Preference for a 3- or 5-Button Configuration?
-
In the Vertical reviews from DC Rainmaker and Chase the Summit, I was a little taken aback that amid the generally positive comments they made, they both mentioned that they wish the Vertical had a five-button configuration.
Now, CtS mentions often that heâs a âGarminâ guy, and DCR very likely has prediliction toward Garmin devices too (though he does stay more neutral than CtS). So I assume that their comments were really just them projecting their Garmin/Fenix preferences (or their muscle memory) onto the new Vertical. However, I donât ever remember them really complaining about this with watches like Corosâ Vertix, so the complaints seem to be a bit of a stretch and lacking in an appreciation of individuality.
So, my question is: If it were entirely up to you, do you prefer a 3- or 5-button configuration?
Mind you, this is not an official survey or anything; just something Iâm curious about. I definitely prefer the 3. When I use the 5 Peak with 5 buttons, I find I have a tendency to hit those fourth and fifth buttons by accident (though with no touch screen on the 5 Peak, I understand the need for more buttons). Not to mention that a 3-button configuration looks and feels cleaner. I also like the long-press âbackâ function, again, as something that helps to reduce accidental presses.
-
-
@TrailEyes same for me. I like the 3 button configuration. long and short presses plus touch screen are perfect for me.
The idea of a rotating bezel (came up when people first saw the notches in Vertical bezel) or a rotating button to quickly scroll though menus, lists or adjust the zoom is appealing though. -
@TrailEyes for me 3 buttons + touchscreen is perfect, especially with S9P/S9PP where they are quite âhiddenâ and contribute to the minimalist design.
-
@TrailEyes
sorry, my answer was very brief
I prefer 3 buttons with intuitive and memorable logic and touch for non-glove activities/seasons. I also like buttons that I can press with at least softshell or medium hardshell gloves and Iâm not the biggest fan of fiddly stuff -
@TrailEyes 3. They are Garmin users hence the 5 button preference since they are used to it. When I had the f6 I found the layout so confusing that I wanted to throw the watch away immediately. Even polarâs vantage has better button mapping
-
3 buttons definitively, more aesthetic !
Rotating button, I really donât like what have been made by Coros for example⊠-
Oh and do not get me started on the quality of the button press (maybe off topic) but every button on garmin has different click feedback⊠thatâs what cheep components do!
-
@v-sacre Corosâ (or in general competitorsâ) implementation of things should not be the benchmark.
The benchmark should be usability -
@freeheeler Nothing wrong with being a man of few words
-
@Egika I have had the Coros Apex Pro, and the rotating button on that got gunked up with fine silt (work in intertidal sediments) and refused to turn, took only one outing in that environment to convince me that rotating buttons were not suitable for me
I currently use a Garmin and 5 button or three doesnt bother me either way so long as the UI can navigated with ease, if I had to Pick then Three with Touchscreen as per Suunto solution. -
-
The only thing I miss from my S5 after switching to S9PP is being unable to cycle back screens during the workout. This is insane when having an active navigation, 3 screens and an S+. The way I used to operate S5 is by having the most useful data screen as the last one before the navigation, which allowed me to simply switch +1 or -1 for most of the time. I canât do this with S9 series.
3 buttons is fine but Iâd like Suunto to come up with a solution to this particular problem while having only 3 buttons.
-
What some other people mentioned: dedicated âbackâ button and switch to rhe previous screen in workout would be nice. Hence, 4 buttons for me I guess.
Or, what Iâd prefer even more is a rotating crown, like Coros has. That opens up the other two buttons to be âselectâ and âbackâ. If the crown is also clickable, then even more functionality would fit. -
@Ćukasz-Szmigiel @isazi in the current 3 button configuration a âmediumâ long press of the middle button could be used to move back a screen (up until you hold the button long enough to enter options).
-
3
-
@Freezer I was also thinking about double click. But that would interfere with instances of clocking three or four times in a row.
But holding for back is not a bad idea. Thereâs an animation running when you hold the middle button. It could be redesigned to show what action a hold would trigger.
-
5 button for me
-
I do not have a strong preference for buttons, but I would not give up on touchscreen. Since moving to the S9B I realized that for many things a touchscreen is more convenient than buttons.
-
I have used watches with 3 button plus touchscreen (Suunto Spartan and S9B) and 4 buttons (S7) and 5 buttons no touchscreen (Wahoo Rival) and I can definitely say although I think the 3 button approach works for the traditional Suunto sports app UI with breadcrumb navigation, I much prefer the 4 or 5 button approach. Having that extra button or two helps in some very tangible and practical ways esp when you introduce maps and the zoom functionality that becomes that much more information-giving.
-
dedicated backlight button is very nice, adds options for user to have more control over the watch
-
dedicated back button is just nice when you donât want to swipe screen. on older 3 button devices I never used the long middle button hold.
-
adding a 4 or 5 button layout adds ability for hotkeys. whereas current 3 button really limits because long hold of upper right is dedicated to a soft reset, middle button hold is (or was in old UI) dedicated to a quick menu start.
I agree with the reviewers, Suunto needs to add more buttons to compete and open up their UI to be more flexible esp now with maps. having to long hold to zoom out seems like a pain compared to how S7 worked with map zoom.
-
