View Single Post
Posts: 488 | Thanked: 107 times | Joined on Sep 2009 @ Asgard / Midgard / London
#70
Originally Posted by nymajoak View Post
I think the multitasking screen might be tricky as well, as has been pointed out elsewhere (can't find the post right now). I don't remember the details right now but the windows are not just static screenshots of the apps, but dynamic. So when rotating the MT screen you have to switch all open apps to their other orientation. This might take a lot of resources (have no feeling for how demanding it would be, but a slow and laggy switch between orientations would be definite turn-off with an otherwise snappy device).
I was thinking more along the lines of having seen the 2 rows by 3 columns = 6 windows on the desktop running dynamically, we can just have those windows rotated into portrait (90 degrees) in the same locations, so we end up with a 3 rows and 2 columns. There may be less spacing between the columns, or the windows will have to be a little smaller, but it should be do-able.

Originally Posted by nymajoak View Post
Also, all applications won't support both orientations (I think it would be a mistake to force them to, see below) which complicates it further. It might look a mess with windows in different orientations?


Personally I think it would be a mistake to force all applications to have support for both orientations. Besides increasing the load on app developers, I am pretty sure not all applications work "well" (as in being practical, intuitive, logical, usable etc) in both orientations.

But yes, there is in-built support for applications to have both orientations if I have understood it right. It's up to the developer.
I didn't phrase it correctly, the developer should have the option to lock-in the orientation, be it because they can't be bothered to make portrait, or feel the work is way too much, or that the application makes no sense in portrait, say for example, watching a widescreen movie. You'd really want to watch it in landscape.

Also, I think that an application would probably need a UI design for landscape and one for portrait, and the accelerometer triggers which one is displayed. Yes, it's more work, but I can't think of any other way, so it's up to a developer to decide what to do.

Originally Posted by nymajoak View Post
Having square widgets/shortcuts etc (or rather forcing them to a grid with square slots) would solve the entire homescreen problem as far as I understand. Question is if it is worth the sacrifice. Without having used either blackberries, iphones, n97s or n900s I think I prefer the n900's homescreen system and wouldn't want to sacrifice the functionality. Also, it would mean redesigning the entire homescreen functionality and all widgets...
Well portrait mode would have less functionality. Anyone who wants full functionality of widgets can go to landscape mode. It works well on the Blackberry (and mine is fixed as it's not touchscreen, and it makes no sense rotating the phone). I don't really have much experience of the iPhone, but I think I've heard the home screen is only available in portrait mode? I think the menus within Symbian can rotate to landscape or portrait on my N82 (I have autorotation off the screen is off-centre in landscape, though mobitubia is fine in it), but the homescreen is the only one permanently in portrait (excluding developr apps).

Last edited by Thor; 2009-09-26 at 23:56.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to Thor For This Useful Post: