I find it entirely plausible that the flick method could simply be inherently superior.Īs a Japanese native speaker who has to enter many Japanese texts on a daily basis both on a PC and on a smartphone, I feel obliged to point out that the quality of an IME (a piece of software providing possible kanji/alphabet sequences for a given phonetic relization), is far better on a PC (its built-in MS-IME, to be precise) than on a smartphone (iOS). It is my understanding that most young Japanese people prefer the flick input method, which is a refinement of the old keitai input method used on featurephones with numeric keypads they are often startlingly quick at using this method, but it poses a far higher switching cost when moving to a QWERTY-derived physical keyboard. The prediction and correction algorithms seem to be far more intelligent on mobile, which largely compensates for the slower and more error-prone tactile experience. The context switching between inputting pīnyīn and selecting hànzì is much less expensive when the hànzì are presented directly above the on-screen keyboard. As a second-language user of Chinese, I find it considerably faster and easier to input hànzì on a smartphone than with a physical keyboard. The prediction and correction technologies of smartphone keyboards are a very good match for kanji and hànzì input. Inputting kanji on a physical keyboard is nowhere near as fluid as inputting Latin characters - you're constantly toggling between inputting kana and selecting the kanji options presented by the IME. All input methods for the Japanese language are a compromise. It's worth bearing in mind that the source is Japanese.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |