Talk:Haptic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
No mention of Wii in this article. Is Wii considered a haptically-informed device? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.135.141.54 (talk) 15:01, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Technical details?
There doesnt seem to be a Wiki area for describing how Force Feedback works. Hopefully someone can shed some light on the subject with comparisons between previous attempts at FF. Please? :)
Here's a link on 'HowStuffWorks' describing the Playstation Dualshock controller and it describes how the vibration (basically 1 DOF vibration haptics device) motor works. Other devices like Sensable's, Force Dimension's and Novint's have a full 3 DOF (cartesian x,y,z force vectors... at least) feedback points. These are obviously very different (and much more expensive) than the simple vibration motors which Immersion_Corporation viciously guards.
The Greek word that is the etymological base for "haptics" should have a rough breathing mark over the initial alpha (looking like a single open quote mark). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.234.90.30 (talk) 20:26, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Novint link?
Hey all, I was told that I was not allowed to add a link to Novint's homepage (despite being prominently featured in the Games section) because it was "commercial" while other commercial links exist on the link page. (Sensable, Force Dimension, etc..) Anyone know what's up with that?
I plan to work on this page a bit... One of the first things to do would be to reorganize the external links section and make a subsection specifically for the commercial links (and add in Novint). Hopefully that will solve the problem. Any feedback on my edits is welcome...--Aokamura 01:54, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
Here's some feedback for those people who seem to want Novint product info clobbered from this article: I agree that Wikipedia should not be used as an advertisement site. But that does not mean that Wikipedia should be purged of all mention of commercial products. And that goes especially for this article on haptics when there is a singular breakthrough in what has become commercially available for the mass market. As for the editing practice of reversion, I see that as a radical action that should be reserved for correcting people who clearly do not share the goal of improving Wikipedia's articles. If someone spams an article with ads or vandalizes an article THEN a reversion would be appropriate. But if a Wikipedian puts forth their best effort toward making an improvement to an article, that would be the type of activity to be encouraged. It is the cumulation of those types of efforts that make Wikipedia great. Vybr8 (talk) 10:03, 6 January 2008 (UTC) For Ham Pastrami, I just saw that you are a member of the Video Games WikiProject. Now I am especially puzzled that you are pressing me for justifying my addition as noteworthy. Before you persist with your view that Novint Falcon info does not belong in this article on haptics, you might want to go find one of these thingies and give it a try. It is a revolutionary leap in computer interfaces. Perhaps the problem is that people from that company have been shamelessly promoting themselves here. I don't know the full history. But if that was the case I would think that one of them would have created an article about the company itself. I was surprised to see that there was no Novint article on Wikipedia, so I created it myself. Again, I have no connection to that company myself, other than the fact that I bought one of their gizmos and am totally freaked out by it. Vybr8 (talk) 10:47, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Feedback on Article
- Haptic technology section is a bit cumbersome. I suggest reorganizing it into something like pratical and entertainment uses of haptic technology... then alphabetize and combine the subsections where possible.
- The bit about the night club should be at the top of the page, or at the very least not under 'Haptic Technology'.
- Would be nice to have another picture, maybe at the top.
guiltyspark 23:06, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
- One key implementation of haptic technology that is missing is the BMW iDrive controller. That was where I first encountered the term "haptic profile".
[edit] Content and title of article
There was confusion and overlap between this article and Haptics. I have moved the info about human touching behaviour to Haptics. Now this article should be only about haptic technology. To that end I propose that the article is renamed Haptic technology. In any case I am not that keen on an article title being an adjective. Any other suggestions? Matt 20:47, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
Sounds like a good idea to me. I'm a bit confused over the sudden introduction of temperature near the end of the article. While I agree that temperature could be a component of a haptic system, the example given is of uisng air-holes to keep the user's hands cool during extended use. If the temperature isn't being actively controlled (as by a computer), then I don't think of it as being haptic. --Vrmlguy 09:40, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Game controls
I know I'm being pedantic, but I think both parts of the following statement need to be sourced.
- Many have believed these controllers to be providing force feedback when in reality true force feedback involves the feedback of a resisting force to the user.
"Many have believed" are usually considered weasel words, and the definition of "force feedback" needs a cite. Heck, I may do it if I get around to it.
-- trlkly 07:33, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Requested move
The word haptic is an adjective, and the article Haptic is actually about haptic technology. There are some other articles that use the adjective 'haptic', including Haptic perception and Haptic communication. This was suggested last year in an earlier comment on this page. Currently Haptic technology redirects to Haptic, and it should be the other way around, I think.--Cooper24 (talk) 07:07, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
