What the App Drawer Means for Android

Android is famous for being customizable. When you think of iOS, you think of a grid of icons as your home screen. That isn't true for Android. Android flaunts a more desktop-esque layout for its home screen, and a major part of that is the app drawer. The app drawer holds all the apps that you don't want on your home screen. Lately there has been some rumors of Google getting rid of the app drawer in Android N, and there is more and more evidence to support it every day. Also, manufacturers like LG have already chosen to get rid of the app drawer in the LG G5. But... Why?

Run Forrest Run! Or walk, or drive, or bike. #MapsAtTheMovies https://t.co/GocsZtDx9Lhttps://t.co/4iOFYbDkl0

— Google Maps (@googlemaps) February 26, 2016

The above tweet is the major cause for us to believe that the next version of Android will not have an app drawer, but Android Authority reports that multiple inside sources have informed them that Android N currently does not have one.

So why? Well, many think it's for a more "simplistic" approach in order to make it easier for users, but personally, I think it does nothing but crowd the home screen. Others are wondering if Google is planning on replacing the app drawer with a search bar to find your apps. Either way, I'll stick with my app drawer. The app drawer is the "overflow" of information that you don't need right on your home screen. But the good thing is, even if Google does choose to get rid of it, there are always custom launchers like Nova to take its place. That's what makes Android great.

Image source: Droid Life

What Makes a Good Mobile Game

When I think of mobile games, I think big companies spending a lot of money to get people like Arnold Schwarzenegger to narrate over CGI explosions. Maybe the occasional arcade game fad like Flappy Bird or Angry Birds. What I usually don't think of is quality gameplay and mechanics, but there are games who break the mold and achieve this regardless.

First, I'll have to talk about Monument Valley. What Makes Monument Valley different is its game-changing puzzle mechanics. The app is paid with paid DLCs, but that's a small price to pay for an app that is this amazing. You can also get it for free on Amazon's Underground app store. The game combines a beautiful geometric aesthetic with physics-defying gameplay. The goal is simply to get from the beginning to the end while moving the environment. Seems simple enough, but simple is what makes a good mobile game. Each level is well thought out and just the right amount of challenging. It's great to play when you have down-time, or just binge it all in one go.

You know when I gave Angry Birds as an example of a fad in the first paragraph of this post? Well, the studio that made Angry Birds, Rovio, made a game that doesn't rely on Angry Birds branding to succeed for once. The game is called Retry, and I think it is a great example of how to make a game that strikes the perfect balance between user experience and profit. The game is fairly simple, you pilot a plane through various levels, collecting coins and other things along the way. I think the best part of this game is how it is monetized. Lots of mobile games basically rely on micro-transactions to win. Pay-to-win is common among mobile games. While Retry has micro-transactions to get more coins and gears, you don't need them to succeed. Coins are used to unlock checkpoints, but even if you don't have any coins to unlock a checkpoint, you can watch a simple 30-second ad or grab some coins from another level. I think this is a very non-obtrusive way for a game to make money.

How can I make a post on games without talking about Neko Atsume? Neko Atsume: Kitty Collector is a game that's gained widespread popularity, and the weirdest part? Nobody knows why. I don't even know why I keep coming back to it. The game is simple, you put items down in your yard for cats to come and play with, and they leave you fish to buy more things. The game is laid-back, which I think is important in a mobile game. Sometimes it's nice to just check and see how your cats are doing. Maybe snap a picture of a cute cat. The game is slow, but rewarding. Games like this where you have to wait and do little things throughout the day are another great way to utilize the mobile platform.

So what is it that makes a good mobile game? Simplicity, elegance, mobility, and originality. There are too many games that are all the same lately. Luckily, we have games like the ones I've listed above trying to break the mold. I don't need a 50th Candy Crush or Angry Birds. I don't want a war game that exploits women. I'll stick with my beautiful art styles, airplanes, and cats.

Ads: Necessary Evil?

Today, some studies show that Americans are exposed to as many as 5,000 or more ads in a single day. Many of those are found on the Internet, television, and physical media. Are these ads necessary in daily life? A lot of us have Adblock or have cut the cord on our cable subscriptions, but is this hurting the industries that we really want to support?

Firstly, I'd like to give my opinion on Adblock. I support it in most cases. I wish there wasn't a need for it, but the way the Internet is now, I don't see a way around it. Flash advertisements that carry malware, random ads playing audio and video, and extremely distracting and ugly advertisements make the whole site look worse. Now, I realize this may seem hypocritical because I have advertisements on this site. A 4:3 ad on the sidebar. But hey, if you don't want to see it, use an adblocker. I don't mind.

I believe that we, the consumers, should be the ones to decide how advertisements reach us in the Internet age. Personally, the only ads I can tolerate are ones such as Twitter's ad tweets. Advertisements that blend seamlessly into the content, while at the same time not masquerading as content. On sites like this, I'll disable my adblocking software. I realize that this is how sites get revenue, and I want to support that. But I refuse to support sites whose pages are littered with advertisements.

I think it's extremely interesting what Spotify and YouTube have done in terms of advertising. Both companies offer a free version of the service which is ad-supported, and have an option to cheaply get rid of those ads while also unlocking new features. I think this is a great way for sites to gain reputation. People don't like ads, and if they see that they can still support the site without viewing them, they will. I have YouTube Red, which I talked about in this post, that does just that.

I don't think it is the user's responsibility to provide funding for the service. If they really want the service, it will receive funding from either people willing to view ads or donations or other means. If a service is covered in ads, turn adblock on and let them come up with another solution. Or die. Thus is capitalism.

As for television, I think it's ridiculous that people are paying to be able to watch things other people pick for you, with 1/4 of the time watching ads. Solutions such as Netflix are a much better alternative, with people directly paying Netflix to host the content and even create new content.

Nobody likes ads, and if you don't want to support a site, don't view the ads. If you do and still don't want to view the ads, think of other ways to support them. Donations, purchases, things like that. Ads are an evil, but they aren't necessary. There's always other ways of funding and support. 

Sources: CBS

Opinions on the LG G5 and GS7

Today, two major companies in the Android smartphone market revealed their flagship devices which will stand as the company's mark on the industry for the next year. I talked about the LG G5's odd rumored changes in a previous post, but now it's official. Both devices have added "always-on" displays, which I think is a fairly nifty feature, but I can't say it's as game changing as I originally thought. I'd be interested to see some battery statistics about it.

I'll be honest, I think the LG G5 may have focused too heavily on being different and not enough on what people actually want. Sure, its new "modular" slot on the bottom is different and allows for some cool accessories, but the amount of people that will actually use it I think is minimal. There is also a dual-camera design to snap wider-angle pictures, and while that's cool, I'd rather just have a solid camera. Plus, I'm not a fan of its new design. A lot of people are comparing it to a Nexus 6P in terms of design, and I don't think that could be any more wrong. When you look at the 6P, you just see premium. You see the diamond-cut edges and the quality metal. But with the LG G5, it's so smoothed that it doesn't look premium at all. Along with this, the color choices are very odd as there's only lighter color options except for an odd grey-ish one. On the software side, LG has taken a step in the wrong direction. They chose to remove the app drawer in their default launcher because it can "confuse users", which I think it a very odd thing to do. Thinking about it more and more, the LG G5 almost seems like a copy of what many Chinese manufacturers are doing. No app drawer, smoothed surface with odd features. Is it a bad phone? No. I'm sure it's great. But I think LG has shifted their focus on being "different" instead of being good.

There's not too much to talk about with the new Galaxy S7 and Galaxy S7 Edge. In terms of design changes, the only major difference is a slight curve in the back. Besides that, they've added better specs for both devices and they've both been waterproofed. I think the S7 is a solid upgrade to last year, but if you already have the S6, there is absolutely no use upgrading. The devices are so similar I just can't see a point in getting the S7 over the S6.

Sources: The Verge

Why the Court Ruling Apple to Hack Its Own Phone Is a Bad Decision

You must have been living under a rock if you haven't heard about this by now, but just in case Patrick Star is reading this, I'll explain what happened.

Last December there was a terrorist attack in San Bernardino, California. This attack resulted in 14 deaths and 22 injuries. Now, the courts have ruled that Apple has to help the FBI and the United States government hack into the perpetrator's iPhone. Apple has rightfully opposed this ruling, citing the security issues that can and will result from them doing this.

Apple has the capability to do this. Encryption is a word commonly thrown around, but few outside of the tech industry really understand what it means. Encryption is when data, in this case the user data on an iPhone, is scrambled in a way that it becomes unreadable without a specific key. Without the key, it is virtually impossible for anyone but the best hackers to break that encryption. Once the encryption algorithm is broken, any device using the same algorithm can be easily broken as well. What the FBI wants Apple to do is create a custom iOS update that they're going to install on this specific iPhone that will decrypt its data. That's great, right? It's only for one iPhone. Wrong.

With this piece of software that the FBI wants Apple to create, it not only allows the FBI to unlock anyone's iPhone, but it creates a backdoor that anyone will soon be able to access. If that software is leaked in any way, there is no way to tell how widespread it could get. Creating a backdoor is not just leaving it open for one person, it leaves iPhones vulnerable to everyone. When this happens, iPhones become completely insecure. The whole point of computer security is to completely close any gaps in the security. If there's even one gap, it can and will be exploited. Intentionally creating a flaw as large as this one can only have terrible consequences.

I'm not saying that it's not important that this phone doesn't get hacked, but there are a few things to consider. One, it is not Apple's responsibility to provide the FBI with the tools to hack its secure devices. And two, if they do, it will completely destroy Apple's reputation as a company that values security. Because of this, Tim Cook, Apple's CEO, has written a public letter to its customers on this topic of encryption. (Here.) I completely support Apple taking a stand against a court who obviously doesn't understand the repercussions of this order.

What I Learned from My First Hackathon

Yesterday, I attended the hackathon at Iowa BIG as a part of a field trip from my computer science class. Up until yesterday, I had no idea what a hackathon really entailed. I assumed it would be intense and I wouldn't like it, but after going I'm really glad I did and would happily go again.

A hackathon is when a group of developers or other people gather in a space in an attempt to solve problems through coding. It's not as hard as it sounds. The people at Iowa BIG already had some problems for us to solve, such as build an RPG to drive tourism to the community, building an app to help our school keep track of tutorials, or build an interesting project with a Microsoft Kinect. The people there made sure that we chose a project we're passionate about, a problem we want to solve. I chose to redesign a logo and website for a local nonprofit, because I've had experience in web and graphic design in the past.

A major setback I had right away was redesigning the logo. The nonprofit itself had a very outdated logo with clipart, and I planned to completely scrap it and make a new one in Adobe Illustrator. Once I drew up the draft on a whiteboard, I found that the computers we had there did not have Illustrator on them. (GIMP or Inkscape are pretty much unusable for me.) Asking one of the teachers from BIG, I found out that there was indeed a computer downstairs where I could use Illustrator. Making it was a really fun exercise, because I felt like I was actually contributing my design skills for someone else. It's the first time I've ever done something like that. And while I was pressed for time because another group had to use the computer, I got a rough draft done. It could definitely be improved upon, but the coordinators of the hackathon insured us that the goal was not to get a finished product, but to make a dent in the problem.

While I was making the logo, I left my group to the website. Apparently I should not have done that. I don't know if my group felt over their heads or if they simply just went to the hackathon to get out of school, but they made little progress. Taking control, I essentially ended up copying a Bootstrap template and replacing certain text and images with stuff from the nonprofit's website to give it a more updated look. I didn't get all the way through because I felt like my group wasn't doing any work, so I handed the laptop to them and told them to finish it while I relaxed for the last 30 minutes. I'm not exaggerating when I say they did not make any changes or progress at all after that point.

Even though my group wasn't helpful, I would still do it again even if it meant doing it alone. It was fun to practice my web and graphic design skills on something that actually exists, and for another person. I also had various people at the building complement my work on the logo, which was a huge motivator. Plus, free pizza! Who doesn't want that?

The purpose of this post isn't just to talk about my experience, but to let everyone know what a hackathon is like and what it can be. A hackathon will be fun if you're actually planning to contribute, and I did see other groups that worked well together. But if you aren't interested in doing any work, it's not going to be fun. It was a great learning experience to get actual practice and experience in the field of something I hope to do for the rest of my life. Design and coding are extremely fun to me, and if they are to you, I'd encourage you to check one out as well.

App Review: ACT® Exam Prep 2016

Studying for the ACT can be hard, not knowing exactly what to study or what will be on the exam is a problem for first time test takers. Thankfully, in the 21st century we have the option to study during free time using our smartphones. ACT Exam Prep 2016 is an app by Pocket Prep that makes studying really easy. This is the first ACT prep app I've downloaded, but I can't really picture an app doing it better.

The app uses notifications to remind you to study on a basis that you select in the settings. The app also has the option to input your ACT test date in order to keep you aware of how much time you have left to study. Along with extensive 10-question or more quizzes of all areas, there is also questions of the day which help you move along without spending the time to do a full quiz. My favorite part about the app is that when you take a quiz, it categorizes the questions and answers so you know which areas you have to work on.

When you get an answer wrong, there is always a written explanation of why the correct answer is correct.

The app also allows you to flag questions to review them later if you're having trouble, and even take whole quizzes of flagged questions. There are also other options to show the answers as you take your test, customize how many questions per test, or if it should time you. While the free version of the app only includes a small number of questions, once you get a feel for how great the app is at keeping you studying it really won't be a hard decision to shell out a few bucks for hundreds more.

Best Low Budget Smartphones

In recent years, there has been a trend for smartphone manufacturers to create smartphones with decent, or amazing specs at an affordable price. The logic behind this is that if they create a smartphone that can compete with the top flagships for a cheaper price, they'll gain more marketshare and more loyal users. If they can mass produce affordable smartphones, the profit margin won't matter as much.

Under $200 - Moto G (2015)

While it's unclear whether Motorola will continue to offer low cost smartphones like the Moto G, what is certain is that the current 3rd gen model is the best smartphone you can get below $200. It offers an updated near-stock experience, a 5-inch display, and a 13 megapixel camera in an affordable package. It isn't the most flashy or best specced smartphone out there, but it's about as good as you'll get for under $200. The Moto G starts at $179.99 unlocked.

Under $300 - OnePlus X

I do have my problems with OnePlus as a company and their inability to provide consistent software experience and customer service, but I can't overlook the OnePlus X in the under $300 category. In a package strikingly similar to the iPhone 4 days, it provides an updated Android experience. Its camera and display are fairly similar to the Moto G, but its specs outpace it. With 3GB of RAM and a Snapdragon 801 processor, this device won't be lagging behind any time soon. And while Oxygen OS isn't stock Android, it's pretty darn close. It adds some nifty new features such as accent colors, but I wouldn't count on consistent updates. The OnePlus X starts at $249.99 unlocked.

Under $400 - LG Nexus 5X & Moto X Pure Edition

LG Nexus 5X

The successor to the wildly popular Nexus 5 is here in the form of the Nexus 5X. The design is cost effective while at the same time keeping a premium feel. The 5X is also the first device on this list to include a fingerprint sensor, which is in fact the same as the one in the Huawei Nexus 6P. Speaking of similarities with the 6P, the 5X's camera is the same as well. The only difference is that the 5X cannot shoot 4K video due to hardware limitations. Regardless, the 5X has one of the best cameras on this list. Because this is a Nexus, you're getting the stock Android experience as Google intended, as well as receiving constant updates. The LG Nexus 5X starts at $349.00 unlocked.

Moto X Pure Edition

The Moto X Pure Edition's praise comes from a variety of things.While it doesn't have a fingerprint sensor, the Moto X Pure Edition's screen outpaces other smartphones in this class. Its QHD screen combined with a 21 megapixel camera makes for some really sharp photos. Besides this, the Moto X Pure Edition also has something completely different from anything else on this list. (Besides the Moto G.) Moto Maker. This allows for nearly limitless customization of your phone. You can choose the color of different parts of your phone, different materials, and even engravings. The Moto X Pure Edition starts at $399.99 unlocked.

Above $400 - Huawei Nexus 6P

If you know this blog, you know this was going to be here. While I wouldn't call this phone "low budget", it certainly is cheap for what it is. This phone rivals every other flagship smartphone out there for about half the price. You can read my full review of the Nexus 6P by clicking here, but for the sake of this post, I'll keep it short and sweet. The Nexus 6P has no major faults. It's all-around great in every sense of the word. Amazing metal build, top-of-the-line Samsung AMOLED QHD display, fingerprint sensor, award winning camera, and pure stock Nexus experience. The fact that all of this can fit in a package that's merely $499.00 is a feat. 

The LG G5 Is the Most Mysterious Flagship Not-Yet-Released

LG has been making weird statements about its LG G5 flagship before its announcement on February 21st. And not just weird for LG, weird for smartphones in general. Either they're going to be changing the LG G5 drastically from its predecessors, or we're getting fooled. If everything they say is true, the LG G5 could be the most unconventional flagship I've seen in a long time.

First weird change for LG, they're switching their volume buttons to the side of the phone. This isn't normally weird, but since the LG Optimus G, LG has been committed to its back-button design. LG has toted in its advertisements how it's the "perfect placement" for buttons as that's where your index finger naturally sits. It's odd that they would change something so iconic to the brand that LG has built over the years. Some leaks say this could be because of a possible second camera on the back, while others hint at a fingerprint sensor. Maybe even both. The reasoning for this change is blurry, but it is something we know for sure.

If you didn't think that was too weird, just wait. The LG G5 has been leaked to have a metal unibody design, while at the same time keeping its removable battery and expandable storage. Usually, it's one or the other, but LG has some weird plans for the G5. Reports show that they're planning on having a sort of metal "cap" on the bottom of the device that allows access to the battery and SD card port.

Last weird leak is LG teasing an "always-on" display for the G5. Many news sites are comparing this to how some other devices, like Motorola, have displays that light up just a portion of the display to show information like the time and your notifications. The way LG is teasing this, I don't think that's it. Those other devices are not always-on, they just turn on when you pick them up or other similar action. What it looks like LG is doing is something like what Pebble does with its e-paper displays, or the low power mode on Android Wear watches. That is, the display really never turns off. If that's true, it could be an incredible innovation for smartphones that I can see a lot of manufacturers adopting. 

So whatever LG is doing with the G5, it's going to be drastically different than its past flagships. LG is probably hoping to make a real competitor to Samsung's Galaxy S7, but personally, I can't see them doing that without a huge software overhaul. LG's Android skin is one of the worst I've seen, and when Samsung—once notorious for having a bad skin—is far better than you, it's time to step  up.

Sources: Verge, Android Authority, Droid Life

Carriers Giving Some Services a Free Data Pass: A Violation of Net Neutrality?

If you don't know what net neutrality is, check out my net neutrality post. Verizon has made news this week by announcing that their Go90 video service will not count towards their user's data. This isn't the first time carriers have given certain services a pardon, with T-Mobile boasting free unlimited music streaming to certain services. So what's the problem? It's good for the user, so who cares? Who doesn't want unlimited music streaming or video?

Well, the problem here lies in the very problem with violating net neutrality. It's unfair for other businesses that aren't given this privilege. Imagine that you want to create a new company that streams music to compete with Spotify, but something Spotify has that you won't is that streaming Spotify doesn't affect people's' data. This means you're never going to become as big as Spotify unless you're added to this special "VIP" data list. Not only is this bad for that company, it's bad for the user because it curbs competition. Verizon's choice to have their Go90 app free of data charges is even worse than T-Mobile, because they're the ones directly making a profit and stealing users from the likes of other video streaming platforms. While I don't like T-Mobile's choice to have certain music streaming services not incur data charges, I think it's at least more morally acceptable than what Verizon has just done. At least T-Mobile continues to add various music websites to encourage competition. Verizon, on the other hand, has done this purely for selfish gain.

Sources: TechCrunch, T-Mobile

Why Nobody Is Taking Android from Google

A lot of people are having the idea that Android can be a separate entity outside of Google and it will be successful. This is true in very limited circumstances, which I will go over, but most of the time and in the widest cases, Android is Google's. Android, or AOSP (Android Open Source Project) is licensed under the Apache license. The Apache license is a fancy legal term which basically allows for anyone to copy the source code of Android and use it for anything they want, as long as it doesn't go against the terms of the license. This means that companies like Cyanogen, Inc. and Amazon can take Android, modify it, and release it for profit. So why isn't everyone doing this?

Google takes strict control over small but important parts of Android that make it, well, Android. These parts are called the GApps, or Google Apps. Things like the Google Play Store, Google Maps, Google Now, Google Calendar, and Chrome are not licensed under Apache and are Google's property. Imagine Android without the Google Play Store, the most important aspect of GApps, or Google Now on modern Android versions. Most people wouldn't want this, except in very limited cases. So the reason you don't see tons of versions of Android that are vastly different from stock is because Google will not let them use their GApps unless they comply with some rules. Personally, I think these rules are important. They are what keep Android as a central operating system and what keeps things consistent across device manufacturers. Without a central power in charge of the OS it could go the way of many Linux distros, all vastly different and unrefined. One could argue this as a strong suit, but while I think choices are important in your OS, I don't think the OS should be too different to become unrecognizable. This only creates inconsistent apps and confused users.

Amazon is one of the only successful worldwide companies I can think of that releases a fork of Android that does not include GApps. The reason Amazon can do this and get away with it is because Amazon is a large company and markets its tablets not as Android tablets, but as their own separate Fire e-readers. When people buy an Amazon Kindle Fire, they aren't expecting Android, they're expecting a Kindle Fire. Amazon has the resources to make this branding speak for itself instead of piggybacking off of Android, something few other companies have. As a result, their app store is semi-successful, (although hardly anything compared to the Play Store) as well as the Kindle Fire itself. The only other company I can think of that could do something similar and succeed is Samsung, simply because they hold such a wide market in Android. Samsung already has a bunch of its own stores and apps, but they're coupled along side GApps. Neither the Kindle App Store or Samsung's app stores can compete with Google Play, though.

This is in America, but elsewhere in the world, especially China, manufacturers do not include GApps on purpose. Google is largely blocked in China, so smartphone manufacturers like Huawei, Xiaomi, OnePlus, Oppo, and more are forced to not include them. Because of this, different manufacturers have vastly different themes, skins, and forks of Android because they don't have to follow Google's guidelines.

Xiaomi's MIUI

OnePlus's Hydrogen OS

Cyanogen, Inc. has made headlines in the past year for their CEO's comments about taking Android away from Google. They're ridiculous and would never work in a US or European market. Cyanogen is cocky because of its new investors, and it isn't sustainable if they want to expand into major markets. Their best bet is to stay in emerging markets like India and China if they want to avoid Google's rules. In America they had semi-success with the OnePlus One launching with Cyanogen OS, but it also included GApps. And before long, that relationship fell apart due to their irresponsibility as a company. Cyanogen doesn't have a chance to take Android away from Google in a global market, and neither does anyone else. The Google Play Store's major library prevents it, as well as how Google is starting to integrate their services more and more into the OS.

Why Microsoft's Acquisition of SwiftKey Has Me Jumping Ship (Probably)

I'll be honest, I don't like Microsoft's modern strategy for basically anything it's doing. Yesterday, Microsoft announced plans to acquire SwiftKey, my keyboard of choice, for $250 million. Seems like a lot, right? It really isn't. Microsoft isn't paying for the keyboard, they're paying for the branding, the research, the users, and the technology. SwiftKey has made many leaps in typing research that makes their suggestions and autocorrect scarily accurate. Three posts ago I talked about SwiftKey's Neural keyboard, which uses AI neural networks to predict typing and make typing much more accurate. So far, this isn't something that any other keyboard uses. This research along with the user base and user data makes SwiftKey extremely valuable to Microsoft.

Why don't I like it? Microsoft has basically ruined everything it has acquired the past few years. Take Skype for example. Once a great method for communicating with friends and family, its new, unintuitive and ad-ridden interface has made it basically unusable for me. I've talked about how Microsoft's meddling has caused me to move to Discord in a previous post, and I can only assume their guidance will lead SwiftKey in a similar direction. From Skype, to Halo, to Nokia, to Minecraft, to SwiftKey. Microsoft's acquisitions benefit no-one but themselves and those in their ecosystem. Unfortunately, I'm not in Microsoft's ecosystem. The only Microsoft product I use on a daily basis is Windows, and that's only because I have to.

I'm not against the acquisition of items in general, but personally, Microsoft is not a company I appreciate acquiring the apps I use. I'll be honest, though. This isn't the sole reason I'm attempting to switch from SwiftKey. I've felt quite a bit of lag on it compared to the stock keyboard. Also, I feel like SwiftKey's transition from a paid app to a free app with paid themes was greedy at best.

So what am I using instead? Chrooma Keyboard is a fairly new addition to Android keyboards, taking after the default Google Keyboard but adding a few cool features. It adapts to the color of the app it is being used in and has a number row, but other than that, it's basically stock. Other options for keyboards I've considered in the past include Fleksy, but my main complaint about that is how difficult it is to get to commas and other punctuation, and the gestures have quite a learning curve. Chrooma Keyboard is a great alternative to the stock Google Keyboard, and I recommend it fully.