3 ms·
27% is still a lot, and those would be the ones who could afford phablets. I would guess that a lot of the people in the demographic we're speaking about make
by mhd 12y ago
27% is still a lot, and those would be the ones who could afford phablets.
I would guess that a lot of the people in the demographic we're speaking about make do with previous generation smartphones or the lower end ones you get with a contract, so smaller screen sizes are probably more common, as are older Android versions.
So one better uses features that the 2.3 Android browser understands.
I'm more surprised that feature phones don't play a larger role, but I guess this would be different outside of the US, in developing markets.
- josu 12y ago>those would be the ones who could afford phablets Poor people are usually not that good at managing their money. That's the reason why phone companies subsidizes the phones, not because they are nice, but because they know they can take advantage of the situation. A low earning person will rarely shell out a lump sum of $600 to buy a phone. Instead, if you offer her the option to buy it in 24 easy $30 payments she'll go for it. Some poor people are insolvent, most poor people have liquidity constraints. So my intuition is that the target of expensive phones are poor and rich people alike.