Would this be the case? I enjoy having good selection of ROMs with different looks
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA App
Can't see why that would be the case, unless you're thinking about Gingerbread roms, which would make no sense.
FISKER_Q said:
Can't see why that would be the case, unless you're thinking about Gingerbread roms, which would make no sense.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know its a dumb question but would htc and samsung etc make phones with no buttons? I believe you can use ics with physical buttons as shown on nexus s.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA App
jay_993 said:
Would this be the case? I enjoy having good selection of ROMs with different looks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well why would you want a Gingerbread ROM ported to the Galaxy Nexus? That's the only way you'd have an issue.
Once custom ROMs are based on 4.0, it'll already have the hooks to run with on-screen buttons and not hardware buttons. That's part of ICS, not just this particular release.
Problem solved...
jay_993 said:
I know its a dumb question but would htc and samsung etc make phones with no buttons? I believe you can use ics with physical buttons as shown on nexus s.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, but all ICS releases will be made for phones with no buttons, unless you're anticipating someone building ROMs on Android 2.3 for some reason.
Any custom ROM that comes out will be ICS based, so there's really no reason to worry. The ONLY one that might be in some trouble at first is MIUI, but I'm sure some intrepid dev out there will fix it.
SomeGuyDude said:
Yeah, but all ICS releases will be made for phones with no buttons, unless you're anticipating someone building ROMs on Android 2.3 for some reason.
Any custom ROM that comes out will be ICS based, so there's really no reason to worry. The ONLY one that might be in some trouble at first is MIUI, but I'm sure some intrepid dev out there will fix it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I doubt ICS releases will assume phones have no buttons. The emulator in the SDK for ICS is still button-based. I think the ICS base software will be agnostic to the button arrangement, and then vendor-specific hardware drivers will then determine whether virtual buttons or physical buttons are used to interface with the OS.
Chirality said:
I doubt ICS releases will assume phones have no buttons. The emulator in the SDK for ICS is still button-based. I think the ICS base software will be agnostic to the button arrangement, and then vendor-specific hardware drivers will then determine whether virtual buttons or physical buttons are used to interface with the OS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well of course the emulator will be button based, as you can't touch the screen of your laptop
But yes, I get your point. The idea is the manufacturer chooses whether to use buttons or not. I think they'd be stupid to include buttons though, when the soft buttons will obviously make the experience much better.
jay_993 said:
Would this be the case? I enjoy having good selection of ROMs with different looks
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ICS will work if you have or don't have physical buttons.
http://gizmodo.com/5853298/will-your-android-phones-buttons-still-work-with-ice-cream-sandwich
I think the focus is ports such as MIUI... but either they'll include the hooks for the buttons or 3rd party controls... or custom launchers like the ICS launchers we have now.
Not to worry
G2x - 2.3.7 CM7
Transformer - 3.2 Revolver OC/UV
martonikaj said:
Well of course the emulator will be button based, as you can't touch the screen of your laptop
But yes, I get your point. The idea is the manufacturer chooses whether to use buttons or not. I think they'd be stupid to include buttons though, when the soft buttons will obviously make the experience much better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You didn't really think through your point...
If you can't simulate touchscreen input on the emulator, how are you going to perform all those touch-based actions in Android on the emulator? Did you think that on the emulator, you press buttons to do everything?
The answer is that with the emulator, you use mouse presses to simulate touchscreen input. Which means that, if the softkeys are a standard, always-present part of ICS, then in the emulator for ICS those softkeys would be on the screen. However they are not, which means ICS works just fine with hardware buttons, and hides the softkeys when they are present.
Chirality said:
You didn't really think through your point...
If you can't simulate touchscreen input on the emulator, how are you going to perform all those touch-based actions in Android on the emulator? Did you think that on the emulator, you press buttons to do everything?
The answer is that with the emulator, you use mouse presses to simulate touchscreen input. Which means that, if the softkeys are a standard, always-present part of ICS, then in the emulator for ICS those softkeys would be on the screen. However they are not, which means ICS works just fine with hardware buttons, and hides the softkeys when they are present.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was making a joke about it. Easy tiger.
They're just simply running 4.0 in the old emulator so the emulator interface is the same whether you're running a 2.3 or 4.0 AVD.
martonikaj said:
I was making a joke about it. Easy tiger.
They're just simply running 4.0 in the old emulator so the emulator interface is the same whether you're running a 2.3 or 4.0 AVD.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I thought you might have been making a joke, so I wasn't overly critical, but tone doesn't come across well over the web...
Sure, they reused the old emulator interface. But that already tells you everything you need to know. If ICS doesn't work with physical buttons, then they would either need to revamp the emulator, disable the physical buttons and put on-screen buttons on the emulator display, or just leave the physical buttons there, but they would do nothing and on-screen buttons would be displayed. The fact that the emulator works without change, already tells you that ICS supports physical buttons and can hide the on-screen buttons when they are not needed.
Chirality said:
I thought you might have been making a joke, so I wasn't overly critical, but tone doesn't come across well over the web...
Sure, they reused the old emulator interface. But that already tells you everything you need to know. If ICS doesn't work with physical buttons, then they would either need to revamp the emulator, disable the physical buttons and put on-screen buttons on the emulator display, or just leave the physical buttons there, but they would do nothing and on-screen buttons would be displayed. The fact that the emulator works without change, already tells you that ICS supports physical buttons and can hide the on-screen buttons when they are not needed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh I'm 100% sure ICS is set up to work with either on-screen or hardware buttons. Its pretty well exemplified by the SDK ports of ICS running just fine on a Nexus S with hardware buttons, and the fact that manufacturers are saying old phones (pre GN) are getting ICS upgrades. I think Goog would be stupid to make it only work on all-screen phones.
All I was saying is that I think manufacturers would be dumb to make new phones with hardware buttons and ICS, as the software buttons work so much better. Just as we saw with honeycomb, a few tablets used a hardware home key or something like that, but most just used on-screen buttons.
Most likely we will see more phones with hardware based buttons in the future. The button-less design will be standard for high-end phones but on the smaller phones with smaller screens where the size of software buttons will take up to much space. I think that the option to use hardware buttons will stay as an options for years to come.
martonikaj said:
Oh I'm 100% sure ICS is set up to work with either on-screen or hardware buttons. Its pretty well exemplified by the SDK ports of ICS running just fine on a Nexus S with hardware buttons, and the fact that manufacturers are saying old phones (pre GN) are getting ICS upgrades. I think Goog would be stupid to make it only work on all-screen phones.
All I was saying is that I think manufacturers would be dumb to make new phones with hardware buttons and ICS, as the software buttons work so much better. Just as we saw with honeycomb, a few tablets used a hardware home key or something like that, but most just used on-screen buttons.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How exactly do software buttons work better? I would much prefer hardware buttons with real tactile feedback because it's much harder to accidentally press them.
Chirality said:
How exactly do software buttons work better? I would much prefer hardware buttons with real tactile feedback because it's much harder to accidentally press them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well for one they're dynamic, meaning they can adapt to whatever changes in lighting, orientation, etc.
They can also be changed after the fact, for example if Google decides that there should be a search button instead of, or in addition to, the button(s), then they will adapt it on the software side.
Failure of the buttons is also dependant on the touch sensor failing, and not just wear and tear from the user, i know the trackball on my Nexus One was becoming increasingly frustrating because of that.
Lastly as for the con that it's easier to accidentally press, i disagree. I can't speak for Google's implementation, but there are a variety of software options to prevent stuff like that from happening.
For example the already existing capacative buttons cannot be activated unless you actually click on them, or atleast that's how it is on my phone, yes the touch required is otherwise light, but could likewise be adjusted in the software.
FISKER_Q said:
Well for one they're dynamic, meaning they can adapt to whatever changes in lighting, orientation, etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There are no advantages to this. If you have hardware buttons with real tactile feedback, you can press them in your pocket without looking at it. You don't need fancy virtual buttons that change icons and dim, all you need are real, physical buttons.
FISKER_Q said:
They can also be changed after the fact, for example if Google decides that there should be a search button instead of, or in addition to, the button(s), then they will adapt it on the software side.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While this is a potential pro, the chances of this happening are slim to none. For this to work, Android would have to truly do away with physical buttons and make software buttons an integral part of the platform. Physical buttons and virtual buttons remain viable options for the platform, which means that the platform can't make changes to the button specification at will.
FISKER_Q said:
Failure of the buttons is also dependant on the touch sensor failing, and not just wear and tear from the user, i know the trackball on my Nexus One was becoming increasingly frustrating because of that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd like to see some statistics to back up the claim that physical buttons fail before touchscreens do.
FISKER_Q said:
Lastly as for the con that it's easier to accidentally press, i disagree. I can't speak for Google's implementation, but there are a variety of software options to prevent stuff like that from happening.
For example the already existing capacative buttons cannot be activated unless you actually click on them, or atleast that's how it is on my phone, yes the touch required is otherwise light, but could likewise be adjusted in the software.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Touchpanel makers have been trying for years to master the technology to prevent accidental presses, but none of them work as well as a real button that you have to depress to activate. I think if you were honest with yourself you'd agree with this, any reasonable person would.
Lil Jones said:
Most likely we will see more phones with hardware based buttons in the future. The button-less design will be standard for high-end phones but on the smaller phones with smaller screens where the size of software buttons will take up to much space. I think that the option to use hardware buttons will stay as an options for years to come.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not sure if you're thinking this through. When you remove the hardware buttons, the screen gets larger. The net real-estate you have for screen+buttons stays the same, but now the buttons can change/move.
Chirality said:
How exactly do software buttons work better? I would much prefer hardware buttons with real tactile feedback because it's much harder to accidentally press them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
When you don't need the buttons (games, videos, camera, etc.) they go away. Leaving you with MORE screen then you had before.
Software buttons can dynamically change. They get brighter or dimmer with the screen, they rotate with the phone, and the buttons can change (add or remove menu button for legacy apps) depending on where in the OS you are.
Not to mention that with ICS software buttons, the positioning is standardized. No more rearranging of the buttons from android device to android device and manufacturer to manufacturer.
---------- Post added at 12:05 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:01 PM ----------
Chirality said:
There are no advantages to this. If you have hardware buttons with real tactile feedback, you can press them in your pocket without looking at it. You don't need fancy virtual buttons that change icons and dim, all you need are real, physical buttons.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
why do you need to press the home/menu/back/search buttons on your phone in your pocket?
While this is a potential pro, the chances of this happening are slim to none. For this to work, Android would have to truly do away with physical buttons and make software buttons an integral part of the platform. Physical buttons and virtual buttons remain viable options for the platform, which means that the platform can't make changes to the button specification at will.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its pretty clear that ICS is moving Android towards a buttonless design. When the Nexus comes out with no physical buttons, I think they're sending a pretty serious message about what they want manufacturers to do and what Google sees as the future of Android.
martonikaj said:
When you don't need the buttons (games, videos, camera, etc.) they go away. Leaving you with MORE screen then you had before.
Software buttons can dynamically change. They get brighter or dimmer with the screen, they rotate with the phone, and the buttons can change (add or remove menu button for legacy apps) depending on where in the OS you are.
Not to mention that with ICS software buttons, the positioning is standardized. No more rearranging of the buttons from android device to android device and manufacturer to manufacturer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I sense there is some conceptual confusion here. Both you and FISKER_Q said something about on-screen buttons being dynamic and can change with what the software is doing. Let's clarify things a bit.
We are actually talking about two different kinds of buttons here. The first kind are the button widgets displayed on the screen, they can have different appearances and functions and appear and disappear depending on what the software is doing. Let's call them dynamic buttons. The second kind are buttons that are always present and always do the same thing. Let's call them static buttons.
Obviously a touchscreen mobile device needs dynamic buttons, they are an integral part of the current UI paradigm. But does it need static buttons? Well...it needs at least one, the power button. Without it, you won't be able to turn the phone on. But does it need a second one? The answer is yes, it needs a home button. Without it you won't be able to return from a full screen application that wasn't designed with an exit function. This is why the iPhone has a giant button underneath the screen. And in fact, in ICS, the three virtual buttons only go away during video playback. They are still there, possibly dimmed, during any games or other apps. And this is only because the video playback app is a standard part of the OS, so it's safe to let that app hide the home button until a user taps the screen. Imagine if any app could hide the home button. Then you can write a malicious app that hides the home button and doesn't let you exit the app, forcing you to restart your phone.
So we established that a mobile device needs at least a second static button. Now the question becomes, given that you need this button to be always present and always doing the same thing, why make it into a dynamic, virtual button? Why do you need it to dim, change orientation, change function, move around? You want this button to be static, predictable, easy to locate. Users should be able to press this button without any graphic indicating what and where it is. This is why I said physical buttons can be pressed in your pocket without looking at it: not because you would ever need to do that, but because with a physical button, particularly as few as 1 to 3, they are so easy to locate and press that you don't even need any lights or graphics indicating where they are.
Obviously Android realizes the necessity of at least two static buttons, that's why they designed the home button to behave the way it does on ICS, where it is treated differently from other buttons. Now it is the decision of the Android designers to include not just one, but three static buttons as a standard part of the system. But here we are not concerned with this design choice, what we are concerned with is the fact that there needs to be at least one of these static buttons besides the power button, and the properties that these buttons must have. Given these properties, why should these static buttons be dynamic, be able to dim, be able to change orientation, be able to change function based on context? Why shouldn't they simply be physical buttons that can always be easily located, easily pressed, and difficult to trigger accidentally?
Chirality said:
Obviously a touchscreen mobile device needs dynamic buttons, they are an integral part of the current UI paradigm. But does it need static buttons? Well...it needs at least one, the power button. Without it, you won't be able to turn the phone on. But does it need a second one? The answer is yes, it needs a home button. Without it you won't be able to return from a full screen application that wasn't designed with an exit function. This is why the iPhone has a giant button underneath the screen. And in fact, in ICS, the three virtual buttons only go away during video playback. They are still there, possibly dimmed, during any games or other apps. And this is only because the video playback app is a standard part of the OS, so it's safe to let that app hide the home button until a user taps the screen. Imagine if any app could hide the home button. Then you can write a malicious app that hides the home button and doesn't let you exit the app, forcing you to restart your phone.
So we established that a mobile device needs at least a second static button. Now the question becomes, given that you need this button to be always present and always doing the same thing, why make it into a dynamic, virtual button? Why do you need it to dim, change orientation, change function, move around? You want this button to be static, predictable, easy to locate. Users should be able to press this button without any graphic indicating what and where it is. This is why I said physical buttons can be pressed in your pocket without looking at it: not because you would ever need to do that, but because with a physical button, particularly as few as 1 to 3, they are so easy to locate and press that you don't even need any lights or graphics indicating where they are.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, we didn't establish anything. You established that you think the phone needs a 2nd static button. And why? Because you're worried about malware taking over the buttons? You can write a malicious app now that disables your hardware home button (or any other button, for that matter) too. How is that ANY different? Just because its hardware doesn't mean that it doesn't link to software at some point. If you think about it, Android already has software buttons, they're just linked to hardware switches on the front of the phone....
Obviously Android realizes the necessity of at least two static buttons, that's why they designed the home button to behave the way it does on ICS, where it is treated differently from other buttons. Now it is the decision of the Android designers to include not just one, but three static buttons as a standard part of the system. But here we are not concerned with this design choice, what we are concerned with is the fact that there needs to be at least one of these static buttons besides the power button, and the properties that these buttons must have. Given these properties, why should these static buttons be dynamic, be able to dim, be able to change orientation, be able to change function based on context? Why shouldn't they simply be physical buttons that can always be easily located, easily pressed, and difficult to trigger accidentally?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, android actually hasn't realized the necessity for at least 2 buttons. Its actually quite the opposite. They've gone from wanting 5 static buttons, to ICS+Galaxy Nexus only having 1, the power button. The home button will always be in the same place when you need it, it is just able to disappear in full-screen apps to allow them to use the full real estate of the phone's front panel (and not just movies. Books, games, web pages, etc.).
You make it sound like because the software buttons are able to rotate with the phone or fade out during watching a movie or reading a book that they won't come back when you need them in the exact same spot when you're done with the full-screen task. It is just as easy for a user to remember where a software button is as it is to know where a hardware button is. Software just brings more consistency across the platform, where software buttons will always be in the same spot.
I love everything about the One series, wish they'd used software buttons like ICS is supposed to have.
e.g. on most legacy apps, we'll now have a whole bar just to show the menu button. Thus you have a row for the menu button, and below it another for the capacitive ones. With soft-keys, they get combined and you have more screen space.
Plus software can modify the button bar to put other details and buttons, change orientation etc. Soft-keys are simply better.
ECrispy said:
I love everything about the One series, wish they'd used software buttons like ICS is supposed to have.
e.g. on most legacy apps, we'll now have a whole bar just to show the menu button. Thus you have a row for the menu button, and below it another for the capacitive ones. With soft-keys, they get combined and you have more screen space.
Plus software can modify the button bar to put other details and buttons, change orientation etc. Soft-keys are simply better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Couldn't disagree more. Legacy apps will be updated over time; physical buttons don't need anywhere near as much power to backlight as an LCD display, and require essentially no processing power to operate. By placing the buttons on the screen, you're requiring an inefficient LCD backlight to light those buttons, wasting processing power on rendering the screen, and not to mention that since those on-screen buttons can't be disabled, you're permanently wasting valuable LCD real-estate (and hence forcing a non-standard screen aspect ratio, since LCD panels are an off-the-shelf part and aren't typically designed to add extra menu bar pixels to the standard aspect.)
This will in not too long provide a better aspect ratio and more on-screen real estate in well-coded apps, doesn't sacrifice any screen real estate over a screen that always has the menu bar because it lacks physical buttons, and it will measurably improve battery life over a display providing the same real estate for apps *plus* a full-time LCD menu bar.
It's a big win, as far as I'm concerned, that is largely misunderstood so far by people not thinking about the bigger picture.
Software buttons can be disabled for more screen real estate.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium
joshnichols189 said:
Software buttons can be disabled for more screen real estate.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They certainly can't in ICS on tablets, I must admit I haven't tried an ICS phone yet.
Of course they can be disabled, e.g in video playback they go away. And there are ICS api's developers can call to modify the buttons. There are custom rom's that features such as search button to the button bar, which isn't possible with hard buttons of course.
ECrispy said:
...e.g in video playback they go away...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't know about on a phone but on a tablet they don't go away they are just replaced with very small dot. So the bar is still there and you still lose the screen space.
I really like hardware buttons, I don't like the "menu" bar but as you said this is for legacy apps so the pressure should be put on the app developers to update their apps inline with ICS.
Like said prev, hardware buttons give more screen, correct aspect ratios, use less power, and in the long run the menu button will become redundant.
ECrispy said:
Of course they can be disabled, e.g in video playback they go away. And there are ICS api's developers can call to modify the buttons. There are custom rom's that features such as search button to the button bar, which isn't possible with hard buttons of course.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They certainly don't "go away" on ICS tablets. The bar is still there, the buttons are just replaced with less-distracting dots.
I love the physical touch buttons on the bottom, rather have them than touch screen ones anyday
Sent from my Desire HD using XDA
Google themselves have said that Android is moving in a direction where there should be no physical buttons. e.g. lets say Jellybean removes/adds a button, now some phones will need to be redesigned for it, just like they had to remove search & menu when moving to ICS. But a phone with software buttons doesn't need to change the hardware. It's more future proof.
I think this kind of change will take a while but eventually it will happen. There are still many people who prefer hw buttons and HTC wanted to accomodate them I guess.
I don't have an ICS tablet, I'd guess the reason is there is enough space on a tablet screen so they don't go away.
I prefer hardware buttons, BUT:
If using soft button means that the phone actually gets smaller,
i choose soft buttons.
ECrispy said:
But a phone with software buttons doesn't need to change the hardware. It's more future proof.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Frankly, future-proofing is meaningless for as long as Google requires that end users go through a carrier and/or a manufacturer to get updates, and in the process guarantees that almost all Android products will be abandoned by the wayside before they've even stopped being sold (and the few that get updates will get them late, if ever.)
I just don't understand why they had to abandon the menu button, it was perfect...
I don't understand why we need a multitask button when you could just keep home pressed for the same result.
I didn't use a GN so won't comment on the software buttons much, I think it could really work if they added options for it in default ics so people who don't use custom roms and such could deal with them as they wish.
as for the menu bar on htc one.. it will eventually have a option to hide it (a V arrow on the bar)
it did in a previous software version but I guess they forgot to add it in the final build
and if you wanted it back all you had to do is keep multitask button pressed
@OP: drop by GNexus forum, there's quite some guys not happy with the screen size they loose with softbuttons. There's even an option on AKOP ROM to disable softbar.
I'm quite happy with hard buttons on One X, I just find stupid the solution HTC found to replace the menu button.
Disabling the soft buttons on the Galaxy Nexus is a commonly requested feature because tons of app developers haven't yet updated their apps to hide them while in full screen, not because of some half-baked idea that the loss of that extra 84 pixels of height somehow detracts from the user experience. Furthermore, the loss of screen real estate doesn't mean anything when 99% of the current apps are configured for the old 5:3 aspect ratio. Lots of old games look funky when you disable the soft buttons, because all the OS does is stretch it to fit.
Soft buttons are better because nobody can make up their minds on the design of the UI, so you might as well just leave it open to customization. Don't blame Google, blame the app developers.
HTC listened...
Maybe HTC listened to the majority of the HTC users and followed through with hardware buttons or maybe it is an HTC thing to keep hardware buttons as to Apple with their Home button.
I just want my search button back... that was perhaps the one (and only )good addition the US carriers made to their devices. IMO.
I can't find the article but an HTC executive was quoted as saying it's necessary to support Sense.
I'm happy they did it. The buttons on the galaxy nexus look like crap, the black isn't black enough to use it for passive buttons.
H-Cim said:
I'm happy they did it. The buttons on the galaxy nexus look like crap, the black isn't black enough to use it for passive buttons.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The.majority of GN roms alow you to change both the brightness and colour of the on-screen buttons so that isn't an issue for most people. I actually prefer them, particularly as you can add or change the configuration of the buttons easily.
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2