>>45475270 I find it stupid that you guys have a problem with it's wideness. While no one even has a problem that the keypad is less than 1/4th of the phone? Imaging how bad the typing experience would be, The chances of it falling seem pretty high while typing (The bold and classic series do the keypad perfectly). I still wish to try this phone.
>>45475291 Runs Android apps off the Amazon store. And has native Whatsapp, Viber support.
What I used to like about Blackberry phones where the fact that SMS and Instant messages were grouped in a "message hub" like thing. I don't know if that is still there in BBOS10 or if they've gone the shabby android/iOS route of a notification center.
Why? They dont waste space on bezel for buttons, less points of failure (if the screen breaks the phone is useless regardless of buttons), and they are context sensitive.
I also can't stand how every manufacture still puts that god damn menu button on their phone instead of doing:
Back, Home, Multitasking
Whenever Google updates design (as with Lollipop) the on screen buttons icons can change, the physical buttons cannot thus you're stuck with incorrect icons.
Only a fucking retard would prefer anything other than on screen buttons. The only argument against them is that they take up screen real estate but this can be countered with PIE or other methods. Buttons can also have transparent backing so that you can still read the text behind them.
>>45475389 >. The only argument against them is that they take up screen real estate but this can be countered with PIE or other methods. Actually make screens with 1920x1200 resolution and increase the physical height to 10-20 mm more and you're done.
I've got experience with Nexus 4, Moto G, iPhone, and Galaxy S5, so I've used them all(fully capacitive like HTC I haven't owned, but I've used).
I think they're all "fine", though my preference is with physical(specifically the Galaxy), for a few reasons.
One, it's fucking physical. You can feel it because it's an actual button.
Two, there is no screen real estate lost. You can fix that with mods for Nexus 4 etc., but then the keyboard goes all the way to the bottom of the screen and your hand moves with it, which makes the phone harder to hold(not so much a big deal with smaller phones).
Three, added functionality like fingerprint scanning, although the Galaxy's scanner blows dicks.
I like my home button. You can turn the lights off of the capacitive buttons on the side, and the home button is so subtle, you can't really tell it's there until you need it. Like I said, it doesn't mess with the phone experience at all.
>>45475141 The HTC One X is a mix of onscreen and physical because if you're running ICS you can actually scroll sideways while only having your finger on the buttons. So it's touch grid is still part of the screen. They removed that feature in Jelly for some reason or it might just be my ROM. (ARHD)
Onscreen is stupid, Why do you want to waste pixels on static images that do nothing but lower your effective display pixels when you could just have capacitive buttons outside of the screen in the bezel that's going to be there anyways.
I also used to want physical keyboards(mostly because I wanted some physical way to play games instead of onscreen buttons) but since swipe and the like I'm not too bothered about it. I would still like some buttons and pads for games tho.
On-screen is the objectively superior choice. The argument that they take take screen space is completely flawed. They're context-sensitive, hide when you don't need them (video and games), hide when you don't want them (expanded desktop, PIE), give the the device 1 to 4 less points of failure, allow for much smaller bezels, and are fully customizable. Hardware and capacitive buttons go against every single one of these things.
>>45480746 >allow for much smaller bezels That's the problem. Phones with On-Screen buttons don't have smaller bezels. If there actually were phones where this is the case, On-screen buttons are clearly superior.
Picture related, absolutely disgusting shit. You could fit two rows of physical buttons on that bezel.
>>45480796 Hardware buttons never compensate for the six shortcomings I have pointed out (unless we talk about full hardware keyboards). Not to mention the fact that what you pointed out is not a dichotomy and will soon improve.
While I don't mind having physical buttons, I've come to accept that capactive/on screen buttons are just fine too depending on the device.
I just got a BlackBerry developer device, the prototype hardware that eventually became the Z10 and I love it. BlackBerry knows their shit and provides just the right tools to get the job done, and the hardware - even in spite of being about 2 years old now (this developer device, not the actual Z10) - is great even now and runs the latest BlackBerry 10 version as well.
The volume buttons can be used to skip music tracks (since custom ROMs are pretty much impossible on these devices) and it has a third hardware button for Play/Pause which is fucking awesome. I like having controls in the remote on the headphone/earbud/IEM cord but, this is even better 'cause the phone is in my hand and my fingers are already in place to do the controls.
Extremely high DPI on this 4.2" 1280x768 display too, it's fucking awesome - now I want a damned Z10 'cause it's more powerful and has twice the RAM, etc.
The reason the trend has been moving the buttons to onscreen is because Google fucking said so. Its a shame, but if Google said that phones will now have attached dildos then manufacturers will oblige or else their devices wouldn't be allowed to run Android.
>>45475141 I'm an iPhone guy and prefer a physical button. It just feels better, but at the same time the home button on my 4 year old iPhone is working less and less often which leads me to think that an on-screen button makes more sense for long-term usage. The screen's touch sensor will last much long than a physical switch.
>>45482673 You could use phones to do other things such as email even back then. T9 was shit then and it's even more shit now. If you're adept with a phone you can easily type using something like swype without looking at the keyboard.
>>45482792 >You could use phones to do other things such as email even back then. Yes, but never had one because exorbitant network rates back then.
>T9 was shit then and it's even more shit now. You just suck at using T9, then. Nokia T9 was the best.
>If you're adept with a phone you can easily type using something like swype without looking at the keyboard. Never seen anyone type with a single hand on any smartphone. You know, like with phone that fits your hand and properly reads each key you press; and where you can tell where each key is because physical feedback.
>>45482862 >You just suck at using T9, then. Nokia T9 was the best. It's not that I suck, it's that T9 sucks.
>Never seen anyone type with a single hand on any smartphone. Swype is pretty much gesture based typing. You don't need to look at your keyboard once you have your muscle memory down.
>You know, like with phone that fits your hand and properly reads each key you press; and where you can tell where each key is because physical feedback. Thumb keyboards don't have that. It's not like a normal keyboard where each finger is only pressing maybe 3 or 4 keys ever, or like your T9 keyboard where you find the center and work from there. Gesture based typing is the best thing to happen to mobile device input.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.