Reduce Motion - On or Off?

Discussion in 'Apple Watch' started by drew0020, Sep 29, 2016.

  1. drew0020 macrumors 68000

    drew0020

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2006
    #1
    I've been playing around with my 2 new Apple Watches and have been going back and forth with this setting. I think I prefer reduce motion 'on' because it feels quicker and the 'off' setting sometimes seems a little choppy.

    Anyone else have a preference? The option is under settings-general-accessibility-reduce motion.
     
  2. exxxviii macrumors 65816

    exxxviii

    Joined:
    May 20, 2015
    #2
    I got rid of the motion feature on my AWS0 a year ago. For me, it made main app screen navigation very difficult.

    Reduced Motion = Off = Better User Experience for Me
     
  3. Vihzel macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2010
    #3
    Oh wow I had no idea this was even a thing. It really speeds up the S0 because it greatly reduces or eliminates the animation lag. I would highly recommend this to anyone with an S0.
     
  4. eastwoodandy macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2016
    Location:
    Nottingham, England
    #4
    Does it affect anything apart from the home screen?
     
  5. exxxviii macrumors 65816

    exxxviii

    Joined:
    May 20, 2015
    #5
    It probably does, but Apple is not clear about it. For example, for some bizarre reason, Apple linked the Reduced Motion option on the phone to the new iMessage features in iOS 10. That makes no sense, and users generally discovered it by accident. I expect it is the same with the watch.
     
  6. anthonymoody macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2002
    #6
    I'd turned it On on my phone years ago as a means of extending battery life and improving performance - it was always on those lists of ways to improve the phone. Finally turned it Off to get the fun stuff in Messages. Agreed that was a weird thing to connect.

    Turned it On on my AWS0 just now.
     
  7. drew0020 thread starter macrumors 68000

    drew0020

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2006
    #7
    I always have it to "on" until Apple tied it to the new iMessage features as well. Makes no sense they would do that, but until it changes ill leave it "on' for the Watch and "off" for the phone.
     
  8. dyn macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2009
    Location:
    .nl
    #8
    It makes perfect sense because all those additional features are all about movement. Fireworks and confetti going all over the screen...it's an awful lot of movement going on. It is these kind of things that should be affected by the "reduce motion" setting.

    Motion on a small display (Watch) is quite different than on a large display (iPhone). I don't like it on the iPhone so I have "reduce motion" turned on but on the Apple Watch I don't. "Reduce motion" affects the homescreen in such a way that instead of going through individual icons you are moving around a big blob of icons which I find much harder to navigate. This is also the only change I observed on the Watch and since the other movements do not bother me, I keep "reduce motion" off.

    Since you can easily toggle the setting and the use of it is very personal, you really need and should try it out yourself.
     
  9. exxxviii macrumors 65816

    exxxviii

    Joined:
    May 20, 2015
    #9
    Reach. It should be an app-level setting in Messages, not a General OS-level setting. I do not like the constant movement of the background picture behind the icons. I love the iMessage features. There is no common sense universe where the control for these should be bound together.
     
  10. drew0020 thread starter macrumors 68000

    drew0020

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2006
    #10
    I couldn't have said this better myself. I am in complete agreement with you!
     
  11. exxxviii macrumors 65816

    exxxviii

    Joined:
    May 20, 2015
    #11
    Reduce Motion = Dumb Ass Animation We Invented Because We Could, But Called It Something that Sounds Intelligent, And Made the On/Off Option Setting The Opposite of Intuitive
     
  12. anthonymoody macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2002
    #12
    Precisely.

    I agree on all points.

    One (not great) "solution" is to use a background that's more or less solid. This way you don't notice the movement so much even though it's taxing the processor and battery in a way I'd rather it not.
     
  13. dyn macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2009
    Location:
    .nl
    #13
    No, it should be an OS-level setting because it is meant for those who have physical issues with motion of the OS (People who are epileptic, get a migraine, dizzyness, etc.). If it were an app-level thing that would require going through ALL of the apps and little settings to disable the motion. It is just so much easier with one big toggle as it is now. This is a feature apps can support and it is up to them what reduce motion means.

    This is not a convenience feature or a performance feature as you seem to think it is. This is a purely medical feature hence why it is in the accessibility submenu of the system settings. For such a medical feature there is no common sense in the universe where the control should not be bound together!

    The place where they put it and the name of that place completely gives it away. The fact you two don't get that says more about you than about the feature itself and iOS. The same can be said about using a background with movement when you don't like it: use the option of the normal backgrounds as they have no movement at all.
     
  14. PCtoMAC1 macrumors 6502

    PCtoMAC1

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2012
    #14
    Does turning off reduce motion decrease battery life like it does on iPhone?
     
  15. dyn macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2009
    Location:
    .nl
    #15
    Not that I have noticed. It doesn't disable motion, it only tells apps to lessen it (that's what "reduce" means).
     
  16. exxxviii macrumors 65816

    exxxviii

    Joined:
    May 20, 2015
    #16
    I think you stand in a small minority in buying into Apple's PR justification that a single setting for cutting animation on a system-wide level is a good decision. Labeling it "accessibility" does not help with the minority defense. At a minimum, Apple should have given us a combination of one macro setting along with discrete app-level settings, principally for the iMessage features that are table stakes equalizers with other messaging apps like Snapchat. Oh yeah, Snapchat would be an app-level setting, wouldn't it?

    I get that Apple called it Reduce Motion, because I read their explanations when they introduced the option years ago. I'm just saying it was a stupid decision. Thanks to the stupid decision, all of their animations are bound and we cannot discretely choose.
     
  17. dyn macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2009
    Location:
    .nl
    #17
    No, I just know what I'm talking about. It is has been scientifically proven many times over the course of years that motion induces epileptic attacks, migraines, dizziness and so on. Not only that, these tests are also very common for just about any hospital around the world. Do a search on the internet how they test for epilepsy and dizziness, you'll find that this uses a lot of motion.

    What this means is that developers need to be very careful with motion. In many peoples opinion (not just mine) Apple went too far as of iOS 7. There is too much motion in the OS which also doesn't really add anything, not even to usability. This has lead to many people complaining to Apple which is why there is a single switch that disables them all. Of course this only works if developers play along and thus use the appropriate APIs.

    This isn't PR but simply Apple responding to the many complaints by various people.

    I'm afraid that you are the one that is part of a very small minority instead of me. Apple could indeed add another option to the app options where you could override the single "reduce motion" setting but that is quite contradictory for most people using the "reduce motion" option. They turn it on because they want less motion throughout the entire system either to make it more usable, to increase the performance but mostly to stop the motions making them feel sick. What you are proposing is actually very illogic and stupid from that viewing point.
     
  18. exxxviii macrumors 65816

    exxxviii

    Joined:
    May 20, 2015
    #18
    I am sure you are an expert. And, I agree with you about the care of managing visually over-stimulating animations on devices. But, I do not think your expertise in that area extends to an understanding of user interface design and an understanding of the differences between discretionary application features and system-level behaviors. Apple went simpleton, and it makes the device the worse for most of us. Except you and a small minority who do not understand the difference.
     
  19. anthonymoody, Oct 1, 2016
    Last edited: Oct 1, 2016

    anthonymoody macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2002
    #19
    Regardless of its origins and intended purpose, the fact is that turning On Reduce Motion in Settings has been included in lists of "ways to improve battery life" since, well, it became a thing. Many people did it as evidenced by the many threads and posts from people who couldn't get the new features working in iMessages and couldn't figure out why.

    Perhaps we can compromise and say that as a sub menu under Reduce Motion within Accessibility there should be a list of apps that you can toggle individually? That's something done with many other system wide things like Notifications, Location Services, etc.

    That said, I think it should be a per app thing.
     
  20. dyn macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2009
    Location:
    .nl
    #20
    The only one being in a small minority is you. The majority of people wanting or needing the reduce motion are people who want/need it everywhere. Someone who is epileptic doesn't suddenly stop being epileptic in the Messages app. Not to mention all the other kinds of visually impaired people out there (such as people who've had a stroke). You have a health issue and it is there in every part of the iOS and all the apps on it.

    I do understand the difference but you completely fail to understand what this feature is about and why this isn't idiotic/illogic/stupid. You are being extremely disrespectful towards anyone with a health issue and I as you've probably already notice, I strongly object to that. You really need to change that attitude.

    No that would be very confusing. The main toggle to switch it on everywhere should be the one we already have in accessibility. The other option to turn it on/off per app should be in the app settings itself. Why? because every other possible setting of that app is already there too.

    But again, the fact that it doesn't work like you want it too doesn't mean this is an illogic/idiotic/stupid feature. It's not there because of fun or convenience, it's there for necessity and it serves a rather big need. Mind you, other operating systems do not have this option and for a lot of people needing this feature those are not even an option.

    So can you guys finally get over the "it doesn't do what I want it to do so it is stupid" thing now? Or are you going to continue your discrimination and now talk about how stupid the wheelchair functionality in the activity app is?
     
  21. anthonymoody macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2002
    #21
    You're being unduly argumentative and defensive. I suggest you back off.

    First, there are, as I already cited, *ample* instances in iOS settings where there is a global switch and a list of per app switches underneath. These include, but are not limited to:

    -cellular data
    -notifications
    -do not disturb (you can elect to allow calls from individual groups of contacts)
    -sound and haptics
    -privacy, which, in addition to location services, has 12 - TWELVE - additional submenus in it allowing per app on/off control of all sorts of things throughout iOS

    So, Apple has *already* determined that a global switch in Settings with a sub menu on a per app basis in the same place is a good idea. In fact, I think they believe it's a great idea since I found SEVENTEEN instances of it without even trying that hard. And there are probably others.

    As for whether it's "illogic [sic]/idiotic/stupid feature" why don't you show me all the instances in iOS where there's a global switch in Settings, but a way to over ride it in the app settings itself, as you suggest would be better.

    I'll wait.
     
  22. dyn macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2009
    Location:
    .nl
    #22
    I suggest you to change the attitude and back off. If you want a proper discussion then first start with being respectful and open towards others and their ideas. Try to understand what they are saying, why and also look at your own suggestions more closely. Try to look at things from a different perspective than purely your own as you are doing here. If not then the only right thing to do is to close this topic as it is quite clear that a discussion is not possible. The only thing possible would be posts going "yes you are right", "yes I want that too" which is against forum rules.

    As for the settings: as many people have already pointed out for quite some iOS releases now: Apple needs to rethink the settings app. The problem is that settings are now all over the place and difficult to find. If you want to change a setting for a specific app you can't always go to the app in Settings because Apple put the setting somewhere else, somewhere more generic. The search box they've put in place after so many complaints helps a bit but it would be far better if every setting that you could do for an individual app would be placed in the same place: the app. Have the generic settings in the generic places.

    Why is having an app specific setting somewhere outside the apps settings more logical than having all the app specific settings in one place?
     
  23. anthonymoody macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2002
    #23
    Let me remind you that when you ended your post (since edited) with:

    "So can you guys finally get over the "it doesn't do what I want it to do so it is stupid" thing now?"

    ....you were the one crossing a line into incivility into an otherwise civil thread.

    Onto the substance: sorry but you can't have it both ways. You're moving the goal posts into a broader criticism of the Settings app across the board. Some share the view that it should be changed, others do not. But that's not what we're talking about.

    I am simply pointing out a fact: Apple does it in a particular way. You may not like it, or you may. But that's the way they do it. So, the consistent way for Apple to address this would be the way they do it in (at least) 17 other instances. Full stop.

    I even said I think it should be a per app thing, so perhaps you need to re-read my post more carefully. Fact is though, Apple feels otherwise in parallel instances.

    As to your final question, the issue is one of confusion, plain and simple. If you are in an App's settings, and you set it to do, or not do something, but then you go to the global Setting and set it to do or not do something, which "wins"? Which over rides the other? Is it dependent on the order the selection is done? Will you be warned each time that there's a global setting that says otherwise? Or a local setting that says otherwise? Would you be prompted at the global switch to then choose the apps that can act as exceptions? Oh, wait - then we'd be right back where Apple already is: a global switch with per app switches immediately following.

    I'll happily bid you good day and let you have the final word since you're clearly the type who needs it.
     
  24. dyn macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2009
    Location:
    .nl
    #24
    Just like with everything, the individual setting overrides the general.

    I'll happily bid you good day too since you are clearly the type who isn't able to discuss things let alone stand it when someone disagrees with your viewing points.

    @mods: since discussion seems futile can we just lock this thread and move it to the wasteland?
     
  25. LoveToMacRumors macrumors 68020

    LoveToMacRumors

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2015
    Location:
    Canada
    #25
    Reduce motion ON.
     

Share This Page