Might we get a second button ?

Discussion in 'iPad' started by Piggie, Nov 6, 2010.

  1. Piggie macrumors 604

    Piggie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    #1
    I know Apple can be very reluctant to add things, even when common sense dictates otherwise (single button mice)

    Now we have the new (soon to be new for most people) Multitasking which now will require us to be double clicking the home button all the time.

    Might if we are lucky, Apple feel that this is getting a bit silly and giving us a separate button might be a good idea?

    Personally I'd be happy with 3 buttons in a nice well designed layout (like many phones have)

    I'd like a Home button as we have now, a Multitasking button to press to call up your running/frozen apps, and a customise button which you could set to launch the app of your choice.

    That would seem a nice amount and a nice setup to make everyone happy.

    Of course, I'm sure many here would hate this and only want 1 button, but I suppose I feel it's a fit design over function to religiously only have 1 button just for the sake of it.

    I don't want 5 or 10 or 20 buttons, just 3 would be fine thanks :)
     
  2. MacDawg macrumors P6

    MacDawg

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2004
    Location:
    "Between the Hedges"
    #2
    I doubt you will see any additional buttons
    And I am fine with that
     
  3. Piggie thread starter macrumors 604

    Piggie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    #4
    I am sure (as we know how stubborn Apple can be) you are correct.

    My real world test would of course be if there two two iPads side by side for sale at the same price from Apple in store:

    One with 1 neat button you have to press multiple times for different functions.

    The other with 3 neat buttons, Home, Multi-task, User define

    Would people really all pick the single button version over the 3 button version?

    If everyone would only want the 1 button version then I'm happy to accept I'm wrong.
     
  4. Tom G. macrumors 68000

    Tom G.

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2009
    Location:
    Champaign/Urbana Illinois
    #5
    You stand a better chance of getting another belly button.
     
  5. ditzy macrumors 68000

    ditzy

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2007
    #6
    Steve Jobs does not add buttons unless a product has been a failure, such as the iPod shuffle.
    The iPad has been a total success, added buttons aren't going to happen.
     
  6. zhenya macrumors 603

    zhenya

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2005
    #7
    I would much prefer Apple to implement gestures instead of adding more buttons. It seems odd that with their big push into gesturing on other platforms, that the iPad would be left out. I can only dream of a gesture to invoke an Expose task switcher, to quickly show the home screen and/or to quickly switch from one app to another.
     
  7. Piggie thread starter macrumors 604

    Piggie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    #8
    I fully agree with you actually.

    For the life of me, I don't know why things like Safari does not have a quick left and right swipe function to take you back and forward web pages.

    Seems so obvious.

    As you say, you could have special movements to call up features.

    Perhaps swiping the bezel in certain ways.
     
  8. Don Kosak macrumors 6502a

    Don Kosak

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2010
    Location:
    Hilo, Hawaii
    #9
    Yeah, I'd prefer that they extend the touch area to one or more sides of the Bezel.

    Some of the Palm webOS phones do this, and let you use the "off screen" touch area to control multitasking and such.

    The trick for the iPad will be how to do that in an orientation free way. If you put just one strip near the button, it's tricky to use upside down, or in landscape mode. Put it on all 4 sides, and now holding the iPad without accidentally triggering stuff gets difficult.
     
  9. jeffkempster macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    #10
    I actually do not like double clicking a physical button.

    I wish they would loose the current button. I would much prefer a little area in the same place that was just a touch surface.
     
  10. zhenya macrumors 603

    zhenya

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2005
    #11
    I think if they are to do this, they need to stay consistent with their other products - rather than force users to learn separate sets of gestures. I'd be thrilled if we got the standard Macbook gestures like two-finger tap for a right-click context menu, three fingers for back and forth scrolling, four finger up/down for Expose, and four finger left and right to switch apps, etc.
     
  11. Piggie thread starter macrumors 604

    Piggie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    #12
    I wish people would stop saying that.

    They don't have to be consistent with other products.

    The iPad does not have to be a big screen iPod Touch all it's life.
    It should be able to grow into it's own entity.

    Mark my words: If Apple continue to hold the iPad back from growing and constrain it's development in becoming a bigger thing than it is now, it will only be Apple that suffer.
     
  12. zhenya macrumors 603

    zhenya

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2005
    #13
    Well, I respectfully disagree. Nothing I said indicates that it's only a 'big screen iPod touch." Apple is clearly trying to make their track pads a replacement for touch-screens on their desktop and laptop computers, so consistency makes sense. How on earth is staying consistent with gestures 'holding the ipad back from growing?' Apple is holding the iPad back in many ways, but I don't see how this would be one of them.
     
  13. ssdeg7 macrumors 6502a

    ssdeg7

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2010
    #14
    That's true, Jobs hates buttons
     
  14. Piggie thread starter macrumors 604

    Piggie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    #15
    Just to clarify :)

    I was not having a go at you.

    It's just I've heard quite a few things along these lines that grate with me.

    Hence we're not having our Orientation button any-more as that's not how the iPhone and Touch do it.

    But it's NOT a iPhone or Touch.

    And we can't change things too much as it won't be a consistent experience for people with other smaller Apple devices.

    I think it's because I love the iPad and I don't want Apple getting in the way and blocking it from growing due to silly ideas.

    I'm sure Apple users and intelligent enough to learn a few new swipes and controls on a new device.
     
  15. zhenya macrumors 603

    zhenya

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2005
    #16

    Thanks - sorry if I took it that way.

    I guess I am a big fan of consistency of UI - it's one of the things that still bugs me about Windows, even after 20+ years of daily use - there is always 6 ways do do the same thing. Give me one way that works, and stick to it.
     
  16. err404 macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2007
    #17
    You come off as a bit of a troll. OS X has always had full built-in support for multi button mice and every Apple mouse sold in the last 5 years can "right click".
    As for the "iDevices", I feel a customize button makes more sense as a dynamic button within the app itself. As for the single vs double press of the home button, I do agree that the home button UI doesn't feel right, but this is more do to the redundancy of the actual functions. Multitasking functions exactly the same if you bring up the task bar or go straight to the home screen. I don't like the idea of having a second button that essential does the same task, but in a slightly different way. I feel that the home screen itself needs to be re-thought out. I'd like to see the home screen act as an overlay to whichever app you are using and have it combine the launcher, recent apps and widget support. This way a single home button would just bring it up or dismisses the "home screen".
     
  17. Piggie thread starter macrumors 604

    Piggie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    #18
    Group Hug :D

    Don't get me wrong, I don't wish to over complicate anything, I'm all for keeping things simple and easy to use.

    It's just that we seem to have some weird goings on with some peoples comments and points of view.

    If you recall, a lot of bad feelings and criticism was levelled at the iPad as just being a big iPhone without the phone.

    And to be fair the massive waste of the large screen (desktop) did not help.

    But you can't have it both ways I feel. I want to see the iPad develop into more than it is now, and not just be a giant iPod Touch, which to be honest, it is kind of. Albeit with more creative apps coming out.

    I want to see more use being made of the desktop, more ability to be an independent device.

    At the moment, it's treated by Apple as something that's not a real computer and still needs a real computer to sync to, so it can do some fundamental things.

    I'm hoping in time it will gain independence.

    Perhaps it will be able to run a version of iTunes itself one day.

    I just want it to grow into something that can survive without it's mother around to connect to all the time.

    Thats what I hope Apple will do, and I hope they can see it as being more than it currently is.
     
  18. shandyman Suspended

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2010
    Location:
    Dublin, Ireland
    #19
    nope, its an iOS device.....
     
  19. Piggie thread starter macrumors 604

    Piggie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    #20
    Indeed, but does that mean every iOS device has to be the same, and there can't be different levels of iOS devices?

    I have a feeling I will be waiting many many years for Apple to make the iPad anything much more than what it currently is.

    I hope I am wrong though, but I can't see anything much for iPad2, and iPad3 probably not a great change, so that's iPad4 perhaps before anything dramatic.

    All guesses though, but if Apple only will ever see iOS devices and mobile devices that always need a "computer" to sync to and do basic functions then I guess I shall remain disappointed.

    I suppose I want an iPad that can Sync to a NAS or the CLOUD and never really need to connect to anything else, only for file transfers.
     
  20. Dr Kevorkian94 macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2009
    Location:
    SI, NY
    #21
    i call for the next ipad either a total change (like new design, and updated internals), or just the updated internals.
     
  21. shandyman Suspended

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2010
    Location:
    Dublin, Ireland
    #22
    nope, they see them as 1 thing, thats why they brought iOS all together in line with each device with 4.2.

    well you'll be disappointed, but i love my iPad, i only ever physically connect it to update the OS and to sync once a week, which only takes 10 mins tops for me, so it's not really as bad as you make it out to be. with that exception i'm totally wireless with it, using airvideo to watch vids, comic zeal to read comics (both apps take the content over wifi). iBooks also over the air, along with anything else i do. sometimes i connect up to copy over videos to VLC, but i prefer that as it's quicker than copying over wifi.
     
  22. Crosbie macrumors 6502a

    Crosbie

    Joined:
    May 26, 2010
    Location:
    Brighton, UK
    #23
    My guess is fewer buttons.

    I was thankful when iPod Touch 2g came out with volume buttons, because previously I couldn't adjust the volume on it when it was in my pocket.

    But they've just made the switch at the side of the iPad pretty redundant (for my usage at least) and the Touch lives without that one.

    And it bugs me when I pick up or move the pad and accidentally quit out of the app I'm using because I hold it with my thumb on the button.

    I think Jobs and Ive Will only be happy when there's a single, seamless sheet of black glass - and that's it. :)
     
  23. Ksane macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2010
    #24
    Yes yes yes yes! The one and only reason I jailbreak is to install Activator. So I can set up gestures for everything and not have to touch a single button. I can't for the life of me figure out why on earth Apple wouldn't have an app like that in their store.
     

Share This Page