[citation][nom]hellwig[/nom]Isn't mutli-touch detection kinda like counting. Once you figured out that 2 came after 1, and that 3 came after 2, is it really that impressive that 20 comes after 19? I mean really, all they've done is increased the processing power to track 20+ inputs instead of the 3 or 4 of previous devices, right?And touch points? You mean my fingers are simply activating various points on a detection grid (like buttons or switches)? I suppose the detection had to be reduced to a discrete number at some point, but only 3358 touch points? That's 73x46 points. That's what, 3 every 2 centimeters or something? That's not a very precise surface. Maybe I'm just confused.[/citation]
I believe you're thinking of the 20+ touch in a linear fashion rather than simultaneous. A lot of touch-screen devices can only track one touch at a time. If you touch with two fingers, it tends to jump back and forth. Multi-touch devices have started to become more common, and these can track, well, more than one touch at a time. Of course, 20+ is beyond their capacity.
So what are the potential applications of something like this? A touch-screen keyboard that could actually keep up with a proficient 10-finger typist. A collabortive screen where multiple people could input information or maninpulate objects all at the same time.
A lot of times, stuff like this will come out and people will treat it like a solution in search of a problem. That's not entirely untrue. Often times, the next great gadget is only possible once certain technological breakthroughs have been achieved. In fact, there was an article that came out when the iPad debutted pointing out that an iPad prototype was actually invented a decade or so earlier. However, it would not have been possible to create THE iPad because the technology did not exist yet.