Sound like you just have a smaller smartphone on your wrist. My smartwatch has a black and white (not grayscale) display as well as 5 physical buttons and I wouldn't have it any other way.

[–] thatKamGuy@sh.itjust.works 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

If you’ve never used an inline remote, it’s really hard to explain why they were so much better from a UX perspective than what’s available now.

If I want to control media on my smartwatch, I need to flick focus on my wrist - usually stopping me from being able to fully use that hand, identify the right controls on the touch screen (and that it’s even on the right screen, and not obstructed by notifications) and hope that they register correctly.

Those old inline remotes were basically a useful ‘Bop It!’; control inputs varied: twist a dial, tilt the end, button press, slide, scroll dial and provided full tactile control which could be truly used one-handed (when clipped to my shirt).

It is a true shame that they were left by the wayside, when multiple devices ended up amalgamating into the modern smartphone.

[–] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I had and loved my minidisc player back in the earlie naughties. The remote was great, but there was no standardization and it became a single point of failure. If and when it broke, you’d have to get the specific control for your MD player.

It kind of lived on in spirit with in-line volume/call controls for wired headsets on the 4-conductor 2.5mm jack. Those were cool, and standardized.

We could have a return to that, with USB-C, but I don’t think it’d see much more than a niche adoption. Smartwatches and fitness trackers do it just as well, and once you know the layout, you can skip/pause without looking. Plus most cordless headphones/earbuds have integrated controls as well. Streaming at home you have voice controls, streaming in the car they are on the steering wheel or stereo.

The wired in-line remote is really only even applicable to the already niche community of users who refuse to adopt wireless. Considering most of those people are strict audiophiles, only something that has a quality integrated DAC would appeal to them. Thats a pretty specific product for a pretty small market. Not saying it wouldn’t be feasible, but it’d certainly not be cheap and simple.

Tactile feedback is great though. I’m totally with you there…not many watches have physical buttons that you can locate and activate completely unaided by vision.

[–] thatKamGuy@sh.itjust.works 1 points 9 months ago

Granted there was no standardisation in the industry, but I’m pretty sure they used the same remote across most of my portable MiniDisc players growing up (ie. from MZ-R55 to MZ-R900.. the MZ-NH1 had a different remote altogether).. I didn’t even realise there were restrictions?

The issue with the inline controls that evolved since (and morphed into Bluetooth controls) is that they’re too basic, compared to what I’d like.

On the go, I long since ago switched to wireless audio - using AirPods Pro and a ‘vintage’ Apple Watch 3, but I would gladly opt for a wireless/bluetooth lapel clip style object with the same controls those old Sony had.

I’ve had a quick look around - but haven’t managedd to find anything that would fit the bill. Honestly, not even sure if smartphones offer sufficient functionality over Bluetooth to make something like that work out of the box?