8 Dec
2011
8 Dec
'11
12:23 p.m.
I have yet to
meet anyone that actually likes predictive text.
[Waves] Hi!
It's fine once you get used to it. It really does use fewer keystrokes
- quite a lot fewer.
It's great if you learn how to use it /if/ you are a relatively light
to moderate texter. Heavy users who want the absolute maximum speed,
however, seem to favour non-predictive entry, as it is deterministic,
so you don't need to wait and see what emerges. Predictive text is
I am not a heavy user of text messaging, but I do like my machines to be
deterministic. That's the main reason I use an RPN calculator, for example.
interactive: you press the keys, just once each, for
each letter, then
you step through the offered words, pick the one you want and move on
- or teach the phone the new word. This means that the list of
I think I'd end up teaching the phone just about every possible sequence
of letters. I've been known to send messages including assembly language
nmemonics, signal names, etc. Things that will not be in any normal list.
[...]
I don't really understand why any techie dislikes
it, TBH. It is
/vastly/ easier than, say, learning to understand how Unix wildcards
work, let alone regular expressions or something - both things which
I've not yet mastered after more than 20y of effort.
The bigi difference being that unix wildcards are complicated for a
reason - -tjhey let you do poweful things. Predicitve text just gets in
the way! In any case, you don't _have_ to use wildcards in unix (you can
always type the neames explicitly). On the other hand, I've not found a
way to avoid this darn predictive text.
-tony