3 ms·
1. This is like critiscizing a green energy company for not burning oil. Wireless charging is antithetical to any sustainable device mission. In terms of "last
by Reubachi 3y ago
1. This is like critiscizing a green energy company for not burning oil.
Wireless charging is antithetical to any sustainable device mission. In terms of "last mile delivery", wireless charging for small personal devices is about the least efficient, highest energy waste delivery method there is. I'm talking orders of magnitude more waste versus production than coal, oil, propane, wale blubber, wood. That isn't even to say the effect on your battery or surrounding plastics/membranes.
2. Do you purchase a cell phone in 2023 with "Camera quality" in mind? Not trying to be rude, I'm actively sampling this query. I can't understand this and haven't since modern smart phones proliferated. No matter the phone, set it to raw, take photo ,edit in post. Comes out leagues better than any ios, pixel etc photo. and I don't know who is taking so many photos and comparing them to care.
3. The accessory case is a criticism is a bit more valid but come on.
THis phone is losing money on every sale. If they sell one of these cases for every phone, they MAY come out ahead because as you said, the cases are cheap junk. Don't buy the case if this is a problem. This last years, apple switched from leather cases to "vegan leather". Same cost, made in china. More than the cost of this fair phone case.
I feel like if you own a framework, you should understand that the criticisms you listed are.....not criticisms and are in fact features or obvious requirements for a loss-leading edge case device. There is no 100 percent, perfect, sustainable mobile device like there is for workstations, because the walled garden of mobile devices is unfortunatley just more rigidly architectured.
- digging 3y ago> 2. Do you purchase a cell phone in 2023 with "Camera quality" in mind? Not trying to be rude, I'm actively sampling this query. I can't understand this and haven't since modern smart phones proliferated. No matter the phone, set it to raw, take photo ,edit in post. Comes out leagues better than any ios, pixel etc photo. and I don't know who is taking so many photos and comparing them to care. The whole idea of smartphone cameras is that nobody is editing RAWs. I have issues with the GP comment but wanting a high quality camera is not one of them. Taking decent-to-great smartphone photos, whether inane or artistic, is a staple of modern life. (Although it sounds more like a status thing in their case, like they don't want someone else in their social group to be the go-to photographer? Maybe it was just not worded clearly.)w
- sowbug 3y agoGoodness no, not status, you must not know me. :) People preferring this phone's photos is just evidence that it actually takes better snapshots, rather than me being biased about my own tech choices. Wrangling a bunch of parents and children for a photo is hard enough. I like knowing that the camera won't be yet another reason why we need to wrangle everyone twice rather than just once. (Fully agreed on the RAW thing. Photography for me isn't a hobby; it's just a way for the family to remember what everyone looked like last Thanksgiving, preferably not with someone's face silhouetted by poor lighting.)