

IPad stylus -- Kickstarter project - hankejh

While it won't make the iPad (phone, tablets) notably more useful for taking handwritten notes (which strikes me as more of a software than hardware issue), I backed this new pen-cap stylus -- it's a clever design and does have a smaller tip than any other I've encountered (only 9 days left to back the project):<p>https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/donlehman/more-real-stylus-cap<p>---<p>Damion Hankejh | ingk.com
======
melling
At some point, device makers are going to realize a stylus is quite useful.
Unfortunately, I think Apple wants to go out of its way to prove that you
don't need one, it may take a few years to see them as an option.

~~~
hankejh
Agreed -- Jobs believes we all want to write with our fingers or type on
sheets of glass with no haptic feedback.

R u b b i s h.

If that were true, handwriting apps would not be as wildly successful as they
have been in the app store -- and accompanied with reviews slamming the
missing stylus. If iPad had Newton's last iteration of handwriting recognition
(or [gasp] some improvement thereupon from the past ~10 years), it would
become a notably more alluring productivity tool and less of an overpriced
eReader/game toy.

~~~
wittjeff
In the early '90s when I was a usability specialist at Microsoft I did a
laborious usability study (hired several temps to enter text using various
methods for hours per day, over multiple days) comparing pen input vs. OSKs
and got some counter-intuitive results. Essentially OSKs are much faster than
handwriting even under optimal conditions. If it takes 10 seconds to enter a
string with an OSK, it'll take ~15 seconds to write it using block letters.
That's not counting any time needed to correct errors, which will tend to make
the writing input even worse. When I asked participants after the study which
method they thought was quicker, most assumed the pen-based writing was. Keep
in mind that they spent 1/3 or more of their time correcting errors, so the
writing may have taken twice as long as the OSK, yet they didn't perceive as
such. Of course their statements could have been a demand effect, but it
generally corroborates my main point.

I've read a pile of published usability reports on other text entry methods,
such as chording keyboards, and they all show essentially the same thing.
Letting fingers extend to hit a fixed close target is hard to beat, and the
optimal amount of pressure needed is very small (though perhaps not zero).

My theory is that it takes less mental effort to write than to use an OSK, so
the OSK is perceived as being slower. With the OSK the level of mental effort
is mostly high (mostly visual search), with periodic dips (hit the key). With
pen-based writing it's the opposite -- mostly automated / low-cognitive-effort
behavior with periodic thinking about what to do next.

I read a quote from Jobs somewhere recently where he said something like, "the
problem with handwriting is that it's just so darned slow" so that makes me
think that Apple may have done a similar usability study.

I don't think OSKs are ideal. I'm continually impressed by the steady flow of
innovations in text-input methods. But pens have their own usability baggage
even outside the limitations of handwriting.

------
FrankBlack
Yikes! I can foresee potential pitfalls when one loses track of the cap and
the Sharpie!

