I guess so, but these are phones we are looking at so do not have to move our heads.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Galaxy S IV will have eye scrolling
- Thread starter quietstormSD
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I guess so, but these are phones we are looking at so do not have to move our heads.
You mean the guy that's assuming how it works without knowing anything about it then greatly exaggerates the size of the device claiming you need a suitcase to carry it around?
It does seem odd. I'll reserve final judgement until I see/try it in person.
And it is as close to 100% unreliable to me
: Just google quick glance and you will come across various threads in various forums where people have the same problem.Link 1: http://forums.androidcentral.com/samsung-galaxy-note-2/227634-quick-glance-doesnt-work.html
Link: 2: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=32777418
The relevance of Smart TVs and voice commands is that it is just another example how Samsung is eager to implement new ideas across their product range without perfecting them. I certainly appreciate their efforts in being innovators but see no problem in criticizing them where it is due.
Because websites will be scaled in pixels, not screen size. If you're looking at the same site on 2 devices, both with the same resolution but say they have different screen sizes, they'll both display the same area of the website regardless of screen size because they have the same resolution, the site will just look bigger on the bigger screen.
For escape the Galaxy S3 has a 4.8 inch screen with a resolution of 1280x720. My nexus 4 has a 4.6 inch screen with a resolution of 1280x768, because my phone has more pixels on the width it can fit 5x5 apps on a screen on the app drawer, the S3 can only fit 5x4. Screen size only affects how big everything is, not how much you see.
I'm sorry, but not all of us are skinny jeans wearing hipsters. The GS3, and even the NoteII are easily pocketable.
P.S. Not a personal jab, but the idea that the only pocketable phone is the iPhone is complete rubbish.
Last edited:
I can find people in forums who have problems using a toothbrush... so what?And it is as close to 100% unreliable to me
The only reason it could be "close to 100% unreliable" is if your proximity sensor is broken, you don't understand how it works, or were pre-convinced that it will not work (I vote door number 3). This is not a rocket-science gimmick: it uses the same proximity sensor that has been used for many years for phone calls to turn off the screen. If you know that, and where the sensor is located, there is no chance of not being able to trigger quick glance.
Ironically the only phone I had that did have proximity sensor issues was the iPhone 4.
Michael
Lots of anecdotal evidence from both you and the poster you quoted.....
I don't know why we continue arguing about this type of stuff. I can sit here and say I've never had a proximity sensor problem with any iPhone I've ever owned.....means nothing.....
A "quick glance" is a much "quicker" movement than putting the phone to your head to talk....too quick a glance *could* potentially NOT trigger the sensor....being that I've never owned a Samsung phone, I can't speak from experience....simply common sense. You also essentially put the entire side of your face against the phone, likely fully covering the sensor....however a glance may not be enough for the sensor to pick up each time....
Just saying - using the same sensor and comparing two VASTLY different movements/motions doesn't really make for a good argument.
But we get - it works all the time for you and NEVER for him.....I'd venture BOTH of you are overstating your case.
Nope. It is 100% reliable and is not rocket science how it works. I just did it 10x in a row.
You don't "glance" at the phone. You place/wave your hand over the proximity sensor and it will work every time. But some people do not understand that it waits about 1.5 seconds to wake the screen and you do not touch the phone while it is waiting. The phone must also be horizontal... which is stated clearly in the instructions ("put the device on a flat surface"). It only turns on the proximity sensor when the phone is on a level surface with the screen off). You can calibrate the gyroscope to ensure it is accurate.
Try it yourself on a Note 2 next time you see one in a store. There is a demo of it that you can get to in Settings. I guarantee you will not believe the 100% unreliable claims after trying it yourself.
Michael
Hey leave the skinny jeans out of this
Besides us hipsters do have man-bags !
The way smartphone sizes keep increasing, we'll all need "man bags" to carry them around in before too long.
Ok....
Then my big question (and the point I make about all these "innovative" Samsung features) is - why is this a feature? What does this add to the user experience? What is the point in muddying up software code with a useless way to turn on your screen?
And all I had to do was google "quick glance samsung" and the first few results that popped up were all about how it doesn't work....most likely they weren't "doing it right" (how ironic), but as I said - I believe BOTH of you were overstating your claims.....meaning I'd venture it is neither 100% reliable, nor 100% unreliable.
I use it every day, usually when making breakfast/dinner and my hands are wet or I otherwise do not want to touch the phone. Makes it easy to wake it up, briefly, just to see notifications.
This past weekend I was working on my motorcycle and I used it to check my phone. Didn't want to touch the Note 2 when my hands were dirty from the bike. Worked fine and I only had on "must reply" message that required stopping to wash up and reply.
But throwing this feature in with something the requires a camera and software to see your eyes/head, and act on it, is ridiculous in my opinion. Quick glance is much easier to implement since it only uses the proximity sensor for triggering and the gyroscope for arming. Those are basics with not nearly the number of complications that arise when using the camera. Plus it works in the dark.
Michael
Nope, Quick glance is just not reliable. It's that simple actually. The same goes for Kies and S Voice. I believe that Samsung is on the right track but should work harder on reliability and consistency when they push out their new features. No product or trademark is perfect
Actually the links I provided was to show that I was not the only one that has reliability problems with Quick Glance.
Saying it doesn't work is like saying phone calls do not work--or more accurately that the screen doesn't turn off when you use the phone against your head. Uses the same sensor.Nope, Quick glance is just not reliable. It's that simple actually. The same goes for Kies and S Voice. I believe that Samsung is on the right track but should work harder on reliability and consistency when they push out their new features. No product or trademark is perfect
I use it every day. How many people saying it is not reliable are working with it daily? I don't think any. They likely try it a few times, probably not understanding how it works--or even checking to see if it is on--and dismiss it as not working. I took the time, as I knew I wanted to use it, to see what makes it work and have close to 100% success using it. Again, this ain't rocket surgery nor does it even come close to the complexity of, say, smart stay (or smart scroll).
Michael
You kinda sound like Apple now
Anyway let's hope the "eye-scrolling" works better on the new S4.
How did I? I said in my first example that with 2 phones that had identical resolutions but different screen sizes would display the exact same, and it'd just look bigger on the bigger screen because the pixels are bigger.
In my 2nd example I showed how my phone with its smaller screen still shows more than the galaxy s3 even though the S3 has a bigger screen. Because my phone has a higher resolution than the S3.
Do you understand the difference between resolution and screen size? Bigger screen does not equal more, it just means bigger pixels. Higher resolution means more pixels which means more content shown.
Maybe you should ask yourself - why not? would it be useful under certain conditions? Just dont say "no use" just because the opposite side has it and you dont.
I think the 100% reliable should be viewed in the context of the usage/design constraints of that function. Drive your sedan off-road and there is a 90% chance it will get stuck. Drive it on a tarmac (which a sedan is designed to run on) and you can be sure it is near 100% it wont get stuck (after discounting Murphy's Law).
I use SmartStay and quick glance and I can say these work near 100% under the stated conditions they are designed for. To expect something to work 100% under ANY conditions is just not realistic to the point of ridiculous.
A suitcase...really.....what's ridiculous is comments like that. And if the iPhone's best selling feature is "it fits in the pocket of girl jeans" then they can keep it.
My dream one day is to own a touch screen phone you don't have to touch. Siri, eyeball scrolling, some kind of clamp for the forehead, the future is bright
Certainly, having the front camera on will do exactly this. I'll have to see how it works in person though but I imagine it's something I would turn on and off a lot.
Most websites right now do not have this responsive design for different display sizes and types, and it remains unclear how many will adopt it, so it doesn't apply in most cases now. I know that some online website publishing sites (like Squarespace.com) do use it on the back end, but they're the exception, not the rule.
And, about your confusing posts, you said this "But still, its not just about pixels or watching movies. 1080 will still give you more viewing area in the web browser and maps etc so its not pointless."
Then, you said this in a later post "For escape the Galaxy S3 has a 4.8 inch screen with a resolution of 1280x720. My nexus 4 has a 4.6 inch screen with a resolution of 1280x768, because my phone has more pixels on the width it can fit 5x5 apps on a screen on the app drawer, the S3 can only fit 5x4. Screen size only affects how big everything is, not how much you see."
This shows you clearly don't understand how pixel density and vision work. Apple (and everyone else making high pixel-density screens) are giving us screens that have pixels that cannot be distinguished by the vast majority of viewers. After this saturation point has been reached, there is no detail or smoothness to be had or gained by going from 1280 x 768 to 1930 x 1080! Physics man, physics.
No matter how much you want it to be so, it isn't.
Last edited:
Oh, well why not just throw everything we can think of into every device? Forget R&D, I'm sure SOMEONE will want to use every feature we could think of?.....
To a certain point, adding features for the sake of adding features becomes irresponsible as it opens the OS/software up to more bugs....why do you think it takes quad core processors and 2-3X the RAM to run an Android phone as smoothly as an iOS phone??.....bloated software is part of it.
I could infer that is what he meant, but Tinmania tends to be pretty literal so I took it as such. And, in reality, taking it for what it is (anecdotal evidence) the claim really doesn't carry much weight.