https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/donlehman/more-real-stylus-cap
---
Damion Hankejh | ingk.com
R u b b i s h.
If that were true, handwriting apps would not be as wildly successful as they have been in the app store -- and accompanied with reviews slamming the missing stylus. If iPad had Newton's last iteration of handwriting recognition (or [gasp] some improvement thereupon from the past ~10 years), it would become a notably more alluring productivity tool and less of an overpriced eReader/game toy.
I've read a pile of published usability reports on other text entry methods, such as chording keyboards, and they all show essentially the same thing. Letting fingers extend to hit a fixed close target is hard to beat, and the optimal amount of pressure needed is very small (though perhaps not zero).
My theory is that it takes less mental effort to write than to use an OSK, so the OSK is perceived as being slower. With the OSK the level of mental effort is mostly high (mostly visual search), with periodic dips (hit the key). With pen-based writing it's the opposite -- mostly automated / low-cognitive-effort behavior with periodic thinking about what to do next.
I read a quote from Jobs somewhere recently where he said something like, "the problem with handwriting is that it's just so darned slow" so that makes me think that Apple may have done a similar usability study.
I don't think OSKs are ideal. I'm continually impressed by the steady flow of innovations in text-input methods. But pens have their own usability baggage even outside the limitations of handwriting.