<img height="1" width="1" style="display:none" src="https://www.facebook.com/tr?id=2283234405279860&amp;ev=PageView&amp;noscript=1">

Touch is dangerous or is non touch dangerous?

I'm spending the weekend at my fiancee's mother. Her little nephew is also running around here. The kid is like 1,5 years old and likes poking my iPad.

After a while, he starts poking at the screen of my non touch Macbook pro, which obviously doesn't give the wished result. After a few harder and clearly fueled by frustration pokes at the screen, I manage to divert his interest from the screen towards something else.

Two minutes later he spots the big TV in the middle of the living room. He walks up the screen and touches the screen. No result. He starts pocking more persistently at the big TV screen with no result. I see the expression of his face change from initially being happy that he saw the screen, then being confused that the screen didn't react and then the expression on his face of frustration. He then tries pushing the TV over, with force and two hands straight forward arms stretched.

Initially I thought, touch is dangerous as it creates these situations, but then I thought, not having touch is dangerous. Peoples expectations change.

Our kids are growing up in a world where they walk up to a screen and expect it to be interactive. If it is not, they think its broken and it frustrates them.

This alone already shows how much potential the touch and multi-touch industry has.

To people out there with very young kids, if you have an iPad or a touch enabled phone like an iPhone in your house, you better watch your TV.

Credit to 1,5 year old Milo for making this blogpost possible.