→ A new standard in design: in-depth with the PlayStation Vita

by Michael in ,


A new standard in design: in-depth with the PlayStation Vita

A small snippet from Ars Technica's thorough look at the hardware (added emphasis mine):

It's a confusing time in the world of mobile and portable gaming. Consumers seem to be moving away from the idea that they need an entirely separate device to play games on the go, settling for cheap, generally simple touchscreen games on their cell phones and tablets. Nintendo, following up the insanely successful DS system that rested on a seemingly gimmicky double screen design, added a newer glasses-free 3D gimmick to its Nintendo 3DS—only to see extremely slow sales force it into a premature price drop. Sony's PlayStation Portable, meanwhile, has carved out a niche for itself as a serious gamer's system, especially in Japan, but is beginning to show its age as a system designed in the pre-smartphone era.

For the new PlayStation Vita, Sony responded to this confusion by throwing everything and the kitchen sink into the system. For hardcore gamers, there are two analog sticks—a first for a portable system—and a gigantic screen loaded with pixels. For casual players, there's the now-ubiquitous touchscreen as well as a unique rear touch panel to enable new tactile, touchy-feely gameplay. The Vita has two cameras, a GPS receiver, and a 3G data option. There's music and video players, a Web browser, Google Maps, and even a proximity-based social network. Oh, and it also plays games, I guess (more on those in a separate post).

It's a curious approach. What's likely to keep standalone portable video game systems afloat in the face of cell phone gaming is not processing power or connectivity--the rapid improvement in iterative cell phones will always dwarf static platforms in these areas after the gaming systems have been on the market for a short time. The advantage of these dedicated game systems is in the optimization for gaming itself: developers can spend long development cycles on ambitious game designs because the hardware target stays the same for a long time and control mechanisms can be offered which can not be touched by devices which need to be more flexible.

Sony's approach hasn't sacrificed that optimization here, but the entire fate of the system's success rests on how well it performs in the games area. These dedicated systems will never be preferred by a large enough audience over a good smart phone for most things. The PS Vita and Nintendo 3DS will be purchased--or not purchased--entirely on whether people who care a lot about playing really good games decide the quality of gaming on offer is worth having a dedicated device at all. The Vita and 3DS don't have the advantage home consoles have of being set up on the television--the display people use for any number of things, thereby justifying all manners of streaming media and family interaction as a selling point. If gaming ends up being an afterthought on the Vita (I'm not implying it is--it is far too early to tell), the device will fail.

Let's see how this plays out. I think there's more than enough space for both the Vita and the 3DS, despite the burgeoning smart phone market--even if they become a rapidly decreasing percentage of the total portable game market's revenue.

In the meantime, check out the article at Ars. There's a whole lot of detail there.


→ Apple, Suppliers Test Tablet With Smaller Screen

by Michael in


Apple, Suppliers Test Tablet With Smaller Screen

Wall Street Journal:

Apple, which works with suppliers to test new designs all the time, could opt not to proceed with the device.

That's really the only important part of the article. Of course Apple is testing tablets with smaller screens. Just as Apple is certainly constantly testing phones of 3 or 4 different sizes. It's unlikely anyone in the industry tests as thoroughly as Apple does. Testing doesn't necessarily indicate intent to bring to market. Anyone who proposes without real inside knowledge (which no one outside of Apple's upper management has) that Apple will introduce one soon would--if Apple did so--be right only by coincidence rather than by insight.

Having multiple sizes of the same device always brings a cost--especially for iOS. Android, like Mac OS X and Windows, is not made for fixed resolutions so new screen sizes and resolution scan easily be thrown around within reason. iOS, however, only runs at 3 resolutions to date, one of which is exactly quadruple another--allowing for design elements to stay exactly the same physical size. iOS only has two target UI sizes right now. The trade-off between the two approaches is simple: design consistency and sharpness (iOS) versus display size flexibility (others). Introducing a new larger phone or smaller tablet will mean current apps will have comparatively poor usability (Apps designed for a 9.7" iPad will end up having extremely small touch targets on an 8" or 7" tablet--or apps designed for an iPhone will just be less clear than what people are used to and have oddly large touch elements), so if optimized apps are possible to make at all it will introduce yet another design target.

These issues aren't necessarily insurmountable. If Apple introduces more physical sizes for its touch screen devices, it will be because it decided the usability / interface fragmentation sacrifice is less significant than the gains provided by a new size OR they've figured out a way around the problem. Anything is possible, so Apple certainly could introduce a new size touch device, but simply testing sizes is not evidence at all.

(For the record: I think a scaled up iPod Touch at 7" would probably be more usable than a scaled down iPad, but I can't exactly test such a thing. Even then, it would certainly be awkward for many iPod Touch / iPhone apps and definitely not optimal for the size.)


Tweetbot 2.0 and Tweetbot for iPad

by Michael in


A few months ago Twitter ruined the native iOS application. It was a sad day, as the official app was once known as Tweetie and was an app many iOS apps looked to as an example of great design. (Loren Brichter, the developer of Tweetie, introduced the "pull to refresh" concept used by numerous applications in his initial release.)

At that point I switched to Tweetbot ($3), and have been very happy with it on the iPhone. Well, today tapbots (the developer) released version 2.0. At first I was a bit nervous after my experience with the official client, but my fear was unfounded. The app is even more usable than before.

The official Tweetbot 2.0 blog post indicates a few new features:

  • Updated timeline view
    • Image thumbnails in timeline
    • Links now colored and single-tappable
    • “Retweeted by” bar now integrated and tappable
    • Cell colors adjusted for better contrast
  • New direct message view.
  • Redesigned “New Tweets” bar (Can be dismissed by tap and configured in Settings > Display)
  • Timed auto-refresh (timeline, mentions, and DM’s will refresh every 5 minutes)
  • Readability added as mobilizer service
  • Much improved tweet replies view
  • Links in user’s bio now tappable
  • “Huge” font size option in Settings > Display
  • Improved scrolling performance

The inline image thumbnails make a much bigger difference than I would have thought. Meanwhile many smaller tweaks like presentation of @ mentions and a new tweets counter at the top of the timeline add little hints of additional usability in areas I didn't realize were lacking. Tweetbot didn't need to get any better, but it did anyway.

The even bigger announcement today was Tweetbot for iPad. It looks like a great conversion of a great app. While I appreciated the official Twitter app launch release for iPad when it originally came out, it was plagued with many small usability issues that became magnified the longer the app went without any improvements to areas in which it has clearly been lacking. I easily made the decision to buy Tweetbot for iPad for $3 and deleted the official app before my new client even finished downloading.

An added bonus is that using Tweetbot on both devices allows me to finally use the Tweet Marker service to synchronize my position in my timeline and @ mentions.

With all this said, I'm still perfectly happy with the official Twitter app for OS X--aside from my desire to see it use Tweet Marker as well. If I could get a client essentially identical to Twitter for OS X with Tweet Marker added, I'd be golden.

 

Links:

Tweetbot for iPhone

Tweetbot for iPad


→ Chrome For Android

by Michael in


Chrome For Android: The Browser For The 1%

MG Siegler takes a look at the Chrome for Android beta. All his Ice Cream Sandwich-is-only-on-1%-of-devices snark aside, the browser looks fantastic.

There's also this tidbit:

One other bit of intrigue: Chrome for Android will be a part of the Google Apps package. This means that once Chrome fully replaces Browser on Android, there will no longer be a browser that’s a part of the open source Android. In other words, if vendors like Amazon want to include a browser on the Kindle Fire, they’re going to have to build their own — which they did. Still, interesting.

For those who don't know, this is how Google tries to keep other companies under their umbrella. The core Android operating system is free and open source while Google's official apps (Google Maps, Gmail, YouTube, Google Voice, etc.) are only available on devices which fall under certain restrictions set by Google. When Chrome replaces the current Android browser, it'll become another such app--so anyone wanting to make a device that doesn't fit into Google's specs will have to continue to build off the existing browser's codebase or build their own.