5 ms·

I would also add that from a UX perspective they utterly suck. Many task that are possible with a mouse / keyboard setup are impossible on a smartphone, and wha

I would also add that from a UX perspective they utterly suck. Many task that are possible with a mouse / keyboard setup are impossible on a smartphone, and what is possible is much much slower and less precise. I think its clear they have been designed from the ground up to be merely shiny toys / gadgets, and not useful pocket computers. The key fundamental flaw in their design is the touchscreen. Eg. Press a 'button' which is just an image on the screen and has 0 haptic feedback, so the only way to locate it is by looking at it, but your finger is obscuring it (as you are moving to press it with your finger) so you cant see it. It is oxymoronical design.

janlaureys 7y ago
Although I agree, there's also a lot of situations where I find a touchscreen works so much better than a keyboard and mouse. I absolutely love using Google maps on an iPad for example. Also my mother who is very very tech illiterate can intuitively use the iPad. It's just so much easier to point and press at something rather than using a mouse to navigate a small cursor.
phicoh 7y ago
In my experience, current phones are the best way to have a computer in your pocket. In past I wanted to have a physical keyboard, but I changed my mind and the onscreen keyboard is actually best. All in all, a phone is a lousy computer. But it is brilliant if you are in a random place and need to get some work done. It is slow, but slow is better than having to go out and find a real computer somewhere. The big problem at the moment is that we are mostly stuck with some horrible consumer operating systems on our phones. But that is problem that can be fixed.
Wowfunhappy 7y ago
> Many task that are possible with a mouse / keyboard setup are impossible on a smartphone, and what is possible is much much slower and less precise. I agree. But, you can't practically put a mouse on a phone. (At least, I have no idea how it could work—if you have a brilliant idea, I'd be interested to hear it.) I think touch is the best input we have available for a device the size of a phone. On tablets, the lack of a mouse makes less sense, and I think it's notable that tablets haven't replaced laptops to the extent some predicted when the iPad was first introduced. Edit: There is one alternative mechanism I can think of—a stylus. Still touch, but offers much more precision and in turn allows interfaces to be designed with smaller buttons that take up less real-estate. The downside is that styluses get lost, take time to extract from the slot, and cannot be used in the same hand that holds the phone. Also, to truly reap the benefits of stylus input, the UI would need to be wholly stylus-focused. A hybrid UI will need to work with the lowest common denominator.
- everyone 7y ago
  Just something like a Blackberry is decent.. Where you have a screen, that you look at, and buttons that you press with your fingers. Not a screen that you cover with your fingers and also a haptically featureless screen that you press with your fingers. Handheld gaming devices are actually often well designed, eg. Gameboy, PSP. Gaming consoles have a long heritage of being able to navigate complex menus and perform complex tasks on with just a controller (eg. Mario-maker, LittleBigPlanet) Phones / tablets are fine for just faffing about on, but that is all they have been designed for imo. I think a pocket computer designed for actually doing stuff on might resemble a weird Blackberry / PSP hybrid.
  - Wowfunhappy 7y ago
    Mario Maker uses a touch screen. Little Big Planet worked impressively well with buttons, but I wouldn't consider it ideal, and it's notable that the spiritual successor, Dreams, is designed around a mouse-like, gyroscope-controlled pointer. Media Molecule chose this option despite the fact that it feels awkward on a dualshock and requires frequent re-centering. I do miss slide out keyboards, but I don't think they're a complete solution. Similar to a stylus, sliding out a keyboard takes precious seconds, and they introduce a mechanical failure point. If you go full-on Blackberry, you loose valuable screen real-estate.
    - everyone 7y ago
      * Mario Maker uses a touch screen. Ok, well 'street fighter', you need to input very complex and precise controls. Or pokemon on the gameboy, or a JRPG with its labyrinthine menus and options + 100's of complex difficult games. * sliding out a keyboard takes precious seconds As opposed to the minutes you lose fumbling with a 'keyboard' you cant feel (or see, cus ure finger is in front of it) * If you go full-on Blackberry, you loose valuable screen real-estate. If that 'real estate' is also trying to act as a physical interface, then its not valuable real estate anymore, its garbage-land, its acting as the worst interface imaginable. Ive heard that expression before and I think what the phone designers mean when they say it is: if you add a keyboard it no longer looks like a cool shiny sci-fi gadget. I dont get how people are ok with touchsceen interfaces, they're a haptic nothing. People were livid about the IBM PCjr's chiclet keyboard. Even that is infinitely better than 0.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

janlaureys 7y ago

Although I agree, there's also a lot of situations where I find a touchscreen works so much better than a keyboard and mouse. I absolutely love using Google maps on an iPad for example. Also my mother who is very very tech illiterate can intuitively use the iPad. It's just so much easier to point and press at something rather than using a mouse to navigate a small cursor.

phicoh 7y ago

In my experience, current phones are the best way to have a computer in your pocket. In past I wanted to have a physical keyboard, but I changed my mind and the onscreen keyboard is actually best. All in all, a phone is a lousy computer. But it is brilliant if you are in a random place and need to get some work done. It is slow, but slow is better than having to go out and find a real computer somewhere. The big problem at the moment is that we are mostly stuck with some horrible consumer operating systems on our phones. But that is problem that can be fixed.

Wowfunhappy 7y ago

> Many task that are possible with a mouse / keyboard setup are impossible on a smartphone, and what is possible is much much slower and less precise. I agree. But, you can't practically put a mouse on a phone. (At least, I have no idea how it could work—if you have a brilliant idea, I'd be interested to hear it.) I think touch is the best input we have available for a device the size of a phone. On tablets, the lack of a mouse makes less sense, and I think it's notable that tablets haven't replaced laptops to the extent some predicted when the iPad was first introduced. Edit: There is one alternative mechanism I can think of—a stylus. Still touch, but offers much more precision and in turn allows interfaces to be designed with smaller buttons that take up less real-estate. The downside is that styluses get lost, take time to extract from the slot, and cannot be used in the same hand that holds the phone. Also, to truly reap the benefits of stylus input, the UI would need to be wholly stylus-focused. A hybrid UI will need to work with the lowest common denominator.

everyone 7y ago
Just something like a Blackberry is decent.. Where you have a screen, that you look at, and buttons that you press with your fingers. Not a screen that you cover with your fingers and also a haptically featureless screen that you press with your fingers. Handheld gaming devices are actually often well designed, eg. Gameboy, PSP. Gaming consoles have a long heritage of being able to navigate complex menus and perform complex tasks on with just a controller (eg. Mario-maker, LittleBigPlanet) Phones / tablets are fine for just faffing about on, but that is all they have been designed for imo. I think a pocket computer designed for actually doing stuff on might resemble a weird Blackberry / PSP hybrid.
- Wowfunhappy 7y ago
  Mario Maker uses a touch screen. Little Big Planet worked impressively well with buttons, but I wouldn't consider it ideal, and it's notable that the spiritual successor, Dreams, is designed around a mouse-like, gyroscope-controlled pointer. Media Molecule chose this option despite the fact that it feels awkward on a dualshock and requires frequent re-centering. I do miss slide out keyboards, but I don't think they're a complete solution. Similar to a stylus, sliding out a keyboard takes precious seconds, and they introduce a mechanical failure point. If you go full-on Blackberry, you loose valuable screen real-estate.
  - everyone 7y ago
    * Mario Maker uses a touch screen. Ok, well 'street fighter', you need to input very complex and precise controls. Or pokemon on the gameboy, or a JRPG with its labyrinthine menus and options + 100's of complex difficult games. * sliding out a keyboard takes precious seconds As opposed to the minutes you lose fumbling with a 'keyboard' you cant feel (or see, cus ure finger is in front of it) * If you go full-on Blackberry, you loose valuable screen real-estate. If that 'real estate' is also trying to act as a physical interface, then its not valuable real estate anymore, its garbage-land, its acting as the worst interface imaginable. Ive heard that expression before and I think what the phone designers mean when they say it is: if you add a keyboard it no longer looks like a cool shiny sci-fi gadget. I dont get how people are ok with touchsceen interfaces, they're a haptic nothing. People were livid about the IBM PCjr's chiclet keyboard. Even that is infinitely better than 0.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]