Soft/On Screen Buttons Potential Problems

[jmart603]

I don't understand what the big deal about wanting the buttons as part of the screen is for a phone. I understand in merging gingerbread and honeycomb, the code would have to merge the two types of buttons used, but I don't get why they need to be a part of the screen on a phone. Its not like you can ever get rid of them---you always need a home button, and you'll still need menu and back since those aren't built into any apps and google isn't going to have every developer re-write their apps. Since those buttons will always have to be there, its not like we're gaining any screen space. Also, now more of the screen needs to be lit up, which means more battery used. I think I'd prefer if the buttons stayed how they are now. Somebody explain why I should want this (not why its happening, I get the merging the 2 OS thing).

 

[cdf3]

On my Honeycomb tablet, when i rotate the screen to different orientations, the buttons rotate as well.

Sent from my GT-P7510 using Tapatalk

 

[SpaceHippie]

Re: Soft/On Screen Buttons- Whats the point?

More screen space. The buttons appear in certain situations.

 

[jmart603]

Re: Soft/On Screen Buttons- Whats the point?

More screen space. The buttons appear in certain situations.

But wouldn't they always be there. When wouldn't it show a home, back, or menu button, except maybe when watching a video.

 

[dsignori]

Re: Soft/On Screen Buttons- Whats the point?

I don't understand what the big deal about wanting the buttons as part of the screen is for a phone. I understand in merging gingerbread and honeycomb, the code would have to merge the two types of buttons used, but I don't get why they need to be a part of the screen on a phone. Its not like you can ever get rid of them---you always need a home button, and you'll still need menu and back since those aren't built into any apps and google isn't going to have every developer re-write their apps. Since those buttons will always have to be there, its not like we're gaining any screen space. Also, now more of the screen needs to be lit up, which means more battery used. I think I'd prefer if the buttons stayed how they are now. Somebody explain why I should want this (not why its happening, I get the merging the 2 OS thing).

I agree completely. On a tablet this makes sense. On a phone it seems to introduce several usability issues. I'll reserve judgement until I see it in use, but right now I cannot imagine any scenerio where the virtual buttons help in any way. At the very best, it might be a push in terms of usability (in which case, what's the point? and I doubt it will be a push anyway), in many other cases, there would seem to be a need for more screen presses or loss of screen real estate. But, no point in guessing until we see it I suppose. ..

 

[dsignori]

Re: Soft/On Screen Buttons- Whats the point?

But wouldn't they always be there. When wouldn't it show a home, back, or menu button, except maybe when watching a video.

In which case you would then need to press <something> to see the buttons, then press [back] to go back, making more presses/work for the user. This is a disadvantage, not an improvement ..

 

[ejaymd11]

Re: Soft/On Screen Buttons- Whats the point?

I don't understand what the big deal about wanting the buttons as part of the screen is for a phone. I understand in merging gingerbread and honeycomb, the code would have to merge the two types of buttons used, but I don't get why they need to be a part of the screen on a phone. Its not like you can ever get rid of them---you always need a home button, and you'll still need menu and back since those aren't built into any apps and google isn't going to have every developer re-write their apps. Since those buttons will always have to be there, its not like we're gaining any screen space. Also, now more of the screen needs to be lit up, which means more battery used. I think I'd prefer if the buttons stayed how they are now. Somebody explain why I should want this (not why its happening, I get the merging the 2 OS thing).

Awesome thing about android is if you don't want it, don't get it. I'm sure others will come along and keep buttons on it. Or just get a new phone now and wait for the ICS upgrade.

 

[jmart603]

Re: Soft/On Screen Buttons- Whats the point?

In which case you would then need to press <something> to see the buttons, then press [back] to go back, making more presses/work for the user. This is a disadvantage, not an improvement ..

Yeah, well I imagine you'd tap the screen anywhere which would pause the video and bring up the buttons. I don't really see much advantage to virtual buttons on a phone. Guess we'll see how they are when prime comes out (if todays pictures isn't a fake)

 

[cdf3]

I'm also thinking it would make it easier for developers. Ice Cream Sandwich is supposed to bring uniformity to tablets and phones.
One OS for all devices. That way developers don't have to worry about creating an app with capacitive buttons for phones, and on screen buttons for tablets. It would now be all the same.

Sent from my GT-P7510 using Tapatalk

 

[jmart603]

Re: Soft/On Screen Buttons- Whats the point?

I'm also thinking it would make it easier for developers. Ice Cream Sandwich is supposed to bring uniformity to tablets and phones.
One OS for all devices. That way developers don't have to worry about creating an app with capacitive buttons for phones, and on screen buttons for tablets. It would now be all the same.

Sent from my GT-P7510 using Tapatalk

But they don't have to implement virtual buttons on a phone for that----it just requires the code for the menu button (or any button) controlling both a soft and virtual button depending on the hardware

Also, the developers wouldnt create the virtual buttons, they'd be part of the OS

 

[yankdez]

Re: Soft/On Screen Buttons- Whats the point?

what if swiping up from the bottom displays the screen buttons, a lot like the notification bar? come to think of it, if this isnt how you display the screen keys, itd be pretty awesome if this is how you access the app drawer or multitask window.

 

[edoublediz]

Re: Soft/On Screen Buttons- Whats the point?

what if swiping up from the bottom displays the screen buttons, a lot like the notification bar? come to think of it, if this isnt how you display the screen keys, itd be pretty awesome if this is how you access the app drawer or multitask window.

like wave launcher!!! with wave, you just swipe up on edge of screen and it opens the wave launcher. for those who dont know the app, do yourself a favor, it is cool for your favorite 5 apps. launches from anywhere. it can even open within apps.

 

[cdf3]

But they don't have to implement virtual buttons on a phone for that----it just requires the code for the menu button (or any button) controlling both a soft and virtual button depending on the hardware

Also, the developers wouldnt create the virtual buttons, they'd be part of the OS

This may be true for home and escape keys, but there are tons of apps in the market that have not been updated to accommodate the menu key for this setup.
Those that have been optimized for honeycomb will have the menu key in the upper right corner of the screen when using the app. Those that have not will have the menu key next to the other on screen keys.
Also, some video apps can minimize the on screen buttons to small dots while watching video. Then there are some video apps that can't, therefore the on screen buttons are displayed during the duration of the video.

Sent from my GT-P7510 using Tapatalk

 

[pe1]

Re: Soft/On Screen Buttons- Whats the point?

But wouldn't they always be there. When wouldn't it show a home, back, or menu button, except maybe when watching a video.

You've given a perfect example: you don't need buttons while watching a video. So that space can be used to show a bigger picture.

But there's another big advantage: the list of buttons becomes customizable. For example, some apps don't use the menu button. Others do. But the menu button is always there, whether the current app uses it or not. So does this app that's running right now use the menu button? No way to tell except press it and find out.

With on-screen buttons, the menu button is only there if and when pressing it will actually do something. So now you don't need to keep hitting buttons to find out whether they do anything. And if it's not there, the app can use that space for something else.

 

[dsignori]

Re: Soft/On Screen Buttons- Whats the point?

You've given a perfect example: you don't need buttons while watching a video. So that space can be used to show a bigger picture.

But there's another big advantage: the list of buttons becomes customizable. For example, some apps don't use the menu button. Others do. But the menu button is always there, whether the current app uses it or not. So does this app that's running right now use the menu button? No way to tell except press it and find out.

With on-screen buttons, the menu button is only there if and when pressing it will actually do something. So now you don't need to keep hitting buttons to find out whether they do anything. And if it's not there, the app can use that space for something else.

I don't think you're getting it. Picture this, you are now watching a video on your current android phone. You want to go BACK.

- You now need to click once
- With ICS and the rumored virtual buttons (if they disappear), you now need 2 presses.

No need to make it any more complicated than that. At the very very best it might approach the same level of usability as we already have IMO.

 

[cdf3]

I don't think you're getting it. Picture this, you are now watching a video on your current android phone. You want to go BACK.

- You now need to click once
- With ICS and the rumored virtual buttons (if they disappear), you now need 2 presses.

No need to make it any more complicated than that. At the very very best it might approach the same level of usability as we already have IMO.

If it's anything like Honeycomb for tablets, you will not have to click twice.
The buttons will turn into small dots. When clicking on the dot that corresponds to the button it replaced, the action will be carried out in one click.

Sent from my GT-P7510 using Tapatalk

 

[dsignori]

Re: Soft/On Screen Buttons- Whats the point?

If it's anything like Honeycomb for tablets, you will not have to click twice.
The buttons will turn into small dots. When clicking on the dot that corresponds to the button it replaced, the action will be carried out in one click.

Sent from my GT-P7510 using Tapatalk

Right, I mentioned if they disappear then what I wrote applies. If they stay on the screen as dots then we lose screen real estate right?

So:
(a) They disappear completely and you need 2 taps
(b) they stay on (as dots or not) an take up screen space

Again, I just don't see what we are gaining here ..

 

[cdf3]

It would probably use the same multitasking window and menu screen as honeycomb. No matter which way you turn the device, the pop up window from those buttons will remain constant.

Sent from my GT-P7510 using Tapatalk

 

[dsignori]

I'm also thinking it would make it easier for developers. Ice Cream Sandwich is supposed to bring uniformity to tablets and phones.
One OS for all devices. That way developers don't have to worry about creating an app with capacitive buttons for phones, and on screen buttons for tablets. It would now be all the same.

Sent from my GT-P7510 using Tapatalk

This is a good point.

 

[nsjavier]

Re: Soft/On Screen Buttons- Whats the point?

Well I kinda see developers, making their own custom buttons for the app, for example, in a game it could act as a hot bar, where it shows some specific actions like powers, or inventory and still having the back and home button, or in another app like Documents to Go, it could use that space to make buttons like new document, upload and that kind of stuff. I really see this as a good idea.