DIY A Multitouchscreen For Less Than $2: Learn the Basics and Make Your Own

Unless you are running a very old Xserver, rotation capabilities (included in xrandr) should already be on by default. If not, you can enable xrandr by adding the following option to the Screen section of the xorg.conf file.

Xournal++ (xournalpp) is the successor to Xournal that is currently in development. If you want a newer version Xournal, then you could try this. It is currently stable with little to no bugs that causes crashes.

DIY A Multitouchscreen For Less Then $2!!!

Download

If xidump shows that your tablets max resolution is the same as screen resolution, then your wacom driver has rescaled your wacom coordinates to the X server's resolution. To fix this, try recompiling your linuxwacom driver with:

Reaching beyond 40-60 touch points often surpasses useful, usable touchscreen performance for most applications. This is because the touch sensor and its associated control electronics (identifying and outputting the touches) are components in larger, more complex systems and must interface with the computer hardware, the chosen operating system, and application software. Unless all these elements of the system have been designed to work optimally with each other, the user experience will be disappointing. Simply put, what is the point of installing a state-of-the-art, 100-point touch sensing technology, outputting X-Y touch coordinates at less than five millisecond speeds, if you are marrying it up to a budget PC running integrated graphics processing, an outdated OS and poorly designed application software?

There are as many valid reasons for specifying a single or two-point touch sensing technology as there are for specifying a touchscreen capable of measuring 40 touches. The key is understanding the application and then designing the entire system (hardware and software) accordingly.

However, I strongly believe this view of 'innovation' is reductionist -- I think concentrating on innovation at the product level glosses over too many details. If we're really going to seriously look at whether Apple has become less innovative we're going to have to be a bit more clear about exactly what we're discussing.

Merely defining it as "making changes", however, is rather shallow and overly broad. When Apple released speed-bumped MacBook Pros in February, for example it had certainly changed something old into something new; but few would put that in the same sort of class as the release of the iPad mini. It seems to me that if we're to debate the merits of innovations then we're going to need a framework to weigh up the qualities and quantities of very different kinds of changes.

Innovation as advantage: Assuming anyone actually wants the innovation, then it seems reasonable to conclude that it'll convince people to buy the innovating product. Hence the company will sell more stuff than it would have done so otherwise.

The Retina display's innovation was not just skin deep, either. Quadrupling the number of pixels on the display means you also need four times the graphics memory and four times the bandwidth, just to maintain performance parity; then you also need a correspondingly more powerful graphics chip, and you have to do all that without compromising battery life, or weight, or making a device you can't sell for a reasonable price tag. This is why many of Apple's devices like the space-compromised iPad mini don't yet have retina displays.

So, to sum up: novel? Certainly in terms of consumer level devices. Change? A big fat check. Advantage? Difficult to gauge -- sales of Retina-equipped devices are high, for sure, but then the iPhone and iPad were already wildly successful before they were introduced. I think it's hard to imagine that retina displays didn't help, however.

I think the iPhone was a good deal less innovative than many people believe. You might have seen this snarky image by Josh Helfferich doing the rounds on forums and Twitter, purporting to show how the iPhone changed the phone market. The inconvenient truth it glosses over is that the iPhone's basic design -- a black touchscreen slab -- was far from unheard of at the time. To name just one example, consider the HTC TyTN, which was the smartphone I had before my first iPhone, and predates the latter by six months.

Think of the impact that this has had. Without microtransactions, the App Store would be far less vibrant; with no middle ground between free and (say) $10, there would be orders of magnitude less developer interest. That bracket between free and how much apps used to cost before the App Store is where almost all of the interesting stuff is. And that's before we talk about the revolution in the music industry, now shifting to an almost entirely digital model, powered by microtransactions, and other digital content distribution channels, undergoing the same seismic shift.

But when we examine Apple's track record in more granular terms, I think we come to the conclusion that genuine, feature-level innovation is very hard and consequently very rare. I don't think there's any evidence at all that Apple has become less innovative. Sure, Apple hasn't produced anything breathtaking new for a little while now, but when we look back over the last fifteen or so years, it's always a few years between the real big-hitting innovations anyway. So something's probably on its way -- many of you said as much in our recent TUAW poll.

I have a weird behavior in my surface book. the touch function work inside the app ( like browser) but is not respond when touching the icon ( like open folder). The touchpad also not responsive. the pointr stuck at the upper left corner. I have to use a usb wireless mouse to work around the touchpad issue. Try to reset the laptop but the behavior persist.Try to run the surface diagnostic tool but the accept button is not responsive to my mouse click! it just hanged at the license acceptance screen and hanged the whole laptop. I have to shut down the laptop to get it back.Such a weird behavior for a $2k laptop! 2ff7e9595c