3 ms·

Kind of limits the ways you can hold the phone if one entire edge always has special controls on it. Can't grip it with your fingers if you're holding it in you

Kind of limits the ways you can hold the phone if one entire edge always has special controls on it. Can't grip it with your fingers if you're holding it in your left hand, can't grip it with your thumb if you're holding it in your right hand. Have to make sure you always turn it a certain way for landscape mode. For a handheld device this just doesn't seem practical.

rm445 12y ago
It's hard to agree or disagree without the chance to play with the physical object, but I would place my bets on manual dexterity (as in manus, the hand) overcoming any obstacles, if there's an overall benefit to usability. People already perform feats of dexterity (as in dexter, the right hand) with the featureless blocks of slippery glass we currently have. My supposition is that, if people were asked to list problems with phone usability, software factors would rank above physical ergonomics. I'm sure they can learn to work a raised ridge on the edge of the phone with big button target areas, if it helps control the software better.
- devindotcom 12y ago
  Have to ask, why are you providing the etymologies of these words? Sure, we can get better at holding things, but having a screen on the right side means you can't grip the right side of the device. The blocks of glass we've been gripping are mostly safe areas all along the edges, with small active zones for buttons. This design means you can't grip the phone on two sides, which is the way human hands naturally grip a small tablet-shaped object when the front can't be touched.
  - rm445 12y ago
    Mainly because manual is sometimes confused with the masculine, but I also like that simply the direction of the most-commonly dominant hand is linked in our language with skilfulness. My basic proposition is that our devices make no use whatsoever of the incredible natural skill we have in our hands, therefore arguments along the lines that we can't use something because it's not a featureless slate, have a good chance of being wrong. That said, your original complaints about the device in question aren't necessarily wrong. After all, the edge controls could perhaps be a usability nightmare in their own right. The hand is a fascinating device - extremely limited in strength and above all capacity for repetitive work, but absolutely incredible for fine control and versatility. It's an interesting case: claims that hands naturally do this or that quite often don't take any account of just how versatile a tool it can be. But on the other hand (oops!) it is absolutely vital that any object intended for use in the hand has the utmost attention paid to the design: anything that causes discomfort becomes in an instant completely unusable.
    - devindotcom 12y ago
      Well, we can certainly agree on that. The only things I see that seem to get close to maxing out the hand's sensitivity and precision are high-end mice and gaming controllers. Capacitive touchscreens are no comparison. I was interested in Amazon's use of gestures on the Fire Phone - they're handy (oops!) and natural. I think we'll see more of that.

rm445 12y ago

It's hard to agree or disagree without the chance to play with the physical object, but I would place my bets on manual dexterity (as in manus, the hand) overcoming any obstacles, if there's an overall benefit to usability. People already perform feats of dexterity (as in dexter, the right hand) with the featureless blocks of slippery glass we currently have. My supposition is that, if people were asked to list problems with phone usability, software factors would rank above physical ergonomics. I'm sure they can learn to work a raised ridge on the edge of the phone with big button target areas, if it helps control the software better.

devindotcom 12y ago
Have to ask, why are you providing the etymologies of these words? Sure, we can get better at holding things, but having a screen on the right side means you can't grip the right side of the device. The blocks of glass we've been gripping are mostly safe areas all along the edges, with small active zones for buttons. This design means you can't grip the phone on two sides, which is the way human hands naturally grip a small tablet-shaped object when the front can't be touched.
- rm445 12y ago
  Mainly because manual is sometimes confused with the masculine, but I also like that simply the direction of the most-commonly dominant hand is linked in our language with skilfulness. My basic proposition is that our devices make no use whatsoever of the incredible natural skill we have in our hands, therefore arguments along the lines that we can't use something because it's not a featureless slate, have a good chance of being wrong. That said, your original complaints about the device in question aren't necessarily wrong. After all, the edge controls could perhaps be a usability nightmare in their own right. The hand is a fascinating device - extremely limited in strength and above all capacity for repetitive work, but absolutely incredible for fine control and versatility. It's an interesting case: claims that hands naturally do this or that quite often don't take any account of just how versatile a tool it can be. But on the other hand (oops!) it is absolutely vital that any object intended for use in the hand has the utmost attention paid to the design: anything that causes discomfort becomes in an instant completely unusable.
  - devindotcom 12y ago
    Well, we can certainly agree on that. The only things I see that seem to get close to maxing out the hand's sensitivity and precision are high-end mice and gaming controllers. Capacitive touchscreens are no comparison. I was interested in Amazon's use of gestures on the Fire Phone - they're handy (oops!) and natural. I think we'll see more of that.