Swiping left/right to access mulitple attached widgets?
-
@alschmid totally agree with your point of view
-
@alschmid I suspect that the answer to some of your questions is performance.
I think that mini widgets have either some form of cache or just less data than a full widget. When entering the widget, some fields can take time to populate suggesting that they load on demand.
As for why can a disabled widget be pinned: to make the list of widgets less cumbersome.
For example - I have a stopwatch pinned to top button and donât have it on the widgets list. I use it often for tea brewing and cooking so itâs easily accessible without the need to scroll through the widgets.
But I personally agree that more than one pinned widget would be nice.
-
Hi @Ćukasz-Szmigiel, thank you for sharing your thoughts.
Your points on the cache sound quite plausible. I agree that there might be trade-offs: caching storage capacity, caching vs. battery life etc. However, Iâd assume that on-demand loading might buffer some of those trade-offs, and any time-lag for them to laod to be acceptable in light of the convenience to have them âready at handâ. Also, Iâd prefer for such trade-offs to be decided upon by the user, not by unnecessary design limitations. Much like this is the case with the density of the GPS position recording: the more accuracy you choose for the positioning, the less battery life you accept.
Even with your explanation, the pinning and disabling functionalities still confuse me. If youâd be correct, then nothing would be disabled, but only "hidden. Disabling would have made sense to me, assuming it to reduce storage and/or computing resources. Hiding would be fine, too, but only if itâs called like that.
Best, Alex
-
@alschmid weâll see how the interface evolves. Itâs still quite young.
