5 ms·

I'm curious how the new screen shape will play out. And not just the issues with fragmentation of aspect ratio, but with usability. Currently the iphone screen

by rm999 14y ago

I'm curious how the new screen shape will play out. And not just the issues with fragmentation of aspect ratio, but with usability. Currently the iphone screen is just big enough that I can hold it with one hand and reach all four corners with my thumb. That said, I trust Apple has tested the usability aspect of the phone and has a plan for the aspect ratio differences.

awolf 14y ago
I've been working with the new layout system Apple added in iOS6 (Auto Layout). You basically define a set of rules like: this sticks to this, this view's height is proportional to this view's height, etc. The SDK attempts to reconcile the rules you gave and lets you know if there are any ambiguities in a clear way. It's very well thought out- powerful yet easy to use. I don't think fragmentation will be a problem. I do think however that the extra width in Landscape will now require a completely different interface. Adding 88 extra screen pixels means that simply rotating and stretching the interface has crossed the line from "looks kinda weird" to "looks terrible".
- andybak 14y ago
  Isn't that pretty much what other layout engines do? i.e. QT etc. What was the situation before? Absolute positioning via x/y? Really?
  - awolf 14y ago
    Absolute positioning, along with an "auto-resizing" mask for each view defining how it should react to change in the parent view's size. The old way was versatile actually. What it lacked was being able to relate views to anything aside from it's parent container.
bulltale 14y ago
Making the screen higher but not wider is a good choice here. Due to the bone and muscle structure in your hand, it is much easier to move your thumb a little higher and lower, then it is to move it more outward.
- arrrg 14y ago
  But the back button is on the top left. That's a problem. It's already hard to reach now.
jmharvey 14y ago
Currently the iphone screen is just big enough that I can hold it with one hand and reach all four corners with my thumb. This reminds me a bit of the argument that 90 feet is the optimal size for a baseball infield, as evidenced by the number of close plays at first base after a ground ball to an infielder. In actuality, though, the high frequency of close plays is the result of how the infielders choose to position themselves. You can reach all four corners of the screen with your thumb not because of the size of the phone, but because of how you choose to hold it. Change the size of the phone, and you'll naturally change your grip.
BenoitEssiambre 14y ago
For those of us who paid good money to designers to make backgrounds and graphics based on the old aspect ratio this is going to be quite a costly headache. Increasing the screen size diagonally would have given a much better power of two increase in surface, which is desperately needed with iPhones (I have a 4.6inch device and feel that the perfect size would be just a tiny bit bigger than that). There was no need for aspect-ratio fragmentation. If they didn't want to increase the device width, they should have tried doing like Motorola RAZR M and reduce the bezel.

by rm999 14y ago

awolf 14y ago

I've been working with the new layout system Apple added in iOS6 (Auto Layout). You basically define a set of rules like: this sticks to this, this view's height is proportional to this view's height, etc. The SDK attempts to reconcile the rules you gave and lets you know if there are any ambiguities in a clear way. It's very well thought out- powerful yet easy to use. I don't think fragmentation will be a problem. I do think however that the extra width in Landscape will now require a completely different interface. Adding 88 extra screen pixels means that simply rotating and stretching the interface has crossed the line from "looks kinda weird" to "looks terrible".

andybak 14y ago
Isn't that pretty much what other layout engines do? i.e. QT etc. What was the situation before? Absolute positioning via x/y? Really?
- awolf 14y ago
  Absolute positioning, along with an "auto-resizing" mask for each view defining how it should react to change in the parent view's size. The old way was versatile actually. What it lacked was being able to relate views to anything aside from it's parent container.

bulltale 14y ago

Making the screen higher but not wider is a good choice here. Due to the bone and muscle structure in your hand, it is much easier to move your thumb a little higher and lower, then it is to move it more outward.

arrrg 14y ago
But the back button is on the top left. That's a problem. It's already hard to reach now.

jmharvey 14y ago

Currently the iphone screen is just big enough that I can hold it with one hand and reach all four corners with my thumb. This reminds me a bit of the argument that 90 feet is the optimal size for a baseball infield, as evidenced by the number of close plays at first base after a ground ball to an infielder. In actuality, though, the high frequency of close plays is the result of how the infielders choose to position themselves. You can reach all four corners of the screen with your thumb not because of the size of the phone, but because of how you choose to hold it. Change the size of the phone, and you'll naturally change your grip.

BenoitEssiambre 14y ago

For those of us who paid good money to designers to make backgrounds and graphics based on the old aspect ratio this is going to be quite a costly headache. Increasing the screen size diagonally would have given a much better power of two increase in surface, which is desperately needed with iPhones (I have a 4.6inch device and feel that the perfect size would be just a tiny bit bigger than that). There was no need for aspect-ratio fragmentation. If they didn't want to increase the device width, they should have tried doing like Motorola RAZR M and reduce the bezel.