TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

Bill Buxton: Multi-Touch Systems that I Have Known (1982)

115 pointsby johnx123-upover 12 years ago

6 comments

creamyhorrorover 12 years ago
Iluminating, exhaustive article and illustrated history of multitouch. I wonder how many of these papers, prototypes and devices the patent examiners came across when they were deciding on the prospective multitouch patent now owned by Apple. Money quote:<p>----<p><i>Multi-touch technologies have a long history. To put it in perspective, my group at the University of Toronto was working on multi-touchin 1984 (Lee, Buxton &#38; Smith, 1985), the same year that the first Macintosh computer was released, and we were not the first. Furthermore, during the development of the iPhone, Apple was very much aware of the history of multi-touch, dating at least back to 1982, and the use of the pinch gesture, dating back to 1983. This is clearly demonstrated by the bibliography of the PhD thesis of Wayne Westerman, co-founder of FingerWorks, a company that Apple acquired early in 2005, and now an Apple employee<p><pre><code> Westerman, Wayne (1999). Hand Tracking,Finger Identification, and Chordic Manipulation on a Multi-Touch Surface. U of Delaware PhD Dissertation: http://www.ee.udel.edu/~westerma/main.pdf </code></pre> In making this statement about their awareness of past work, I am not criticizing Westerman, the iPhone, or Apple. It is simply good practice and good scholarship to know the literature and do one's homework when embarking on a new product. What I am pointing out, however, is that "new" technologies - like multi-touch - do not grow out of a vacuum. While marketing tends to like the "great invention" story, real innovation rarely works that way. In short, the evolution of multi-touch is a text-book example of what I call "the long-nose of innovation."</i><p>----<p>Interesting examples relating to pinch-to-zoom:<p>[o] 1983: Video Place / Video Desk (Myron Krueger)<p>His use of many of the hand gestures that are now starting to emerge can be clearly seen in the following 1988 video, including using the pinch gesture to scale and translate objects: <a href="http://youtube.com/watch?v=dmmxVA5xhuo" rel="nofollow">http://youtube.com/watch?v=dmmxVA5xhuo</a><p>[o] 1991: Digital Desk(Pierre Wellner, Rank Xerox EuroPARC, Cambridge)<p>Clearly demonstrated multi-touch concepts such as two finger scaling and translation of graphical objects, using either a pinching gesture or a finger from each hand, among other things.<p>This page makes it quite clear how improvements in this subfield of tech, like in many other fields, are evolutionary and build upon existing ideas in the literature. Many potential implementations have been proposed and experimented with. What role do patents play in this picture? What is the breadth of Apple's pinch-to-zoom patent - how far does it extend beyond smartphones? Are any of these devices close enough to the patent to legally count as prior art?<p>Thanks for this great submission. Buxton has been referenced on HN a few times before, but it's my first time reading his page.
评论 #4447592 未加载
xiaomaover 12 years ago
Slightly off-topic:<p>Does anybody know where the videos of Bill's excellent talk titled <i>What if Leopold didn't have a piano</i> can be found? I saw part of the lecture online several years ago and it was one of the most insightful things I've seen, The story of the sculpting instructor who did an A/B test on his students, grading half of them entirely on the cumulative <i>weight</i> of their assignments was particularly eye-opening.<p>I've googled many times since and never found the full multi-hour video again.
otover 12 years ago
Why the (1982) in the title? The original article is from 2007, and this is a revision from 2012.
评论 #4447723 未加载
jeremyarussellover 12 years ago
It strikes me as odd that this didn't last long on the front page or get upvoted nearly as much as all the samsung vs apple submissions that had a large amount of people defending apple in the comments. Yet this, this extremely valid and informational piece gets pushed down the list like nothing. This is why I generally don't post on these submissions anyways, it feels like they are all one sided in defense of apple all the time, nothing but samsung is a thief that copies apple, with no mention of what apple did to xerox and Steve Jobs openly stating that he did indeed take their idea because they weren't going to do anything with it.<p>It's a bit disheartening is all.
Terrettaover 12 years ago
Thank goodness for companies like Apple that, when needing to rapidly introduce new technologies for users, acquire small businesses already invested in the space like Fingerworks for multi-touch, or Pixo for iPod's interface.<p>Seems much better for us entrepreneurs than Samsung's approach. In the build versus buy equation, I want big companies to calculate they're better off to license or acquire.
评论 #4450604 未加载
评论 #4448923 未加载
dj2stein9over 12 years ago
Why isn't Bill Buxton suing Apple for a billion dollars?
评论 #4448982 未加载