


Even the folks least likely to have difficulty expanding into the post-WIMP world have had some difficulty.  If you've had training in HCI (Human-Computer Interaction), you were inadvertently brainwashed with the best. The bulk of the theory and research you contemplated was launched at a time when WIMP was king, even as the Web expanded. Many of the of the principles held dear to traditional HCI folks have been shattered, and no-one has come up with a "theory of everything" that will cover all of the human actions and interactions that are supported or guided by new technologies.


The problem, in part, is that letting go of WIMP is hard to do, as illustrated by the following post from the Ars Technica website:  Light Touch:  A Design Firm Grapples with Microsoft Surface  (Matthew Braga, 6/29/09) "Ditching the mouse and keyboard means a whole lot more than just doing without two common peripherals.  As those who have worked with Microsoft Surface have found out, you have to jettison decades of GUI baggage and start with a whole new mindset...In actuality, few multi-touch gestures are really anything like what we experience in the physical world. There is no situation in which we pull on the corners of an image to increase its size, or swipe in a direction to reveal more content. So, in the context of real-world interaction, these types of gestures are far from natural...gestures should not only feel natural, but logical; the purpose that gestures like these serve, after all, is to replace GUI elements to the end of making interaction a more organic process."   (Be sure to read the comments.)

Now that the Surface is taking root in more places, and touch-screen all-in-one PC's and tablets are starting to multiply, more people are giving "NUI" some thought. Ron George, an interaction and product designer with experience working with Microsoft's Surface team has contributed to the post-WIMP discussion and spent some time sharing ideas with Josh Blake, a .NET, SharePoint, and Microsoft Surface Consultant for InfoStrat and author of Deconstructing the NUI blog. The outcome of this discussion was Ron George's December 28th blog post, "OCGM (pronounced Occam['s Razor] is the replacement for WIMP", and Josh Blake's post, "WIMP is to GUI as OCGM (Occam) is to NUI".   (Be sure to read the comments for both of these posts!)


OCGM (as conceptualized by Ron George)


Objects "are the core of the experience. They can have a direct correlation with something physical, or they can just be objects in the interface."


Containers "will be the “grouping” of the objects. This can manifest itself in whatever the system sees fit to better organize or instruct the user on interactions. They do not have to be, nor should they be, windows. They can be any sort of method of presentation or relationship gathering as seen fit."


Gestures "I went into detail about the differences in Gestures and Manipulations in a previous post [check it out for a refresher]. Gestures are actions performed by the user that initiate a function after its completion and recognition by the system. This is an indirect action on the system because it needs to be completed before the system will react to it."


Manipulations "are the direct influences on an object or a container by the user. These are immediate and responsive. They are generally intuitive and mimic the physical world in some manner. The results are expected and should be non-destructive. These are easily performed and accidental activations should be expected and frequent."

To illustrate a point regarding the validity of the OCGM analogy proposed by Ron George, Josh Blake shares the following video of a presentation from REMIX 2009, in which August de los Reyes, the Principle Director of User Experience for Surface Computing at Microsoft, briefly discusses the TOCA (Touch, Objects, Containers, and Actions) concept, suggested to replace the WIMP concept:

The video wouldn't embed, so go to the following link:


Predicting the Past: A Vision for Microsoft Surface
"Natural User Interface (NUI) is here. New systems of interaction require new approaches to design. Microsoft Surface stands at the forefront of this product space. This presentation looks at one of the richest sources for inventing the future: the past. By analyzing preceding inflection points in user interface, we can derive some patterns that point to the brave NUI world." 

The concepts outlined in the presentation are similar to Microsoft's Vision for 2019


Richard Monson-Haefel added his thoughts about the discussion about OCGM in his recent blog post, "What is NUI's WIMP?"  Richard disagrees with the OCGM concept, as he feels it doesn't encompass some important interactions, such as speech/direct voice input.   He'd probably agree that NUI is NOT WIMP 2.0.


Post-NUI, Activity Theory, and Off-the-Desktop Interaction Design:
As I was reading the recent posts and discussions regarding NUI/OCGM, I also contemplated some of what I've been reading over my holiday break, "Acting With Technology:  Activity Theory and Interaction Design", written by Victor Kaptelinin and Bonnie A. Nardi.   Victor Kaptelinin is the co-editor of "Beyond the Desktop Metaphor: Designing Integrated Digital Work Environments" (MIT Press, 2007), and has an interest in computer-supported cooperative work.  Bonnie Nardi brings to the IT world her background in anthropology, and is the co-author of "Information Ecologies:  Using Technology with the Heart" (MIT Press, 1999). The authors know what they are talking about. 


It is important to note that activity theory-based interaction design is viewed as a "post-cognitivistic", and informed by some of what I studied in psychology, education, and social science years ago. Within the field of activity theory are some important differences, which I'll save for a future post. 


Below are some concepts taken from the book. I am still mulling them over through the prism of NUI, post-WIMP, PATA, TOCA, OCGM, etc.  That's why there will be at "Part II", with specific examples.


"Means and ends, the extent to which the technology facilitates and constrains attaining user's goals and the impact of the technology on provoking or resolving conflicts between different goals


Social and physical aspects of the environment - integration of target technology with requirements, tools, resources, and social rules of the environment
Learning, cognition, and articulation,  internal vs external components of activity and support of their mutual transformations with target technology


Development -Developmental transformation of the above components as a whole" 
"Taken together, these sections cover various aspects of the way the target technology supports, or is intended to support, human actions".  (page 270)


I especially like the activity checklist included in the appendix of the book, as well as the concept of tool mediation. "The Activity Checklist is intended to be used at early phases of system design or for evaluating existing systems.  Accordingly, there are two slightly different versions of the Checklist, the "evaluation version" and the "design version".  Both versions are implemented as organized sets of items covering the contextual factors that can potentially influence the use of computer technology in real-life settings.  It is assumed that the Checklist can help to identify the most important issues, for instance, potential trouble spots that designers can address". (page 269)


"The Checklist covers a large space.  It is intended to be used first by examining the whole space for areas of interest, then focusing on the identified areas of interest in as much depth as possible...there is a heavy emphasis on the principle of tool mediation"  (page 270).


Other Thoughts
What is missing from this picture is a Universal Design component, something that I think holds up across time and technologies.  Following the principles of Universal design doesn't mean dumbing down or relying on simplicity. It is a multi-faceted approach, and relies on conctructing flexibility in use, one of the key concepts of Universal Design. I'd like to see this concept embedded in the post-WIMP conceptualization somehow. 


Because of my background in education/psychology/ special education, I try to follow the principles of  Universal Design for Learning (UDL) when I work on technology project.  I've spent some time thinking about how the principles of UDL could be realized through new interaction/interface systems.   Although this approach focuses on the educational technology domain, it is important to consider, given that a good percentage of our population - potential users, clients, consumers - has a temporary or permanent disability of one kind or another.


Components of Universal Design for Learning:
Multiple Means of Representation
Provide options for perception
Provide options for language and symbols
Provide options for comprehension
Multiple Means of Action and Expression
Provide options for physical action
Provide options for expressive skills and fluency
Provide options for executive functions
Multiple Means of Engagement
Provide options for recruiting interest
Provide options for sustaining effort and persistence
Provide options for self-regulation
-Adapted from the UDL Guidelines/Educator Checklist, which breaks down the components into more specific details.


Note:  The concept of Universal Design for Learning shares historical roots with some of the work behind Activity Theory and Interaction Design. Obviously, there is still much to contemplate regarding OCGM and other permutations of post-WIMP concepts!   


Here are my comments to the discussion on Johnathan Brill's blog from January 2009:
Thoughts: I'm seeing a trend to "optimize" WIMP-type applications so they can be manipulated by gesture and touch. People who program kiosks, ATM's and POS touch screens are examples of what I'm talking about. Touch and hold, two-fingered touch, and double-tap are just a slight transformation of the WIMP world-view, and in my opinion, are still WIMP (wimpy!). The mouse interaction "pretenders" are fine for using legacy productivity applications, OK in the short run.

For example, I have an HP TouchSmart, but I don't use the touch screen as often as I'd hoped. Try using using Visual Studio to code something on a touch screen. There is so much more that can be done! I know from the touch-screen prototype/demos I've worked on in various classes that applications that support collaboration and decision-making are important, and not just for work.

What do people DO, really? First of all, we are social beings, most of us. Think of what we share and discuss with others, and think about what sort of interactions on a display might best correspond with this interaction. Here are some of the things I've been DOING recently that involved some sort of technology and communication/collaboration with others:



---Travel planning - I recently went on a cruise and with various family members, selected activities I wanted to do on the ship as well plan my shore excursions (a complicated process)


---Picture sharing- I came back from the cruise with lots of pictures that I uploaded on Flickr. Related to this process: Picture annotating, tagging, choosing/comparing & editing it would be SO cool if I could use two sliders to enhance my pictures just so!


---Talking on the phone and responding to e-mail with friends and family members about the pictures, and what they wanted to see on Flickr- "you know, the ones of the dogs in Jamaica"... of which I had about 68!


---Financial planning with my husband. (I took info-viz last semester, so I know the possibilities are there.)


---Using the touch-screen to check-in at my eye-doctor's office: This was a user-unfriendly experience. Such a nice little screen. I was provided with a WIMPY PowerPoint-like interface which was confusing to use- and time consuming!


---Shopping at the new Super Wal-Mart: I asked the greeter if there was a map, and he said, "Food is over there, and the rest of the stuff is that way." Flat panel displays were all over the store, but of course,they weren't interactive. I had no idea where anything was, and the few items I was looking at had no bar-code tags. There wasn't a clerk in sight.   Wal-Mart TV rolled on-and-on via the display above my head. If I could only harness the display and have the talking head answer my questions! I gave up on my shopping trip when I was in the facial lotion/potion section. Too many choices, and too much fine print to read.

---Shopping at the mall with my young-adult daughters... I'll have to hold my thoughts on that one for now!

Some suggestions:
I think the artist/designers, (even dancers,) who are interested in multi-touch and gesture interaction have some interesting things to consider. (I linked to some of my previous posts.)


Again:
I am still mulling things over through the prism of NUI, post-WIMP, PATA, TOCA, OCGM, etc.  So that is why there will be at "Part II".  With specific examples!


RELATED
Multimedia, Multi-touch, Gesture, and Interaction Resources


My thoughts:
2007 Letter to the Editor, Pervasive Computing
Useful Usability Studies (pdf)
2007 Blog Post
Usability/Interaction Hall of Shame (In a Hospital)
2008 Blog Posts
Emerging Interactive Technologies, Emerging Interactions, and Emerging Integrated Form Factors
Interactive Touch-Screen Technology, Participatory Design, and "Getting It"
An Example of Convergence: Interactive TV: uxTV 2008
2009 Blog Posts
Why "new" ways of interaction?
Microsoft: Are You Listening?  Cool Cat Teacher (Vicki Davis) Tries out Microsoft's Multi-touch Surface Table
Haptic/Tactile Interface:  Dynamically Changeable Physical Buttons
The Convergence of TV, the Internet, and Interactivity:  Update
UX of ITV:  The User Experience and Interactive TV (or Let's Stamp Out Bad Remote Controls)
Digital Convergence and Interactive Television;  Boxee and Digital Convergence 
ElderGadget Blog: Useful Tech and Tools


Other People's Thoughts
Ron George's blog, OCGM (pronounced Occam['s Razor] is the replacement for WIMP  12/28/09
Ron George: Welcome to the OCGM Generation! Part 2 
Stephen, Microsoft Kitchen: OCGM, A New Windows User Experience

OCGM: A New Windows User Experience

Richard Monson-Haefel's blog, Multi-touch and NUI:  What is NUI's WIMP?
Richard Monson-Haefel:  OCGM: George's Razor
Josh Blake's blog,  Deconstructing the NUI: WIMP is to GUI as OCGM (Occam) is to NUI
Bill Buxton: Gesture Based Interaction (pdf) (Updated 5/2009)
Bill Buxton: "Surface and Tangible Computing, and the "Small" Matter of People and Design" (pdf) - ISSCC 2008
Dan Saffer, Designing for Gestural Interfaces: Touchscreens and Interactive Devices
Dan Saffer, Designing for Interaction 
Mark Weiser,  Computer for the 21st Century  Scientific American, 09, 1991
Touch User Interface:  Readings in Touch Screen, Multi-Touch, and Touch User Interface
Jacob O Wobbrock, Meredith Ringel Morris, Andrew D. Wilson User-Defined Gestures for Surface Computing CHI 2009, April 4–9, 2009, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

From a post-WIMP Perspective: What Happens When Post-Mass Market Goes to Market? Bob Garfield's insightful video, and more.(link)..

From a post-WIMP Perspective: What Happens When Post-Mass Market Goes to Market? Bob Garfield's insightful video, and more...

(No time to cross-post)

Update! The Post-WIMP Conversation: Some Thoughts About Conceptualizing NUI, Part I

The content of this post has been moved. For the most recent update of this post, please see:


The Post-WIMP Explorers Club:  Update of the Updates, Morning of 12/31/09

Want to make some multi-touch? Try PyMT- Python Multitouch. Featured in Make. (via Sharath Patali)

Sharath Patali, a member of the NUI-Group, has been working with Python Multitouch, otherwise known as PyMT, to create multi-touch applications.  He shared a link to a recent post in Make, featuring PyMT.  Sharath is the author of the UI Addict blog, and is currently doing his internship at NUITEQ (Natural User Interface Technologies).

I've been told that the beauty of PyMT is that it makes it "easy" to create multi-touch prototype applications using very few lines of code, which is great for trying out different ideas in a short period of time.  It helps if you already know Python!


PyMT - A post-WIMP Multi-Touch UI Toolkit from Thomas Hansen on Vimeo.

"PyMT is a python module for developing multi-touch enabled media rich applications. Currently the aim is to allow for quick and easy interaction design and rapid prototype development. PyMT is written in Python, based on pyglet toolkit."


PyMT Programming Guide


PyMT Website

Note: 
Christopher, author of The Space Station blog, is a member of the NUI-Group, and is building his own multi-touch table running his PyMT-based applications. Christopher is a student in Koblenz, Germany, studying computational visualistics, known as information visualization in the US.

Joel Eden's Informative Post: Designing for Multi-Touch, Multi-User and Gesture-Based Systems

Joel Eden is a User Experience Consultant at Infragistics- he recently wrote a detailed article/post in the Architecture & Design section of Dr. Dobbs Portal, "Designing for Multi-Touch, Multi-User and Gesture Based Systems". I thought I'd share the link, since I've been writing on the same topic.

In his article, Joel explains the differences between traditional WIMP (Window, Icon, Menue, Pointer) interaction and gesture, multi-touch, and multi-user systems. These systems are also known as Natural User Interfaces, or NUI. He recommends that "rather than trying to come up with new complicated ways to interact with digital objects, your first goal should be to try to leverage how people already interact with objects and each other when designing gesture based systems."

Joel goes on to outline UX (User Experience, IxD (Interaction Design), and HCI (Human-Computer Interaction) concepts that designers should consider when developing new systems, - Affordances, Engagement, Feedback, and "Don't Make Us Think", which he summarizes in the conclusion of his article.

I especially liked Joel's references:

Clark, Andy. Supersizing the Mind: Embodiment, Action, and Cognitive Extension

Few, Stephen. Information Dashboard Design: The Effective Visual Communication of Data

Gibson, John J. The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception

Krug, Steve. Don't Make Me Think: A Common Sense Approach to Web Usability, Second Edition

Norman, Don. The Design of Everyday Things

Norman, Don. Things That Make Us Smart: Defending Human Attributes In The Age Of The Machine

I would also add the following references:
Bill Buxton
Multi-touch Systems I have Known and Loved
(Regularly updated!)
Sketching User Experiences: Getting the Design Right and the Right Design

"Our lack of attention to place, time, function, and human considerations means these fancy new technologies fail to deliver their real potential to real people." - Bill Buxton

Dan Saffer
Designing for Interaction: Creating Smart Applications and Clever Devices
Designing Gestural Interfaces
SAP
Touchscreen Usability in Short
(Summary by Gerd Waloszek of the SAP Design Guild)
SAP Design Guild Resources (User-Centered Design, User Experience, Usability, UI Guidelines, Visual Design, Accessibility)
Kevin Arthur (Synaptics)
Touch Usability
Bruce "Tog" Tognazzini
Ask Tog: Interaction Design Solutions for the Real World
Inclusive Design, Part I
First Principles of Interaction Design
John M. Carroll
Human Computer Interaction (HCI) (History of HCI)
Bill Moggridge
Designing Interactions
Ben Shneiderman
Leonardo's Laptop: Human Needs and the New Computing Technologies
Edward Tufte
Visual Explanations
Beautiful Evidence
The Visual Display of Quantitative Information
Envisioning Information
Rudolf Arnheim (Gestalt)
Art and Visual Perception: A Psychology of the Creative Eye

Update: A great reading list on general HCI. Some of the authors were involved in the early days of touch, bi-manual, and multi-touch interaction.

Jan's Top Ten List of Books on Human-Computer Interaction


FYI: If you know much about Windows Presentation Foundation, you probably know that Josh Smith, WPF guru, also works at Infragistics

Tangible User Interfaces Part II: More Examples, Resources, and Use for TUI's in Education

In Part I of my "mini-series" about Tangible User Interfaces, I discussed the origins of TUI and provided some examples of Siftables. In this section, I've provided some links to information about Tangible User Interfaces and the abstracts of two articles pertaining to TUI's in educational settings.

Zen Waves: A Digital (musical) Zen Garden


reactable from Nick M. on Vimeo.

Reactable

More about the Reactable
"The reactable hardware is based on a translucent, round multi-touch surface. A camera situated beneath the table, continuously analyzes the surface, tracking the player's finger tips and the nature, position and orientation of physical objects that are distributed on its surface. These objects represent the components of a classic modular synthesizer, the players interact by moving these objects, changing their distance, orientation and the relation to each other. These actions directly control the topological structure and parameters of the sound synthesizer. A projector, also from underneath the table, draws dynamic animations on its surface, providing a visual feedback of the state, the activity and the main characteristics of the sounds produced by the audio synthesizer."

The Bubblegum Sequencer: Making Music with Candy


Jabberstamp: Embedding Sound and Voice in Children's Drawings(pdf)
(A TUI application to support literacy development in children)

Affective TouchCasting (pdf)

TapTap: A Haptic Wearable for Asynchronous Distributed Touch Therapy (pdf)

BodyBeats: Whole-Body, Musical Interfaces for Children (pdf)

Telestory is a Siftables application that looks like it would be quite useful for supporting children who have communication disorders or autism spectrum disorders.

Telestory Siftables application from Jeevan Kalanithi on Vimeo.

"Telestory is an educational, language learning application created by Seth Hunter. In this video, the child is looking at a television screen. He can control onscreen characters, events and objects with the siftables. For example, he has the dog and cat interact by placing the dog and cat siftables next to each other." TeleStory Project Website

Here is a video of how Siftables can be used as equation editors:

Siftables Equation Editor from Jeevan Kalanithi on Vimeo.

RESOURCES ABOUT TUI'S:

5 lessons about tangible interfaces, GDC Lyon, December 2007(pdf) Nicolas Nova

Special Issue on Tangible and Embedded Interaction (Guest Editors: Eva Hornecker, Albrecht Schmidt, Brygg Ullmer) Journal of Arts and Technology (IJART) Volume 1 Issue 3/4 - 2008

Reality-Based Interaction: A Framework for Post-WIMP Interfaces (pdf)

Here are a couple of abstracts of articles related to the use of TUI's in education:

Evaluation of the Efficacy of Computer-Based Training Using Tangible User Interface for Low-Functioning Children with Autism Proceedings of the 2008 IEEE International Conference on Digital Games and Intelligent Toys

"Recently, the number of children having autism disorder increases rapidly all over the world. Computer-based training (CBT) has been applied to autism spectrum disorder treatment. Most CBT applications are based on the standard WIMP interface. However, recent study suggests that a Tangible User Interface (TUI) is easier to use for children with autism than the WIMP interface. In this paper, the efficiency of the TUI training system is considered, in comparison with a conventional method of training basic geometric shape classification. A CBT system with TUI was developed using standard computer equipment and a consumer video camera. The experiment was conducted to measure learning efficacy of the new system and the conventional training method. The results show that, under the same time constraint, children with autism who practiced with the new system were able to learn more shapes than those participating in the conventional method."

Towards a framework for investigating tangible environments for learning Sara Price, Jennifer G. Sheridan, Taciana Pontual Falcao, George Roussos, London Knowledge Lab, 2008

"External representations have been shown to play a key role in mediating cognition. Tangible environments offer the opportunity for novel representational formats and combinations, potentially increasing representational power for supporting learning. However, we currently know little about the specific learning benefits of tangible environments, and have no established framework within which to analyse the ways that external representations work in tangible environments to support learning. Taking external representation as the central focus, this paper proposes a framework for investigating the effect of tangible technologies on interaction and cognition. Key artefact-action-representation relationships are identified, and classified to form a structure for investigating the differential cognitive effects of these features. An example scenario from our current research is presented to illustrate how the framework can be used as a method for investigating the effectiveness of differential designs for supporting science learning"

Interactive Touch-Screen Technology, Participatory Design,and "Getting It"....

PLEASE SEE THE UPDATED VERSION OF THIS POST:
Interactive Touch Screen Technology, Participatory Design, and "Getting It", Revisited

There's been some discussion over the reasons why so many people don't understand touch screen, or "surface" computing, even though research in this area has been going on for years.

As the new owner of the HP TouchSmart, I know that I get it.

The research I've conducted in this area suggests that people will "get-it" only if there is a strong commitment to develop touch-screen "surface" applications through a user-centered, participatory design process. In my view, this should incorporate principles of ethnography, and ensure that usability studies are conducted outside of the lab.

This approach was taken with Intel's Classmate PC. Intel has about 40 ethnographic researchers, and sent many of them to work with students and teachers in classrooms around the world. (A video regarding ethnographic research and the Intel Classmate project can be found near the end of this post.)



Where to start?
K-12 classrooms and media centers. Public libraries. Malls. Hospital lobbies and doctor's offices. Any waiting room. Staff lounges in medical centers, schools, and universities. Community festivities and events. Movie theater lobbies. Museums and other points of interests.

I believe we need to take a "touching is believing" approach.

Here are some thoughts:

When I try to explain my fascination with developing touch-screen interactive multimedia applications, (interactive whiteboards, multi-touch displays and tables, and the like), many of my friends and family members eyes glaze over. This is particularly true for people I know who are forty-ish or over.

Even if you are younger, if you never saw the cool technology demonstrated in the movie Minority Report, or if you have limited experience with video games, or if you haven't came within touching distance of an interactive whiteboard, the concept might be difficult to understand.

The reality?

Even people who have the opportunity to use surface computing technology on large screens do not take full advantage of it. Multi-touch screens are often used as single-touch screens, and interactive whiteboards in classrooms are often serve as expensive projector screens for teacher-controlled PowerPoint presentations.

Most importantly, there are few software developers who understand the surface computing approach, even with the popularity of the iPhone and iPod Touch. Most focus on traditional business-oriented or marketing applications, and have difficulty envisioning scenarios in which surface computing would be a welcome breath of fresh air.

Another factor is that not all people entrusted to market surface or touch screen computing fully understand it.


Despite a cool website showing off the goods, Microsoft's Surface multi-touch table has been slow to take off, limiting hope of bringing down the price tag to a price most families or schools could afford. (The picture above depicts an application for the Surface designed for health care professionals, not K-12 science education.)

Although you can't buy a Surface table for your family room, it is possible to buy a TouchSmart.
HP's TouchSmart website is engaging and highlights some examples of touch-screen interaction, but most people don't seem to know about it.

Unfortunately, you wouldn't have a clue that the HP TouchSmart exists browsing the aisles at Circuit City or Best Buy!

When I was shopping for my new TouchSmart, I noticed that from a distance, the TouchSmart looked just like the other larger flat-screen monitors filling up the aisles. The salespeople at both stores were not well-informed about the system. The only reason I knew bout the new TouchSmart was related to my obsession with interactive multimedia touch-screen applications- designing them, developing them, studying them, reading about them, blogging about them.... ; }

More thoughts:

After studying HCI (Human-Computer Interaction), and relating this knowledge to what I know as a psychologist, my hunch is that the "Window Icon Mouse Pointing-device" (WIMP) and keyboard input mind-set is embedded in our brains, to a certain extent. Like driving a car, it is something automatic and expected. This is true for users AND developers.

Think about it.

Suppose one day, you were told that you no longer were allowed to control your car by turning on the ignition, steering the wheel, or using your feet to accelerate, slow down, or stop the car! Instead, you needed to learn a new navigation, integration, and control system that involved waving your hands about and perhaps speaking a few commands.

For new drivers who'd never seen a car before, this new system would be user-friendly and intuitive. Perhaps it would be quite easy for 16-year-old kids to wrap their heads around this concept. For most of us, no. Imagine the disasters we would see on our streets and highways!

When we think about how newer technologies are introduced to people, we should keep this in mind.

In my mind, spreading the word about surface computing is not a "if you build it, they will come" phenomenon, like the iPhone. We can't ignore the broader picture.

From my middle-age woman's vantage point, I believe that it is important that the those involved with studying, developing, or marketing surface computing applications realize that many of us simply have no point of reference other than our experiences with ATMs, airline kiosks, supermarket self-serve lanes, and the like.

(The video clip at the very end of this post provides a good example of touch-screen technology gone wrong.)

Be aware that there are substantial numbers of people who might benefit from surface computing who prefer to avoid the ATMs, airline kiosks, and self-serve grocery shopping.

Realize that the collective experience with technology, in many cases, has not been too pretty. Many people have had such user-unfriendly experiences with productivity applications, forced upon them by their employers, that any interest or desire to explore emerging technologies has been zapped.

My own exposure to interactive "surface" related technology was somewhat accidental.

A few years ago, a huge box was deposited into the room I worked in a couple of days a week as a school psychologist at a middle school. After a week or so, I became curious, and found out that it was a SmartBoard. Until then (2002!), I did not know that interactive whiteboards existed.

The boxed remained unopened in the room for the entire school year, but no worry. I played with the only other SmartBoard in the school, and found a couple at the high school where I also worked. I hunted for all of the applications and interactive websites that I could find, and tried them out. That is when I was hooked. I could see all kinds of possibilities for interactive, engaging subject area learning activities. I could see the SmartBoards potential for music and art classes. With my own eyes, I saw how the SmartBoard engaged students with special needs in counseling activities.

(By the way, if you are working with middle school students, PBS Kid's ItsMyLife website activities work great on an interactive whiteboard.)

A few years have passed, and reflecting on all of my fun experiences with interactive whiteboards, with and without students, I now understand that many teachers still have had limited exposure to this technology.

This school year, many teachers are finding themselves teaching in classrooms recently outfitted with interactive whiteboards, scrambling along with educational technology staff development specialists, to figure out how it works best with various groups of students, and what sort of changes need to be made regarding instructional practice.

For the very first time, interactive whiteboards were installed in two classrooms at one of the schools I work at. One of the teachers I know thanked me for telling her about interactive whiteboards and sharing my resources and links.

If I hadn't let her know about this technology, she wouldn't have volunteered to have one installed in her classroom. It has transformed the way she teaches special needs students.

In the few months that she's used the whiteboard, I can see how much it has transformed the way the students learn. They are attentive, more communicative, and engaged. The students don't spend the whole day with the whiteboard - the interactive learning activities are woven into lessons at various times of the day, representing true technology integration.

Now let's see what happens when all-in-one touch-screen PC's are unleashed in our schools!

Some resources:
HP TouchSmart PC website, with demo
HP's TouchSmart YouTube videos
lm3labs (catchyoo, ubiq'window)
NUI Group (See member's links)
NextWindow
Fingertapps
thirteen23
SmartTechnologies
Perceptive Pixel - Jeff Hans
Microsoft Surface
iPhone
(More can be found by doing a search on this blog or The World Is My Interactive Interface.)

Value of ethnographic research:
Ethnographic Research Informed Intel's Classmate PC
"Intel looked closely at how students collaborate and move around in classroom environments. The new tablet feature was implemented so that the device would be more conducive to what Intel calls “micromobility”. Intel wants students to be able to carry around Classmate PCs in much the same way that they currently carry around paper and pencil." -via Putting People First and Ars Technica

The video below is from Intel's YouTube Channel. Information about Intel's approach to ethnographic research in classrooms during the development of the Classroom PC is highlighted. This approach uses participatory design and allows the set of applications developed for the Classmate PC to reflect the needs of local students and teachers. Schools from many different countries were included in this study.




FYI:

Need for Improvement: User-Unfriendly Information Kiosk Interactive Map

Here are some interesting pictures from lm3labs, which are in my interactive usability hall of fame:

Samsung's new Omnia SDG i900 was re-created in a much larger size, using lm3lab's Ubiq'window touchless technology.

For more about lm3labs, including several videoclips, take a look at one of my previous posts:
Lm3Labs, Nicolas Leoillot, and Multimedia Interaction