His food ordering examples are funny because many restaurants and karaoke bars in Japan have had touch-screen digital menus for quite a while:

http://digidenki.com/wordpress/wp-content/pictures/_Image017.jpg

I somehow don't think Microsoft believes that they created the concept of the touchscreen. What they are introducing is the interface they've built. It's not your typical finger-as-mouse interface that touchscreens generally have.

My point was that the example problem in that submission has been solved for a number of years. I'm also not sure multi-touch is necessarily an improvement over point-touch, in a greasy restaurant environment.

I find it weird that there are few mentions of Jeff Han's table, which was a relatively big meme last August.

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/65http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/65

I'd prefer a bit more objective reporting with some background included, perhaps this piece at Wired: http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2007/05/first_look_micr.html

I suppose it's still important what Microsoft is interested in and rolling out, but we should ask ourselves whether it's them, someone who came before them, or someone who comes after them that defines the new interaction method. Like the Wired piece mentions, others have done similar research and there must be startups of various stages commercializing this. Do we know any?

I know there are a lot of Microsoft Hate-ers (MH) out there but; maybe just maybe you MH can bring yourselves to admit this is really cool.

I'm not an MH, but I do find this a little sad. They're now reimplementing a very old interface digitally, instead of using computers to create something new. It's like Henry Ford building a car that galloped 30% faster than the average horse.

If you look at it as a new interface for a computer, then it might not be too interesting. But if you look at it as a new interface for a table or anything that has a surface (microwave, walls, fridges), then it becomes very interesting.

Anyone else find it funny that the site is using Flash, and not Silverlight?

I noticed that too - Flash not Silverlight. Kind of funny..

Lots of the things this interface can do are actually fairly new. I can't stretch pictures on my coffee table. Besides, very few things are truly new. Most technology is incremental. It just looks revolutionary later.

Also, the model T topped out at 45 mph. Thoroughbreds can get to 40 mph. Granted, that's not exactly the average horse. But Ford's contribution wasn't speed. It was mass production, an incremental improvement.

The key word was 'galloped'. Cars weren't mechanical horses -- they were devices that used new technology in a way that wasn't possible before.

I could be wrong but I just did a quick Google search. The top speed of the Model T was 45mph - The top speed for a horse is 47.5 mph - hummm - just a thought. By the way I am all for something new. I just like the MS interface - it looks cool to me.

Well, in 1997, I built a small prototype of a squeezeball that generated voltage levels which were mapped to characters or commands. (But did not successfully complete it).

Well, you need an environment - money, encouragement (advice, not flattery), and co-workers.

Only Google and MS or a University can provide these, it seems.

Perhaps that's why I cant get my act off the ground :)

My world is coming apart, as MSFT continues to release....well, cool stuff.