It's a neat idea in that I like seeing new uses of displays, and new ways to interface with them. Problem is, I think this would be rather annoying to use as a lefty, and others seems to agree [1].
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I gotta think Apple looks at Samsung as a business operating as their R&D departments. What an incredible money saver that must be. Samsung takes the risk on the "edgy" new features (excuse the pun) and then Apple can see what was popular or missed the mark in the implementation - can we improve? Apple doesn't need to be first at this point, but customers do expect them to be best, so it's a great spot to be behind the leading edge.
I agree. It looks like Apple has decided it's more efficient to let somebody else validate the market for features, then fast follow. This is kind of short circuiting Samsung's previous mode of operation where they were the fast followers.
Apple just has to see that there is a market for something, and then execute the hell out of it. Something Samsung isn't as great doing.
note I use a Note 3 and think it's the greatest portable electronic device I've ever purchased, despite the crappy Samsung software on it.
edit
somebody doesn't like this idea and has downvoted both my comment and the parent without explanation. Which is just the equivalent of "wrong!". What exactly is wrong with this assertion? Pretty much all of Apple's expected upcoming announcements are Apple executed versions of things that other companies have already produced: larger screen phones, watch, etc.
There's nothing wrong with using somebody else's R&D and marketing dollars to develop the market for you. That's what Apple did for everybody else with the iPhone and now it's what they're letting other companies do for them. It's smart since it puts execution front and forward, which is squarely in Apple's wheelhouse. Not feature development and market testing.
This supposition is only correct if you have visibility into the product development timelines of each company.
Just because Apple releases a watch 6 months after Samsung, that does not mean that they started working on it 6 months after Samsung did. It's possible that Apple has been working on a watch concept for years, and Samsung rushed theirs out the door when the rumors got louder.
That's probably why you're getting downvoted. You're drawing conclusions solely from the public launch date of things, which actually don't tell us much about who is copying whom.
Actually we do have some insight into the product timelines at Apple and Samsung due to the disclosures during their recent patent lawsuits. Internal Apple communication reveals that they made the iPad mini (1) and they'll be making larger screen iPhones (2) primarily due to Samsung and other Android OEMS.
14 comments
[ 3.2 ms ] story [ 15.4 ms ] threadSo -- apart from showing off the curved-screen tech -- I wonder what the point is.
[1] http://www.theverge.com/2014/9/3/6101571/the-galaxy-note-edg...
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.
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.
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.
Apple just has to see that there is a market for something, and then execute the hell out of it. Something Samsung isn't as great doing.
note I use a Note 3 and think it's the greatest portable electronic device I've ever purchased, despite the crappy Samsung software on it.
edit
somebody doesn't like this idea and has downvoted both my comment and the parent without explanation. Which is just the equivalent of "wrong!". What exactly is wrong with this assertion? Pretty much all of Apple's expected upcoming announcements are Apple executed versions of things that other companies have already produced: larger screen phones, watch, etc.
There's nothing wrong with using somebody else's R&D and marketing dollars to develop the market for you. That's what Apple did for everybody else with the iPhone and now it's what they're letting other companies do for them. It's smart since it puts execution front and forward, which is squarely in Apple's wheelhouse. Not feature development and market testing.
Just because Apple releases a watch 6 months after Samsung, that does not mean that they started working on it 6 months after Samsung did. It's possible that Apple has been working on a watch concept for years, and Samsung rushed theirs out the door when the rumors got louder.
That's probably why you're getting downvoted. You're drawing conclusions solely from the public launch date of things, which actually don't tell us much about who is copying whom.
But to be honest, it doesn't really matter. Time to market is important. Real companies ship.
(1) http://www.cnet.com/news/heres-apples-e-mail-thread-about-a-... (2) http://9to5mac.com/2014/04/06/why-apple-has-to-make-bigger-s...