View Single Post
Posts: 330 | Thanked: 57 times | Joined on May 2007 @ BKNYC
#23
Originally Posted by Benson View Post
Wait'll Karel Jansens shows up... you guys talking of putting the iPhone <spit> interface on an IT!

I'd like something more finger-friendly; the problem, though, is many apps are not designed to display well smaller than the non-fullscreen size. So it'll be difficult to make a bunch of apps work well if you reduce either width (below about 700px) or especially height (below about 400px for some apps, others respect the stylus-board and display fine at ~300px).
I don't want an iCandy interface on my N800. I'm after more functionality, which is not what sets the iPhone <spit> apart. A different sort of finger-interface would be nice, but it's seriously difficult at this point to make it work well with old apps. When the N900 comes out with a 1024x800 screen, such changes can be made. (You guys are working on that now, right Ragnar?)

Edit: forgot this part which I intended to include:
We don't want an iInterface for our ITs because:
  • We don't have tiny screens (so pinch-zooming and panning aren't as necessary)
  • We don't have real multi-touch (so pinch-zooming is not as easily possible)

We don't?
We don't?
Sounds like you speaking for the whole NIT community.
I'm all for an iInterface, or any interface for that matter.
I'm guessing right now, but I think a we statement had to be made about not needing a descent paint application. which is why we still don' t have a descent paint application.

I don't mean no harm by this quote on your statement.
I just think when We speak of not needing or needing something on the tablet a (I) should be used.

Maybe a pole should be started.