Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Open-Source Multitouch Display

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 6 years ago | from the yes-she-knows-it's-a-multipass dept.

Input Devices 62

shankar writes "Engineers at Eyebeam, an art and technology center based in New York, have created a scaled-down open-source version of Surface, called Cubit. By sharing the Cubit's hardware schematics and software source code, the engineers are significantly reducing the cost of owning a multitouch table. 'Multitouch displays are not new technology; in fact, they've been built in research labs for decades. Mitsubishi Electric Research Labs created an iconic multitouch table called DiamondTouch; more recently, Jeff Han, founder of Perceptive Pixel, based in New York, developed wall-sized multitouch screens that he sells to corporations and major government agencies. But because of the falling costs of many touch-screen components, such as infrared light sources and small cameras and projectors, it's now becoming feasible for people without access to a lab or venture-capital money to make their own multitouch displays.'"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Way to AD this to the front page (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23281550)

After clicking there to "skip this ad", I was nearly able to find a few swatches that weren't completely covered in ads. Y'all who use adblocker will laugh at massive tracts of land that are white on your screen.

Re:Way to AD this to the front page (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23281576)

Did you just say "massive tracts of land [] ?

Yep... (-1, Offtopic)

imamac (1083405) | more than 6 years ago | (#23281572)

...and so can a 17 year old kid: [] And he used a Mac. Much cooler.

Re:Yep... (2, Insightful)

Whiney Mac Fanboy (963289) | more than 6 years ago | (#23282014)

And he used a Mac. Much cooler.

Uuuuh? You think that someone who's attempting to do something is cooler than someone with an actual finished product, that you can build yourself right now as the designer's have published the software & hardware schematics?

Seriously? What makes this kid's attempt at something much cooler than eyebeam's table?

(Oh, and your name is like my sig)

Re:Yep... (1)

empaler (130732) | more than 6 years ago | (#23294916)

If you'd bothered to RTFA or watch the VIDEO, you'd known this was a Mac too. Plus, they have a DIY-kit that you can buy.

Apart from that, the kid does give some instructions, but not nearly detailed enough for them to be useful, at least for me. This kit is totally FTW.

Benefits (0)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 6 years ago | (#23281604)

I don't want to sound like a hater here, but what are the benefits other than saying it looks nifty? A table that is a giant touchscreen is nice in that anyone can interact, but does it have to be multi-touch? Do multiple people need to navigate on the same screen at once?

To an extent, I'd suggest it would be better to use a Webex session, and allow each user their own interface allowed a shared session. MUCH cheaper and easier to pull off. Heck, the people don't have to be in the same room unless you want them to.

Re:Benefits (2, Insightful)

zappepcs (820751) | more than 6 years ago | (#23281674)

I think the answer that you are looking for is that it allows joe sixpack (joe bloggs) to use a computer in a more natural fashion. Personally I manage to type at about 45-50 wpm and keyboard shortcuts as well as some mouse effects make me quite a bit more efficient than the low end of computer skills users.

With a multitouch surface and appropriate desktop UI software, it allows anyone to do things that they would be hindered in doing with keyboard and mouse. This type of interface is much more intuitive in as much as it works like our brain wants to work. That is not to say that it doesn't take learning, but it is easier/more natural to the way we work with other things in life. The keyboard and mouse are NOT natural interfaces.

Some demos I've seen let people work with documents and folders in much the way they would on their own desks with paper documents and folders. Ergonomics aside, I think this would help those who can least afford it the most.

Re:Benefits (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 6 years ago | (#23281702)

I'm a little skeptical at this point that a multitouch display will be faster than a keyboard and mouse for most tasks. I've used touch screens, and they are faster than a mouse for certain tasks, but they are also frustrating and often cumbersome.

I type around 80 wpm, and I bounce back and forth between keyboard and mouse, depending on which is faster for a given task. I've even become really accustom to hitting Win+R or Alt+F2 and then typing a program name, as opposed to using a Start or KDE Menu, and often this is faster.

The keyboard isn't "natural" but often it is the fastest tool available to me, even though the mouse seems more like a natural means of pointing, selecting, moving, marking, etc. I do use a mouse for selecting, but only when shift+direction isn't faster.

There are a few multi-touch specific gestures, such as pinching with two fingers to close a window, but throwing my mouse to the right corner and clicking X, or hitting Alt-F4 is just as fast. Pinching might seem fun, but I have yet to see a full interface designed around a multi-touch display to take advantage of it, and really make it a faster system to work with.

Furthermore, I touch Surface was not designed for a single user, but rather multi-touch for multiple users.

Am I mistaken?

Re:Benefits (1)

zappepcs (820751) | more than 6 years ago | (#23281734)

No, you are right on target. That is why I said that the people it will help the most are the ones least able to afford it.

Whether it is for multiple people or not, it does change the interface for the computer to a more 'natural' environment. You and I and many others are quite adept with mouse and keyboard for one reason or another, but joe bloggs is not. It is joe bloggs that it will help the most. In a "failure mode test" (TM) it will succeed where keyboard and mouse do not. Think of the physically impaired, or mentally handicapped. Where you can simply show them how to do something with a finger or hand and they can repeat it. Trying to teach them to type is often the barrier to entry for some classes of users.

The usefulness of this technology has yet to be shown for users of your/my class.

Remember, "there is need of maybe 5 computers in the whole world"... "The phonograph is a swell toy, but it will never catch on" and many other early quotes about technology that later became indispensables.

The mere fact that it radically changes the UI for a computer means that it will open up computing to those who find keyboards/mice a barrier to entry. Yes, it doesn't seem to have immediate game changing applications, but it will.

Re:Benefits (1)

shadow349 (1034412) | more than 6 years ago | (#23283306)

Think of the ... mentally handicapped.
And the other .05% of the blogosphere will just use their keyboards and mice.

Re:Benefits (1)

Homer's Donuts (838704) | more than 6 years ago | (#23297232)

What if they were cheap enough to use in highways, streets, and even sidewalks to allow detailed analysis of human traffic patterns.

Smart sidewalks. Wow. Where did I park my car? Just check Googleped!

Re:Benefits (1)

gregmark (750089) | more than 6 years ago | (#23283888)

You are mistaken. Recently, my 55-year-old aunt, a Boston College Law School grad, called me to ask me how to copy a URL link into an e-mail message. Now, she used *none* of those words in her request, so it took me some time to translate.

The answer to her question was simple of course (on a Mac: CMD-L, CMD-C, CMD-`, CMD-V). But my instructions fell on deaf ears for two reasons: one, she didn't understand how to perform keystroke combinations and two, she didn't understand that her e-mail client was just another Web browser window.

Multi-touch is for people like my aunt, people whose brains lack the circuitry to utilize arbitrary, abstract tools (even old Mr. QWERTY) to perform otherwise objective tasks.

Re:Benefits (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 6 years ago | (#23284232)

You're saying we need to design a slower and worse interface around the lowest common denominator?

Little kids learn how to use a keyboard with no problem. Just because older folks are scared of technology doesn't mean we should cater exclusively to them.

I couldn't explain the concept of a mouse to my grandmother, because she didn't get why you would need to point on a computer. Should we cater everything to her?

Re:Benefits (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23286192)

Who said anything about catering "everything"? You seem to have a bad case of selective hearing. With your attitude, I'm wondering if you're even still welcome in your mommy's basement.

Re:Benefits (2, Interesting)

Peganthyrus (713645) | more than 6 years ago | (#23284424)

Maybe the problems it can solve are just not ones you ever have?

I'm an artist. When I do art in the real world I'm working on a big surface. When I do art in the computer I'm squinting at it through the lens of my laptop screen. I would much rather spend about $1000 for a table-size display I could draw directly onto than the $2500 a 21" Cintiq tablet would cost.

If your main use for the computer is "writing" - whether it be code, text, mail, irc, or whatever - then yes, a keyboard is your best choice.

Re:Benefits (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 6 years ago | (#23286040)

Surface is much, much more expensive than a tablet. You're saying you want the benefits of a Cintiq tablet, but much larger, and cheaper.

Wait 10 years.

Re:Benefits (1)

Peganthyrus (713645) | more than 6 years ago | (#23286636)

Or why I want to play with homebrewing one. These things aren't that much more than a big piece of acrylic plus a projector and an IR camera. And a big slab of acrylic with a light beneath it is handy for ANY artist!

Re:Benefits (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23295454)

Erm, I guess you didn't RTFA. It was all about making something like Surface, but much cheeper, like in the $500 to $1000 range.

Re:Benefits (1)

value_added (719364) | more than 6 years ago | (#23282322)

Personally I manage to type at about 45-50 wpm ...

As a side note, I'd wager that you never learned to type properly. Put another way, there is no reason why someone who can type at 45 wpm shouldn't be typing at 65 wpm minimum comfortably and with increased accuracy.

Not worth the effort? Perhaps, but consider the time required for a course and some initial practice versus gaining a 50% improvement in speed for the rest of your typing days.

Me, I took typing class way back when in high school because I thought it was an easy way to meet girls. I didn't consider the possibility that they would resent me when I learned to type faster than they did, or that I would be making a living using a keyboard.

Re:Benefits (1)

zappepcs (820751) | more than 6 years ago | (#23282390)

DUDE! you are SOOOO wrong.
In high school I was the ONLY guy in the typing class. I took it because I figured some how, some way, I'd be working with computers some day.

Yes, back then I could hit 60wpm pretty good. Now, I'm just a little lazy really. If I wanted to be faster I would.

I've been to meetings where when asked if I'll share my notes and I reply yes, everyone else (including the secretary types there) will shut down their notebooks. I type and talk at the same time and only fuck up if I look at the keyboard.

I used to type up trip reports in the airport bar while waiting for the flight home. One time a guy asked me if I was taking notes because I tend to look around the room while I'm typing. I know the words, and don't need to look... guess he thought I was spying and taking notes on people in the bar. Several people thought I was being pretentious and only pretending to type on the keyboard.

Yes, I did learn how to type correctly. I just suffer from some digital dyslexia, such as:

from = form
thes = this

and several other 'right finger, wrong hand' issues. Normally I don't do too badly. I just don't care to type more than about 45wpm. It does not do me much good to try to type faster.

Online I keep up with people who type in excess of 100wpm so I don't feel badly about it. It just is.

Re:Benefits (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 6 years ago | (#23283480)

I just want to chime in here and say that when I put my fingers on the home keys, it causes me physical pain. I have gigantic hands (on most keyboards I can press the two control keys with one hand without depressing their neighbors) and as no one makes a keyboard large enough for me, it is impossible to touch type. Perhaps one day I will get a chorded keyboard, but until then, you will be wrong :P

Re:Benefits (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23283800)

as no one makes a keyboard large enough for me, it is impossible to touch type.
I had no trouble finding a bunch of large keyed keyboards online, however they were $100+ instead of $10+.

Re:Benefits (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 6 years ago | (#23283930)

I had no trouble finding a bunch of large keyed keyboards online, however they were $100+ instead of $10+.

Those are keyboards for retards and children. None of them have a full character set and every key is in the wrong place. I want a proper layout, in which keys are where they belong, but scaled up 15% or so (like me.)

I'd also like a 10% taller and ~7% wider Ford GT40. 6'2" is about the height limit, and I want one :)

Re:Benefits (1)

pipingguy (566974) | more than 6 years ago | (#23282784)

I think the answer that you are looking for is that it allows joe sixpack (joe bloggs) to use a computer in a more natural fashion.

Is there a "natural fashion" to use a computer?

As a drafting table-trained draftsman (back 25 years or so ago) I had to learn how to interpret the real world at a small scale. Going to CAD and a 14" screen was tough because I couldn't see the extents of my normal 22"x34" (or larger - some older P&IDs were on scrolls many feet long) field of view. Later I used dual 21" CRTs, then went to 4 22" LCDs and am now using a single 30" monitor.

None of these solutions are "natural", since zooming around inside an active screen is extremely artificial. On the other hand, old draftsmen will be all dead soon, so this perception of natural will go away.

Re:Benefits (1)

gregmark (750089) | more than 6 years ago | (#23283938)

On the other hand, old draftsmen will be all dead soon, so this perception of natural will go away.

One day, the old draftsman will be the computer users who cut their teeth using programs like ed, vi, emacs, pine, and even old Word Perfect 5.1. I've spent the last 20 years searching for keyboard shortcuts for every application that I depend on. It's actually hard for me use more "natural" approaches like multi-touch.

But it's probably the way to go. As much as I like vi, its command/mode syntax is basically an abomination.

Re:Benefits (1)

pipingguy (566974) | more than 6 years ago | (#23284344)

Bah, keyboard command input is the way to go for CAD, and certain companies keep moving around and redefining the cute icons so that veterans that don't follow all the latest trends get lost with new releases.

When I see a 35 year veteran stumbling around trying to plot a 22x34 to scale I know something's wrong.

Many changes are/were made to uncomplicate the work of CAD support drones, not for the fricking guys/gals that actually do the REAL work. That was a nice sneaky slide into making ones self irreplaceable and the designers resent it.

Re:Benefits (1)

calebt3 (1098475) | more than 6 years ago | (#23281682)

does it have to be multi-touch?

Very likely. Have you ever tried multi-touch actions on a normal touchpad? The cursor moves with the center of a the all the points you are touching. On a 3" pad this isn't so bad, but once you start getting a screen-sized surface or larger, tracing just your index finger all over the place feels rather limited.

Re:Benefits (1)

Blighten (992637) | more than 6 years ago | (#23281824)

Well, when it comes down to it, surface computing will not be optimal for the typical paradigms that we have grown to love/hate with keyboard/mouse interaction. A single-touch device is basically applying/mapping an already solid interface (the mouse) to a lesser approach. The whole point of multi-touch technology is to break away from the typical one-process-at-a-time task, and move into the realm of a computing adapting itself to the user's preferences.

I've had the chance to play around with the MS surface table... It's true that there isn't much there besides (for me anyway, an advanced computer user) the flash. However, watching the more typical user (and especially kids) interact with it, was a blast. Most multiplayer games require separate controller-type gameplay, but with surface we had our game immersed into a combined space.

In short, I think that multi-touch is a much better approach to computational collaboration that the single node per user approach... but one has to realize that it's still in its infantile state (for a typical, off-the-street user).

Re:Benefits (1)

humphrm (18130) | more than 6 years ago | (#23281868)

In short, I think that multi-touch is a much better approach to computational collaboration that the single node per user approach... but one has to realize that it's still in its infantile state (for a typical, off-the-street user).

Indeed, and I think before it matures we're going to have to figure out what "a much better approach to computational collaboration that the single node per user approach" means.

Re:Benefits (1)

Lazarian (906722) | more than 6 years ago | (#23282246)

One neat application for a touchscreen table would be for a gaming table with the equivalent of board games running on it. You could have a regular coffee table when it's off, and have an assortment of games when company comes over. You wouldn't have to worry if someone spills a drink on the table or if pieces are lost. It probably wouldn't be hard to have display components that have a limited aspect ratio so opposing players wouldn't be able to see parts of the game for ones that require it.

Re:Benefits (1)

Lazarian (906722) | more than 6 years ago | (#23282252)

(oops - meant to say viewing angle, not aspect ratio.)

game table (1)

kriebz (258828) | more than 6 years ago | (#23282662)

I've really been wanting to do this. Maybe even have the table recognize actual game pieces and change the board to match.

I have an overhead projector, a few 15" LCDs, some projection lenses, and some Lexan. Alas, it seems I'll have to wait to see if this Cubit thing will be helpful to me.

Re:game table (1)

neomunk (913773) | more than 6 years ago | (#23288260)

I've been thinking about this too, and the answer to your problem is a infrared base for your pieces. Each piece could have a little infrared led in the base and a unique template on the very bottom that your under-mounted IR camera could see and interpret.

It would be really neat for games like Axis and Allies or Warhammer variants.

Re:Benefits (1)

TheoMurpse (729043) | more than 6 years ago | (#23282258)

I don't want to sound like a hater here, but what are the benefits other than saying it looks nifty? A keyboard is nice in that anyone can interact, but does it have to enable simultaneous keypresses? Do multiple people need to navigate on the same computer at once?
There, I clarified why your question was short-sighted.

Re:Benefits (1)

ceoyoyo (59147) | more than 6 years ago | (#23282454)

Most people have more than one finger. Multitouch is important for intuitive gestures. Gestures are pretty critical for touch screens.

Re:Benefits (1)

Tony Hoyle (11698) | more than 6 years ago | (#23283038)

Personally I don't find it intuitive at all to use more than one finger in gestures. eg. the iphone - I used the pinch thing once and abandoned it (the double click action is much better).. it's just feels like a totally unnatural thing to do.. Same with using two fingers to double click on the MBP... just not a natural way of thinking about it.

Re:Benefits (1)

peragrin (659227) | more than 6 years ago | (#23283440)

and I had exactly the opposite. I picked up the iphone and was resizing images and pages quickly. Of course I can get used to any GU OS in seconds so I am hardly a good example.

you are right about the double click though, a double click is a double tap.

Re:Benefits (1)

ceoyoyo (59147) | more than 6 years ago | (#23284208)

Two fingers to double click on a MBP? I've apparently never found that setting. It's two fingers to right click, or to scroll. Both are fantastic. Everybody I've shown it to love them as well.

Despite your preferences there are many people who like multitouch gestures. Probably a majority.

Re:Benefits (1)

torpor (458) | more than 6 years ago | (#23285312)

Its good for musicians, dude. Think about it - you want to create a nice software synth. Do you only allow the player to modulate one parameter at a time (as is the case now with mouse-based soft synths) or should there be more performance? The performance is the key ..

Don't forget Reactrix... (3, Interesting)

HaeMaker (221642) | more than 6 years ago | (#23281622) []

Mod parent up! (1)

ArchieBunker (132337) | more than 6 years ago | (#23281886)

If you've been to a Bjork show recently you've seen one of those. Check out the reactrix demos on youtube.

Fantastic News! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23281654)

Stroking our fingers on the diseased Surface is now a thing of the past! Men everywhere are now free to multi-touch their Cubits any time of day or night!

Multitouch isn't new... (2, Interesting)

idiotwithastick (1036612) | more than 6 years ago | (#23281782)

but the ways that it is being used are. With more powerful processors being smaller and cooler, now devices like the iPhone and the Surface can be built. In addition, these devices have only really become applicable in a time where people are already linked by technology, not 20 years ago when there was no processing power for such a device. One of the more interesting features of Surface is that it can detect digital cameras or cell phones placed on it and (somehow) download photos and videos from it, this too was worthless back in the day before these devices existed or became as common as the wristwatch. The iPhone would have been worthless without the processing power to run the animations used with multi-touch features and the desire for a device more versatile (in user interaction) than the traditional mobile phone or smart phone, which was already pretty good. Having an open source multi-touch kit doesn't provide the software that make devices like the iPhone and Surface what they are, but merely demonstrates to the average guy that multitouch is not a new idea and is easily implemented.

Re:Multitouch isn't new... (1)

Mr. Picklesworth (931427) | more than 6 years ago | (#23282384)

Surface's syncronization power really isn't that special, though. It is essentially over Bluetooth, using "placing the device on the Surface" as a sort of trigger for the wireless connection to be initiated. It is a completely arbitrary thought, given that technologies are there to detect and synchronize devices as soon as they enter range, without the need to explicitly place them on the screen.

Seamless synchronization, which can be achieved with any of today's operating systems, is functionally beyond Surface's "killer feature".

Having said that, Surface's feature there isn't really about the seamless synchronization. I think the thing that makes it seem kind of cool is how a device itself becomes the launcher for its synchronization interface which would otherwise be completely detached with a conventional system. It's a tactile interface, which allows us richer UI metaphors.

However, we have to look at another trend being pushed at on all corners: Removing the need for a synchronization interface! Pervasive Internet connections and constant connection to home over the Internet, together, do away with the benefit of that more tangible synchronization interface by abstracting where content is stored to begin with.

Besides that, even in the event that it is a nice idea to explicitly synchronize data, isn't it easier to just do it via one device rather than putting both together? I think humans have evolved to the point of understanding pictures.

I guess what I am babbling at is how interface is a lot more than what people see. Really, the most important part is regarding the underlying system which the interface tries to present. Does it behave poorly, creating a struggling and kludgy interface, or does it behave well, leaving room for a straight forward and consistent interface?

Re:Multitouch isn't new... (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 6 years ago | (#23283270)

Automatic synchronisation is pretty trivial. I used to have a script on my PowerBook that was triggered whenever my phone entered range and ran iSync if it hadn't sync'd for more than 24 hours.

The nice thing about a multitough table is that it can extend the user interface of devices placed on (or near) it. Making syncing trivial is important, but being able to transfer a subset of the data is also important. You can put your phone and a friend's phone down on the table and have it display a larger view of both address books and then drag the contacts you want to send over to their phone. The same could be done for pictures and so on using a nice radial tree interface.

Security is important in these use cases, but the UI possibilities are very interesting.

Re:Multitouch isn't new... (1)

dotancohen (1015143) | more than 6 years ago | (#23282906)

Exactly. Not every multi-touch device is a copy of the Surface. The Microsoft Surface [] (disclosure: that's my site) has the ability to connect wirelessly with devices on the table, and even identify their location on the table itself. There is no language in the UI, so anybody from anywhere in the world can operate it. It's actually a rather nifty idea, and the whole multi-touch thing is not it's only feature.

Re:Multitouch isn't new... (1)

Repossessed (1117929) | more than 6 years ago | (#23285264)

Are yu saying surface has no instructions whatsoever built in?

Between that and Microsoft's need for special effects in order to show it to people, I'm sure everyone will be using it real soon.

Re:Multitouch isn't new... (1)

dotancohen (1015143) | more than 6 years ago | (#23285350)

I haven't gotten my hands on a Surface yet, but from the little I've seen there does not seems to be any built in documentation, at least, not yet. Though, I doubt that they will be simply bolted in and forgotten: there may be a small card or some other instruction nearby. Don't forget, the surface, in it's current form, is not intended for the home market. It is intended for hotel lobbies, bars, and other public places. Just think of the security [not] potential!

Cubit Websites (3, Informative)

crf00 (1048098) | more than 6 years ago | (#23281812)

Here are Cubit's project websites: [] []

mod parent up! (1)

Spy der Mann (805235) | more than 6 years ago | (#23282070)

This url should be in the summary, I wonder why they missed it.

Re:Cubit Websites (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23288334)

Does anyone know what the price is for this? I mean is it coming out reasonably priced for the average household or is it still a little on the high side?

mr. lee (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23281916)

johnny chung lee's had it down for years:

Someone needs to get compiz running with this (3, Interesting)

seandiggity (992657) | more than 6 years ago | (#23282134)

Seriously. Even if they just get the fire/water effects of compiz going with a device like this, it would be much more awesome than the demo videos. Could have a small table like this as an input device, and a larger screen to show all the compiz coolness. I don't have the requisite skills, but I hope someone in the community hears me :)

Table schmable... how about a bartop? (1)

ThreeGigs (239452) | more than 6 years ago | (#23282192)

I researched multi-touch homebrews a couple of years ago after seeing this video: []

Figured it was frustrated total internal reflection at work and managed to find out that the concept is pretty much unpatentable due to prior art. Not very often you see that!

That video does go to show that 'nifty' goes a lot farther than just computer based interaction. I'm imagining some cool new video game concepts, like virtual air-hockey or pong, plus games whose imputs might be better based on touching a panel than joystick and buttons.

Re:Table schmable... how about a bartop? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23289526)

one word: starcraft

A brief history of multi-touch (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23282612)

They are right that multi-touch has been around for decades. For a quick and dirty primer refer to Bill Buxton's article on the history of multi-touch. []

Basically there is a lot of confusion among non-specialists regarding what is new and what is old. This article is very useful in dispelling any misunderstandings.

Cubit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23282766)

Like Farnsworth?

openFrameworks (1)

legutierr (1199887) | more than 6 years ago | (#23282886)

The display is very cool. But has anyone here looked at the openFrameworks library that they used in building the software? People are doing some things with it that I, at least, have never seen before, by the looks of this video (which I found by linking through their site): []

NUI Group (1)

nabasu (771183) | more than 6 years ago | (#23283304)

NUI Group has been doing this for a while. They have an active community of amateurs as well for anyone interested. []

better open source multitouch solution (1)

nan0 (620897) | more than 6 years ago | (#23284094)

python based, ebuilds for gentoo & other distros

check out libavg []

and for early examples of this, check out sony's holowall - over 10 years old:

holowall []

Re:better open source multitouch solution (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23284406)

I did a MSc thesis on an 80" multi-touch display back in 2004/05, based on Rekimoto's work at Sony. The theory's pretty solid, but the materials for getting a large, robust screen working cheaply in a small form factor weren't quite so available at the time (especially on my shoestring budget).

Amazing what a few years will do, isn't it?
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?