Hacker News Reader

Comment by hilbert42 | Hacker News Reader

"The way I see it, this just moves the responsibility for safety to the manufacturers instead of the network."

Perhaps so in the current circumstances, but ultimately it is the responsibly of the regulators to ensure the emergency numbers work.

As witnessed here, a number of commentators seem to have forgotten that their smartphones are first and foremost are telephones and not playtoy computers. Unfortunately, the computer aspect now seems to dominate—if this weren't a fact then these unfortunate incidents wouldn't have happened.

View on HN

> their smartphones are first and foremost are telephones and not playtoy computers

I don't think that's true. A few years back when I was comparing phones, many reviews don't even mention how good they are at making calls. Both Millennials and Gen Z are notably phone-averse. [1][2] I think a modern smartphone is a portable network computer/camera/sensor-package, with the telephone bit being something like the human appendix.

As somebody in Gen X, it looks to me like the whole notion of "phone call" is a dying concept that only existed due to the technological limitations during the period 1880-2000. Think of it sort of like faxing: it made sense at the time.

[1] https://www.bankmycell.com/blog/why-millennials-ignore-calls

[2] https://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/health-and-wellness/call-de...

"Making calls" isn't a feature phones compete on - it either works or it doesn't, and I hope a review would let me know if calling was defective on a phone. Otherwise, there's no point in including information on making calls - it's a basic feature everybody who buys a phone expects to have.

It's a bit like saying "most car reviews don't review whether the car stays still when parked in a garage or not!"

That's just not the case. Phone audio quality varies significantly between smartphone models due to variations in speaker, mic, and noise reduction. And that's before we get to fancier things like Wi-Fi Calling and HD Voice. The whole reason I was looking for that in reviews is that people had a hard time hearing me when I called from my previous cellphone, and I also noticed that some people I was talking to had much clearer voice calls than others.

If you had difficulty being heard on a phone, then your phone has failed at being a phone.

Also, splitting hairs over phone audio quality is beside the point. The point of a phone is to be a phone, smart or not. I would be livid if my fridge could play games but not provide cooling. A smart fridge doesn’t negate the primary function.

If audio quality is beside the point, then it sounds like you agree with me that the primary point of a smartphone is no longer that of being a phone.

I also think your "smart fridge" analogy is hilariously off target. Survey data indicates that the actual phone calls are a relatively small fraction of smartphone use: https://www.reviews.org/mobile/cell-phone-addiction/

I agree that the primary purpose of a cellphone was once making calls. I'm just saying that day is long past. That transition started as texting became popular, but smartphones drastically accelerated it.

pro-tip - use a headset (ideally corded) and call people using facetime audio on ios as most professionals, at least in the US, have an iphone

> I think a modern smartphone is a portable network computer/camera/sensor-package, with the telephone bit being something like the human appendix.

A modern smartphone is a convergence of two devices: a PDA and a cell phone (this is more obvious with older devices like the Palm Treo 650). Once the telephone bit is no longer relevant (probably replaced by a data-only cellular modem), it will go back to being just a PDA.

> (probably replaced by a data-only cellular modem)

Isn't this kind of already the case? I thought past 4G there were no separate channels for call audio, it was effectively just VoIP

pretty sure that call audio gets much better prioritization for low latency (though at relatively low bandwidth) than higher bandwidth non-voice data?

The QCI (QoS Class Identifier) for carrier provided voice and video (Android only) calls is generally much higher than normal data, and carriers monitor call handoff reliability between towers, Mean Opinion Scores (MOS, a rating of the audio experience of each call), and device specific performance.

Yes this. I've always disliked phone calls, especially with strangers. All service stuff should be accessible via SMS or email unless it's urgent. Then I can send and forget and they can reply when they're ready. No fumbling to get to the calendar that's on the same device you're trying up speak into.

> a number of commentators seem to have forgotten that their smartphones are first and foremost are telephones and not playtoy computers.

Speaking for myself at least, I can tell you that it's not so much that I forgot as that I don't care and also you're wrong. Yes, it's good - perhaps even important - that the computer I carry in my pocket every day can also theoretically make phone calls, but it is most certainly first and foremost a computer.

Nope. It's called a smartphone, that should be your first clue that it's actually a phone. Also, not a very good computer.

It's "smart" before "phone".

A lot of people never use the phone part of their smartphones, and just block/silence the phone part anymore.

Well, until there is an emergency anyway. But folks not knowing how to deal with emergencies is not that uncommon anyway, unfortunately.

This is such an uncontroversial take, I’m really surprised to see it get so downvoted on HN. I upgraded my phone the day after it froze when I tried to make a call. I never want to be in a situation where I can’t make an emergency call. That’s sortof the whole point of a “TELEPHONE”??

Because for many (probably the vast majority) it's not true. Their smartphone is first and foremost a portable computer. The ability to make calls is secondary.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com