4 ms·

The market had spoken in 2003 - people wanted phones with small screens that were indestructible and lasted a couple of days in terms of battery life. Then the

• praneshp 9y ago
  That's not a reasonable reply though. Thicker phones were made and they flopped in the market. I'd be happier if software updates did not screw up battery life every now and then, like they do on Nexus.
  • izacus 9y ago
    Did they flop because they were thicker, or because they had any other failing?
    • praneshp 9y ago
      That's a fair question. My reading is that their only differentiating factor was battery, but that wasn't accepted. OTOH, you can never prove that a thicker phone with higher battery life succeeded was because of extended life :)
    • valuearb 9y ago
      People who build the vast majority of phones believe thicker hurt sales. And they do lots of market research. I'm pretty sure their market researchers aren't telling them customers want thicker with longer battery life and the phone makers are just responding "oh no they don't!" Even if all the phone makers in the world ignored customer's wishes, it would only take one company to listen to market research and suddenly dominate the market to change everything.
• valuearb 9y ago
  The market speaks every year. And it continues to say no to heavy duty battery life phones. If someone ever designs one that comes with substantive user benefits that thin phones can't provide, fat phones can become a standard again. But again, thin phones can provide as much battery life as you want, just add a battery case. It's like demanding Porsche include permanent, unremovable trailers on every 911, because some minority of users wants to occasionally tow stuff with their sportscar.
  • izacus 9y ago
    How can a market "speak" when there's no way of buying anything but the same practially 99% copied black slab for each company? The basis of market competition (and the ability for market to "speak") is the concept of choice. In mobile phone market there is little choice and the device themselves are more than a single feature.
    • Balbazac 9y ago
      May I suggest a thought experiment? Imagine you cannot use a smartphone for a period of 12 months; certainly, you would expend a not insignificant effort in finding a very capable flip-phone, or other mobile option, combined with perhaps two or three other devices (GPS, MP3 player) which would adequately replicate these smartphone features. Now apply that mental effort to seeking a suitably differentiated mobile phone and I am sure you will find success.
    • valuearb 9y ago
      Here is a list of 20 hour battery life phones. You may note they aren't best sellers. https://www.cnet.com/news/smartphones-best-long-battery-life/ https://www.cnet.com/news/smartphones-best-long-battery-life... While there is lots of similarities, every phone is differentiated in some way. You want bigger differences but right now bigger differences aren't perceived as a plus by most users.
• mrexroad 9y ago
  exactly. in 2003 people wanted "phones." in 2017 people want computers in their pockets, without thinking of them as "computers" my question: how long until we abandon the mental modal and service contract model of these being "phones?" [edit: formatting]
  • lprubin 9y ago
    I tried to buy a google pixel from the verizon store to do some VR programming and they wouldn't sell it to me without a contract. I'm standing there trying to hand them $800 for a product they have on the shelves and they refused. It was a very strange moment.
    • Eridrus 9y ago
      They make less money on the phone sale than a contract sale, and the pixels have been supply constrained, so I don't know why you're so surprised.