4 ms·
Cameras are doubtlessly vital to some users, but almost entirely superfluous to others. I can count the number of times per year I use the camera on my phone w
by LarryMullins 4y ago
Cameras are doubtlessly vital to some users, but almost entirely superfluous to others. I can count the number of times per year I use the camera on my phone with just my fingers.
- fnordpiglet 4y agoI think for in the range of 98% of smartphone users the phone is the least useful feature. In truth they’re often really crap phones and my old flip phone had better all around phone quality and utility. But at this point I feel annoyed when I have to speak to a person. If I were meant to speak to people I wouldn’t have been born an engineer.
- Marsymars 4y ago> I think for in the range of 98% of smartphone users the phone is the least useful feature. Part of the reason this number's so high is that if a phone feature is really important to you, you're liable to get a standalone VoIP line and a headset to go with whatever handset you have rather than using a smartphone.
- fnordpiglet 4y agoYeah certainly the fact they’re universally bad phones makes them less useful as a phone, and phone phones are better at being phones. But I would also hold that phones generally suck, but that’s opinion.
- Marsymars 4y ago> But I would also hold that phones generally suck, but that’s opinion. Technically compared to e.g. internet-native voice communication, or you just think that remote voice communication is bad?
- fnordpiglet 4y agoVoice is for jocks.
- coldtea 4y agoIf those "others" are a small minority, then the parent's point still stands.
- LarryMullins 4y agoI don't think we're that small of a minority. Quite a few people don't actively use any social media, and taking memento photos is an unusual activity for many people, done mostly when going on rare vacations if at all. That leaves purely utilitarian photo taking, like uploading checks or taking a picture to help you remember where you parked your car.
- coldtea 4y agoThose people perhaps don't buy fancy smartphones though, but more like "purely utilitarian" ones? Whereas this subthread is about the possibility of the Apple Watch replacing the smartphone for iPhone users...
- LarryMullins 4y agoNo, a lot of people like I describe buy iphones simply because they're fashionable. If fashions change, they could be well served by a smart watch instead.
- yial 4y agoI agree with you. I guess the question is the overlap / and or market. I don’t know about anything at the scale of Apple. But my simplified imagination of any product is: focus on core customer/demo, once you’ve captured a significant portion, expand. But I also wonder if at apples level, if the customer is “everyone” which I always think of as folly for most business. Example (which may partially disprove this): I know some people in developing countries, who consider an iPad an essential device. (They have a cheap android phone) and for them, it’s much more valuable than a computer. (Though, the people I am thinking of are “high” earners in their country, making 20-40k a year. Even if an iPad is almost double the cost.)