The part of this article that stuck out to me the most was when the word “tool” was defined. I had never thought of a tool as something that was supposed to amplify human capabiity, yet when he explained his reasoning, using the example with the hammer, it all clicked for me. This meant that when he then goes on to explain the lack to tactile richness in modern day tools as a problem, it makes far more sense for me to see it as a problem.
He then points out that touchscreens should be only a transitionary technology. This really points out the possibilities that I have nver considered due to our complacency in screen usage. I think that being able to control something with our fingers, by dragging something along on a touchscreen is inherently somewhat unnnatrual in terms of what the human mind and body are used to; it is simply an unnatrual way to manipulate ‘objects.’ Yet I believe that in terms of how far away that takes us from perfect design with tactile responses, I would not overlook the human mind’s capacity to ‘fill in the blanks’ and ascertain all that we need to know from the object on the screen. So I personally do not think it is as much of an issue as the article says.