4 ms·

> Smartphones should be a dead and withered technology… We need to move on and forward, yet we're being leased old tech… I'll bite. What technology should we b

> Smartphones should be a dead and withered technology… We need to move on and forward, yet we're being leased old tech… I'll bite. What technology should we be using that surpasses smartphones?

fsflover 3y ago
A general-purpose pocket computer with phone functionality, like Librem 5 or Pinephone.
- ulfw 3y ago
  If they were even semi-decent, people would use them. They don't as they aren't. Very simple market dynamics.
  - fsflover 3y ago
    I'm using it as a daily driver. And it's getting better every month. See also: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38002089 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38002089
  - echelon 3y ago
    > Very simple market dynamics. Distorted by an anti-competitive duopoly. Separate hardware from software / platform.
  - stale2002 3y ago
    Its not that those specific examples are good, holistically or not. Instead, the argument is that there are some good features about them. Those good features can be brought to the iPhone to make the iPhone better, even if the rest of the iPhone is better in certain ways.
pierat 3y ago
To answer that, you have to understand what cell phones came from. Prior to the major smartphone push starting with Apple, cell phones were horrific devices that charged $5 per ringtone, apps were $30 or more and only per provider, no tethering, and basically were nasty little expensive locked down bricks. Apple did change that, with the initial strong-arming AT&T. And Iphone compared to prior was amazingly open. Had no app store yet, but had a real full-featured web browser and lots of useful tools. But, this was still very locked down to what the iPhone really is - a general purpose computer. The company still has say-so on everything on these devices. I'd argue that these are rentals, instead of a purchase. Android is a different beast. Google never created Android. They *BOUGHT* android, as a back-way in to the smartphone ecosystem. And they marketed it as "free", to get all the i-clones to use it. Of course, as Google does, it starts free, but you slowly pay more (with your data) and the noose slowly tightens. Now, we have locked bootloaders and PlayProtect and other invasive "root detection" garbage. And the platform becomes less and less hospitable. Forward? Im no fortune teller, but it seems that separating the actual physical interface from the compute would be a great start. And these *general purpose* computers need to be enforced as such. Tie-ins and cloudshit need to be unbundled or FTC enforced as rentals. The platforms we currently have are locked down. The first big steps are actual device ownership.

> Smartphones should be a dead and withered technology… We need to move on and forward, yet we're being leased old tech… I'll bite. What technology should we be using that surpasses smartphones?

fsflover 3y ago

A general-purpose pocket computer with phone functionality, like Librem 5 or Pinephone.

ulfw 3y ago
If they were even semi-decent, people would use them. They don't as they aren't. Very simple market dynamics.
- fsflover 3y ago
  I'm using it as a daily driver. And it's getting better every month. See also: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38002089 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38002089
- echelon 3y ago
  > Very simple market dynamics. Distorted by an anti-competitive duopoly. Separate hardware from software / platform.
- stale2002 3y ago
  Its not that those specific examples are good, holistically or not. Instead, the argument is that there are some good features about them. Those good features can be brought to the iPhone to make the iPhone better, even if the rest of the iPhone is better in certain ways.

pierat 3y ago

To answer that, you have to understand what cell phones came from. Prior to the major smartphone push starting with Apple, cell phones were horrific devices that charged $5 per ringtone, apps were $30 or more and only per provider, no tethering, and basically were nasty little expensive locked down bricks. Apple did change that, with the initial strong-arming AT&T. And Iphone compared to prior was amazingly open. Had no app store yet, but had a real full-featured web browser and lots of useful tools. But, this was still very locked down to what the iPhone really is - a general purpose computer. The company still has say-so on everything on these devices. I'd argue that these are rentals, instead of a purchase. Android is a different beast. Google never created Android. They *BOUGHT* android, as a back-way in to the smartphone ecosystem. And they marketed it as "free", to get all the i-clones to use it. Of course, as Google does, it starts free, but you slowly pay more (with your data) and the noose slowly tightens. Now, we have locked bootloaders and PlayProtect and other invasive "root detection" garbage. And the platform becomes less and less hospitable. Forward? Im no fortune teller, but it seems that separating the actual physical interface from the compute would be a great start. And these *general purpose* computers need to be enforced as such. Tie-ins and cloudshit need to be unbundled or FTC enforced as rentals. The platforms we currently have are locked down. The first big steps are actual device ownership.