So AMD’s ATI graphics division has got something in the works that supports up to six monitors.
If you’ve ever navigated even two displays with a mouse, you may realize something: multiple, high-resolution displays may be outstripping the mouse’s capability as a primary user interface tool. Now toss in six 30-inch monitors – 24 whopping megapixels in all – and you’ve got a real problem. Even if you drop that to six more affordable 1920x1080 displays, that’s still over 12 megapixels you need to navigate. Just visually tracking the mouse cursor becomes problematic.
Still, it's a setup I’d love to have.
What’s needed for huge pixel-count displays is multi-touch. Windows 7 now incorporates an actually useful multi-touch display capability, but it’s currently relegated to all-in-one PCs with multi-touch, a handful of laptops, and the expensive (at $12,500 a pop) Microsoft Surface.
Still, multi-touch isn’t perfect. If you’re a heavy Photoshop user, you need a high degree of precision in selection, sometimes down to the pixel level. For that, a high DPI mouse is indispensible. What would be better in a system with three to six displays would be a combination of multi-touch and a good mouse.
But affordable multi-touch monitors are nowhere to be found. The only desktop display I could find was one by Albatron that was announced back in 2007. But just try actually buying one – you can’t.
You can find multi-touch in all-in-one desktops, like HP’s TouchSmart PCs. Recently, Lenovo announced a Thinkpad model, the T400s, with a multi-touch displays. A touch sensitive display (that’s not just a tablet PC) makes sense – it’s more useful for normal office work than the touch pads that grace most laptops today.
So where are the multi-touch monitors for desktop PCs? Other than the vaporware Albatron announcement, I haven’t seen any major LCD manufacturer announce multi-touch displays. You’d need the proper connectivity, of course, but an additional USB connection should cover that. Given the additional electronics needed for the touch-sensitive interface, a multi-touch display would cost more – but it wouldn’t have to be a huge cost uplift. I’d pay $50 more for a multi-touch 24-inch display, for example.
If large scale display technologies, like AMD’s Eyefinity, are going to be successful, we need to move beyond mouse and keyboard. If multi-touch monitors aren’t available, there’s another route: gesture recognition.
In fact, incorporating gesture recognition would be easy in a 3-display setup. The reason is the increasing number of desktop displays with built-in webcams. Imagine a 3-display setup. The center display might be something large, like a 30-incher. The two “surround” displays could be 24-inch units, each with a built-in webcam. They could be mounted in portrait or landscape mode. The outboard units with the webcam need software that could “read” gestures from the user. Given the separation of the webcams, you could imagine software that could interpret gestures in 3D space, allowing for a larger variety of gestures.
Four or six displays in a flatter arrangement wouldn’t be harder, since you could still have enough separation between webcams for this to work correctly.
Of course, Microsoft’s already done something like this – it’s called Project Natal. Alas, it’s the Xbox group that’s doing this, not the Windows group. If Microsoft could get the Windows group to do a webcam-based gesture recognition interface for Windows 7, I suspect users would be all over it.
As noted, you’d still need a mouse for more precise work. But the mouse would be an adjunct to the primary user interface, much like pen tablets. Pen tablets have already supplanted mice for certain kinds of precision graphics or CAD work.
Given all those webcams, many of which are capable of facial recognition, I’m surprised this hasn’t become a commercial product yet. With Windows 7 arriving soon, as well as AMD’s Eyefinity, maybe someone will pick this ball up and run with it. I’m waiting, credit card in hand…
Comments are closed on this article
whiplash55
October 05, 2009 at 10:17pm
Good to see him writing and podcasting again, hope to see more.
phaddie
September 22, 2009 at 8:26pm
Did anyone else notice that the photo of the 6 monitors appears to move when you are reading teh text below it?
Just asking...
--------------------------------------------------------
I am the very model of a modern major General
Hg Dragon
September 22, 2009 at 2:37pm
If it's simply an issue of navigating across multiple screens, why not use a regular touchscreen. Granted, the majority of them don't have the tops in picture quality and are 4:3 sizes, but they work perfectly fine. I currently have a 17" Elo touchpanel on my desk for a second monitor that we removed from one of our locations when we switched POS hardware. Sure, I don't game on it and don't do heavy content creation or graphics work, but for the everyday IT support work I do, it is perfectly serviceable. I've been contemplating swapping the head for our Anti-Virus server that sits on my desk for a touchpanel as well.
Outside of content creation, image manipulation, or photo editing needs, I think multi-touch is just a cost-increasing bullet-point. Besides, how many applications truly support it? Windows 7 might but that doesn't mean application developers will use it,or use it "right" for that matter.
Furien
September 22, 2009 at 1:06pm
First I just have to say I'm so glad to see Loyd here on Maximum PC! I was super bummed by the whole ExtremeTech fiasco but if it means that we get Loyd writing here and possibly in print then it was all for the best at least as far as I'm concerned. Anyway, it's great to see you writing here Loyd! :)
Anyway, as far as all this multi-monitor stuff is concerned, I hate to admit it, but I'm just not all that excited at least when it comes to gaming. Don't get me wrong, I have a dual-monitor setup at home, and I find it quite useful to be able to have more apps open and viewable at the same time, but I still only use the one monitor for gaming.
There are just too many downsides as far as I see it. First of all you've got to buy how many monitors? Sure they're getting better and cheaper every day, but then do you have enough room for them? Do you have a good way to mount them all together? Will all your games support the effect and not look insanely distorted in certain configurations? Then of course there's the crosshair issue that Modred189 brought up too. These are just some issues off the top of my head, but even if every one of them was easily solved, I still HATE the way multi-monitor setups look with the bezels breaking up the image so much. It then begs the question, why not just buy a bigger single monitor or use a projector if you want a really large single image for gaming?
Techie714
September 22, 2009 at 12:51pm
It's great to see Loyd on Max PC, get his ass on the Podcast people!!!
Modred189
September 22, 2009 at 11:16am
Good to see you here at Max, Loyd, since the ET shens.
Anyway, I really agree wwith you regarding the need for a new paradigm in interface for the new screen capabilities on the horizon. However, I do think that the elimination of any real bezel is going to be vital. I mean, I have 2 22" LCD's, but I do not do multi-monitor gaming for one reason... Because almost ALL games' action happens directly in the middle of the screen... i.e. where the two screens meet. Thus, the targeting reticle is split between the two screens.
The only way this is possible is if you have an odd numberXodd number screen config. 1X3, 3X3 etc... Just not economical compared to 2 screens or 4 (2X2).
Also, these ideas (Eyefinity and multitouch etc) are nice, but there needs to be a reason, an application to utilize it. To be honest, what is the likelilhood that a touch-based interface will be more efficient than a mouse? (excepting things like photoshop and other artistic endeavors,a nd for that Wacom has the Cinique, which is nearly perfect imho)
I just fear that these technologies will be hampered like physX (not equating them of course) in that they really do not have much of a value proposition beyond cool factor and e-peen, and a a result, truly interesting, innovative products (like Surface) will be few and far between...
icebird
September 22, 2009 at 10:29am
Gee, maybe it's time to upgrade the plain white arrow we've used since Windows was born to something easier to spot, track, and use. I have 3 displays and have created my own cross-hair like cursors which I find works out much better for al three categories.
For the problem of movement across larger displays perhaps you could simply add a thumb button to the mouse that doubles the sensitivity when held in, giving you more fine control when you release it. If we find better cursor images that stand out against any background through sublte animation or coloring, the mouse can still be a great solution.
Modred189
September 22, 2009 at 2:50pm
"For the problem of movement across larger displays perhaps you could simply add a thumb button to the mouse that doubles the sensitivity when held in, giving you more fine control when you release it. "
That's a freaking phenomenal idea. Gaming mice often have this ability already, all you have to do is make it not a toggle, but a press-and-hold.
Print
