Piezoelectrics enable displays to provide both audio and touch feedback
spectrum.ieee.org
spectrum.ieee.org
I appreciate the fact that this technology could make mobile devices more durable because it has less moving parts, but I don't feel going any thinner than what's currently available is desirable from an ergonomics perspective. I just don't feel as comfortable holding a phone that's 7mm thick, or less.
And I certainly don't think it's worth the risk of it folding in my pocket.
I think phones are obviously too thin already as evidenced by the thick covers covering nearly every one of them.
So having phone+cover being the ideal size is realistically what will be best for most people.
That may leave the bare phone a bit on the thin side, but that’s a necessary trade-off.
You can also combine phone and wallet and still have it be a nice and reasonable thickness.
May be but I think they will utilize the space for more sensors and optical camera equipment.
Compared to early 2010s the current average smartphone battery capacity is 3-4x higher.
Do we know how much of that is due to increase in average battery volume vs increase in energy density?
I think this can also be corroborated by the fact that there are less and less small smartphones options. And while there are some, they're plagued by poor battery performance. See latest iPhone SE.
There's indeed, by this logic, reason to believe less space taken by other components lead to better battery life by the sheer volume available as a result.
I'm impressed and annoyed. That said, I have very much enjoyed not having a cover. It feels so much better in the pocket and in the hand
I've broken two phones in my life; both of them had on robust cases. The first time, I knocked my phone off of my desk at work. It fell three feet to the carpet and shattered the screen. The second time, I missed my pocket and dropped the phone 2-3 feet. Completely shattered the back glass and sent a hairline crack through the screen.
I've dropped my phones so many other times, in much worse ways (sometimes with no case), yet in these two instances they break. I'm almost at the point of not using cases, but I know my anecdotal experiences don't reflect reality.
External cases provide protection from scratches and scrapes in low energy falls. That is most of what I’ve experience so I put on a thin case for that. An external case can provide some cushion to dissipate some of the impact energy to reduce the change of deformation. That is where thicker is usually better. For me, that scenario is less likely so I don’t bother with thick cases.
When I did my last upgrade the box was damaged and the phone bent at about a 20 degree angle. Made me a bit nervous about how sturdy they actually are.
I have dropped and broken so many fn iphones - once, I had just picked up a new phone and went to dinner where the restaraunt had concrete floors... I had that phone for ~6 hours.
I dropped it and broke it because I hate cases, and the iphone is so damned slippery.
I berated Jony Ive (I sent him an email) and told him that the lack of a lanyard bracket was BS. (This was also when I was flying a lot to asia, and so many phones had lanyard brackets...
I think Ive gone through ~25 phones? I have a stack of several right here: https://i.imgur.com/QvODonY.jpeg - plus the one I took the pic with...
I think I have several more strewn about my tech graveyard...
What sucks is that I have called phone repair places what to do with them all, and they say they are all worthless.
"Throw them out"
I just feel bad for all those kids in China who died at the assembly line to make these worthless products requiring suicide nets. (Thats not a joke, that is really fn sad that people at Flextronics (who use to build a bunch of stuff for Lockheed as well) just killed themselves.)
(Oh and I had a MBP that was under recall for battery fires, CATCH fire in my bed when I was asleep...
It was also an AirBNB and I woke upto my MBP on fire.
Apple held it for two months, then even though the machine was under recall for fire, refused to replace it telling me I had the option to buy a new machine at full price.
They claimed that a moisture sensor went off so warranty (and recall) void.
it took them TWO months to make that statement and try to get me to buy a new machine.
Almost every iPhone since then has gotten thicker with a larger battery.
You can always use a BT repeater for headphones too, I went that route at first along with dongles and gave up. I miss it but I moved on, reluctantly.
I don't believe that, either the space is used for something else, or the phone is in some way made smaller.
Fo if you consider a phone with say an 8 hour battery life, I would imagine the extra space of a jack gives maybe 10? 20? minutes of battery life? while adding an extra layer of complexity viz. Bluetooth (wireless interference, potential pairing and charging issues etc).
To extend the analogy, would you be okay if laptop manufacturers removed LAN ports as wifi "works just as well"? (Wifi is likely probably much closer to ethernet, unlike BT/3.5mm.)
BTW, some devices like iPads that don't have cellular slots... have a plastic shim/object in that place. So sometimes it isn't empty space, it's worse - it's (marginally) extra weight.
Additionally they threw in 2 extra side buttons that can be used for the camera but also mapped to other functions—like for me that is the push-to-talk button for Mumble.
Granted, this is a weird edgecase.
I’m talking about adapting to new phones, you’re talking about why headphone jacks are good.
Your argument is "new thing is good".
His argument is "new thing existed before old thing was removed, so removing old thing didn't make new thing better".
I used a wireless headphones when some of HN visitors didn't even exists, I have a plenty of experience with them. No, I'm not happy with wireless headphones, partially because my old-style wired headphones works always. Not just 'always, though sometimes I need to re-pair them, or find the charging case for a super-mega-fast-charge for 10 minutes, or find the left one despite I swear I placed them both in the case' but always.
Or how with wired headphones one needs to remove to be able to step away from the computer, while with a wireless one I can keep listening anywhere around my home.
I had used a pair of wireless earbuds for a year & I can’t tell you the number of calls I had to cancel early due to listening to music earlier & now not having enough charge. I’ve also had botched firmware upgrades & an app with trackers needed to installed just to get those updates, something analog didn’t deal with. The technology is far from the total-upgrade you are pitching--especially when all your digital apparatuses have a jack, the analog convenience of pulling the plug from one to the next without the fiddling of Bluetooth menus.
First world problems. Also they still can work, so in a pinch you can just insert them tangled.
> all my headphones failed due to a "contact" issue the jack developed
If all your headphones are susceptible for this then it looks like the problem is not in the headphones.
> Or the number of times my headphones got yanked because I was walking with them on and the cables got entangled in something.
Yep, they are wired.
> one needs to remove to be able to step away from the computer
Yes, they are wired. Are you annoyed what you need to stand up to step away from computer?
Wired headphones has some disadvantages compared to wireless ones, but the problem lies again in what Apple said 'fuck you consumers you will eat it and ask for more', consumers ate it and asked for more and idiots followed the suit, too.
You know, BT (if we are talking only about phones) headphones are an old thing, 20 years if we count only BT EDR. All^W Most of those years anyone could choose the tech they like more. But now Apple fanbois and you tell me what I need to ditch my wire headphones, because wireless are working better for you. No, it doesn't work better for me. More so, I tried it multiple times and I can surely tell what it's not not just as an opinion, but backed by my actual experience.
And I love what I can forget my headphones for a month and they would still work even if I forgot to charge them the last time I used them, lol.
NB: the last year I smashed my phone up to the broken screen, first time in my life (Ericsson A1018 doesn't count, it was only a battery cover clip). I smashed it not because it was laying on the table while I stepped away with my headphones already inserted both in the phone and my ears, but because I was quite drunk (or more like drunk AF) and didn't noticed that. Is this a table problem or my phone problem (hey, only 1+ meter high!) or it's my problem? While it wouldn't happen with a wireless ones, the common sense says it's not the headphones' fault.
In a thread about modern cellphone technology is _hilarious_.
Thank you.
Second actually. But not sure how cold war allegiances have anything to do with the topic in question.
> Yes, they are wired.
That is the point. If we treat the downsides of one technology as given and baseline then of course the other technology will look deficient compared to it. But if we look at the pros and cons of both technologies we might see why people prefer one to the other.
> Apple said 'fuck you consumers you will eat it and ask for more', consumers ate it and asked for more and idiots followed the suit, too.
Not really classy calling people idiots. Especially when you are just chatting with someone who is taking the point of view you are calling idiotic.
> you tell me what I need to ditch my wire headphones,
Done no such a thing. You do whatever you want to and I'm wishing you the best with it. I'm merely explaining why I prefer my wireless headphones. You know, just comparing notes on existence among fellow travellers.
> I love what I can forget my headphones for a month and they would still work even if I forgot to charge them the last time I used them, lol.
I will give you that. That is a bummer. I walked today to the shop an wanted to listen to my DnD podcast and my headphone announced that it is running low on battery. I was worried it will cut out on me and I will have to wait before I can learn how the intrepid heroes deal with the nightmare king. Luckily it kept working for the walk. But yeah that is a bummer.
i love my wf-1000xm4s, but i also love my catos, which played a large factor in why i chose the phone i did, the choice to pick one or the other depending on how i'm feeling matters to me. i dont want bluetooth audio to go away, but at the same time i dont want wired to go either. maybe one day i'll get a dedicated DAP and be able to freely pick whatever phone without suffering as much of a consequence but in the meantime thats too expensive and bulky for me to justify
Told by whom? You can still get wired earbuds for iPhone, just that they don’t use 3.5mm jack. Even Apple offers ones.
3.5mm jack don’t seem to be missed at all by the majority of consumers. If you are in the minority there can still be options. Plenty as the matter of fact. Cost you money of course.
>> first world problem (noun)
>> A frustration or complaint only experienced by privileged individuals in wealthy countries.
> But if we look at the pros and cons of both technologies we might see why people prefer one to the other.
But if you take out the 3.5mm jack out of the phone then the comparison is moot.
> Not really classy calling people idiots
Sometimes it's needed to tell the king about his new clothes.
> Especially when you are just chatting with someone who is taking the point of view you are calling idiotic.
Only if you take it to your heart, which you shouldn't. I don't think you are responsible for Apple decisions. Though if you are defending that decision then...
> Done no such a thing
Not you personally, of course, but it's a common thing among people. The thread started on that comment.
> I will give you that. That is a bummer.
Yes, pro and cons.
I've outlined the pros of a wired headphones what works for me. It doesn't mean what everyone should throw out their wireless ones, but that also means what I would defend the presence of 3.5 jack in the smartphones, especially if the absence is dictated by a moot 'we need it thinner' logic. Especially if the company what did that boasts about it's ability to bend the technology to pack the things in a slab plastic and aluminium. Surely that company could find a way to pack a 3.5mm jack in a 7.8mm deep phone. Just like thay did it in that device, 5.4mm deep: https://support.apple.com/kb/SP656?locale=en_US
Or you could have wired that last as long as your phone battery does.
No. Wireless buds are evil. They get lost. They loose battery life over time, usually asymmetrically. And then there is the horror of "pairing" Bluetooth devices without a proper interface, holding buttons down and such. I love my Sony over-ear noise cancelling headphones, but when away from my desk I opt for wired devices every time.
I thought I would miss it, but I genuinely just don't give a shit about the lack of audio jack.
There is only one situation where wired is needed: Charging and Listening at the same time.
Otherwise, people can still use wired headphones all they want, especially now with USB C headphones. Even charging and listening at the same time can just be done with a splitter.
The premise is just a talking point because people want to use AUX. Well I still want to use VGA, doesn't mean they should be putting them on video cards.
* Invested in quality audio equipment that they'd like like to continue using without a crappy dongle
* Bluetooth dongles don't have the same level of integration that EarPods do, for instance (e.g., button presses don't work the same way)
* Lightning or USB-C headphone adapters are easy to lose track of
* Lightning or USB-C headphone adapters are awkward sticking out of your phone and risk breaking the port
* Dislike like the environmental impact of moving to a model of disposable equipment with non-replaceable batteries
* Tired of the inconvenience of dropping wireless ear phones and not being able to find them (e.g., this happens frequently on flights¹)
* Weary of dealing with Bluetooth issues (e.g., my AirPod Pros randomly disconnect from my iPhone with regularity and I have to click multiple things to switch from my phone to my work laptop)
It's fine if these don't apply to you, but they're a little more substantive than the Luddite hand-wringing you suggest.. And for them the trade-off to get a slightly slimmer phone wasn't worth it. That's not to say there aren't advantages to wireless headphones, but supporting one doesn't mean having to preclude the other.
¹ -- https://www.reddit.com/r/mildlyinteresting/comments/16uuyse/...
due to the nature of wireless communications, real time audio is effectively impossible and as such there is almost always some amount of noticeable latency when performing tasks that rely on real time audio (eg music production). a little of latency is okay sometimes but the amount that wireless devices introduce is typically on the offer of maybe 100-200ms and when you're trying to play a section or some such it makes it damn near impossible to hit a note on the mark you're aiming for.
On long calls, I will have delayed audio or glitches, sometimes from facetime, or the network but because of your comment I tried to use the speaker and it was better. I'll try disconnecting them occasionally thanks to your comment. Thanks!
They likely can get better audio with a dongle.
All audio sources on a phone are digital. When you use headphones with a built-in jack the analog outcomes comes via a DAC and amplifier built into the phone.
When you use a Lightning or USB-C dongle the DAC and amplifier are in the dongle.
If the former case you are forever limited to the quality of the DAC and amplifier built into the phone. In the latter case there are higher end options available.
Forgetting doesn't help with adaptors which aren't really standardized, especially the passive ones. And the active ones are expensive..
My work phone still has a jack plug. I don't use it much but the times I do use it I'm really in need of it because I don't have anything else to use.
i personally wouldn't mind shoving even more battery in the area where the speaker is or adding more heat sink especially on the higher end ones
It’s not necessarily just about protection, it’s also about personalisation of the exterior beyond what the manufacturer provides.
This is how I used to carry my flip-phones, which were around that thickness which closed.
Recently someone handed me an old Samsung Galaxy S7 to use for testing. It was a revelation: I wanted and dearly missed having a phone that thin. I really hope someone pushes for thinness again. I miss the iPhone 6 (Edit: a big part of this might be down to the weight, the squared off edges, and the enormous camera bump)
Same thing with laptops. I updated from a MacBook Air M1 to a MacBook Pro 14". The 14" is fast enough to justify its bulk — but barely. Every time I pick up the Air it feels effortlessly portable, when I grab the MacBook Pro it just does not feel thin and light enough
And yes the Galaxy S21-24 are impressively light too.
And they are already foldable, so in your pocket they may count as 2x its unfolded thickness.
https://www.tmonews.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/htc10side...
I think thinnest smartphones era was around 2014-2016 when thin was touted as a feature. But then thin feature phones were hype in 2004, so maybe there is a 10 years cycle of going back to thin.
Thin metal, as Elon Musk is about to discover with the Cybertruck, is basically a dull knife.
"The sound is supposed to be coming from the image that our eyes see on the screen, but our ears know it’s coming from somewhere else." => Not something bothers most of us (also untrue) in current (and even historic) screen and stereo systems - with the support of surround and other spatial technology started in movies. We have a Sony TV where the screen is the speaker and the spatial immersion gain is unnoticable compared to good stereo speakers, while the sound quality is noticeably lower. In a mobile with narrow angle of view... even less significant.
"[current technology] are still big enough to limit how thin our mobile devices can get" => then we put thick camera in it that ruins thinness. Which is fragile enough already and requires followup 'inventions' sometimes (think about the iPhone 6 mishap, becoming the first foldable screen phone : ) ).
Having the vibration of sound crossed with tactile feedback? Sounds confusing like the idea of a transparent TV.
I know, I know, it is not about real needs but about pretentious additions to charge more money than necessary fooling customers with pompus needlessness that shouldn't be taken seriously, yet, I am still a bit grumpy when they try, repeatedly.
There are a lot of challenges with piezos in terms of cost, limited motion, and voltage (usually higher than 100V) that are difficult to make up for with thickness. Their performance (linearity) also seems to suffer quite a bit for any significant driving range. Generally, the bending moment (direct displacement is usually limited to a few % which is micrometers) is most useful for larger and thinner surfaces since deflection is nominally length^3/thick^3 or worse with strain.
The haptics are just as challenging (and you often don't want to hear them!) for similar reasons and usually can't be localized. Touch position sensing is possible but tends to be very sensitive to mounting, wear, and dirt. There are really cool technologies developed, but there's a reason you don't see many in mass production even after 20 years. You have to have a VERY reliable and useful feature to get integrated into UI and the OS.
What are the defining factors that would make such a microphone solution sub-optimal?
I would heartily disagree. Every piezo pickup (undersaddle and body contact) I've ever used suffers from an inaccurate reproduction of the transients and over-emphasis of the midrange relative to the acoustic timbre of the instrument in question. Years ago the go-to solution to this was aggressive compression and parametric EQ - nowadays it's impulse responses. A microphone will always be more accurate relative to what's happening in the room. The problem is that microphones are less convenient than piezoelectric solutions because they suffer from bleed and can introduce feedback on loud stages.
Piezoelectric pickups are certainly more broadband than magnetic pickups as far as frequency response which makes them more ideal for post-processing but it's patently untrue that they're more accurate than a conventional microphone.
My point of reference was a magnetic pickup, not a mic.
I'm actually interested in why piezo mics would be a bad solution for a phone.
Without some sort of preamp-ADC combination wired to the speaker, there's no way for software on the phone to use it as a microphone.
You need a large area (~10cm diameter) moving a reasonable distance (~100s um) to make a speaker work at acceptable volumes in the kHz frequency range.
Does nobody else instinctively turn the volume down to the lowest comfortable level for themselves to hear the other person when they answer a call?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyTAcVjJsd0
I wondered what would happen if you were touching the screen, but it doesn't seem to interfere with the audio too much.
Whether that’s terrible annoying or completely fine is hard to say. Some things you get used to..
How does it work when you’re touching the screen? Obviously that will distort the sound by some amount…
Putting a light finger on a nylon string (or a classic speaker membrane) makes a huge difference, a thick steel contrabass string doesn't really change its frequency until you quite forcefully push it into the fingerboard.
I expect you'd have to push hard into the vibrating gorilla glass of a smartphone screen to influence the sound audibly.
As opposed to the perceptual dissonance of seeing a person inside a small rectangle we can hold in our hands? Or the strangeness of hearing an entire orchestra while sitting on a bus? The fact that sound emanates from a slightly unnatural place or direction isn't a problem worth addressing, despite the fact that fixing it might make phones 1mm thinner.
How about this: Give me a phone with a proper usb port, a couple sim cards, an SD slot, a replaceable battery and a headphone jack. I couldn't possibly care any less about making it any thinner. It's going into a protective case anyway.
I don’t think it makes to frame this as “opposed” to any of the other factors you’re mentioning. This is setting up a false dichotomy.
Having experienced “Spatial Audio”, there is a clear benefit to a sound system that more closely mimics the expectations of our brain’s auditory processing. More than just the sound itself, there’s a certain kind of “presence” or “thereness” that you can experience as a viewer that isn’t possible with traditional speakers, and it can transform certain kinds of content. The person (or whatever you’re watching) is indeed still shown on a piece of glass, but the experience of that can be improved significantly. If a speaker-in-the-screen can achieve something similar, that’s compelling.
I don’t see the relevance of the bus scenario, where externally broadcast audio is never the right choice.
The phone you describe sounds terrible to me (I’d like the headphone jack back but the battery is a tradeoff) but that’s because you and I have different preferences and priorities. And there’s nothing preventing all of the above from being integrated into a device should there be a market for it. And phones aren’t the only devices that can benefit.
without the proper usb port ("only" type C), LG had a number of phones ticking all those boxes (while being good phones, good cameras, good screens, the whole thing). They sold so poorly LG left the market.
https://www.techradar.com/news/why-lg-is-leaving-the-mobile-...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/siladityaray/2021/04/05/after-y...
These two articles indicate only that LG was struggling in the market and decided to focus elsewhere.
I don't know what the poster meant, but drawing a conclusion that there is some correlation due to statement choice is normal.
No, clearly saying that LG tried all the OP was asking, but there wasn't enough of a market for it, so OP is obviously in the non-sufficiently profitable minority.
There might still be market for users looking for modular phones. Fairphone comes to mind in this aspect.
LG failing to provide a product for this specific market niche isn't enough of evidence to support the claim that the market itself doesn't exist, only that LG couldn't or had no interest in maintaining it.
Having the screen be responsible for (or assisting) haptics will also mean “spatial haptics” can be a thing, with extreme precision. Also, no more “finger obscuring speaker opening” while holding your phone.
I’m all in on thinner phones with less parts.
Check out Michel Chion and the idea of the "audio-visual contract" [0]
I forget, but it has a more formal definition like source fusing in experimental perceptual psychology.
What happens is there is a brief dissonance, but it only lasts for a few milliseconds and then our brains _very_ quickly adjust to align what we see and hear, and crucially what we attribute as the source of sounds. This is a actually not a learned but a low-level adaptation because sound travels slowly compared to light and it reflects (echos) so our brains must be able to re-synchronise effortlessly.
https://simpsons.fandom.com/wiki/The_Homer
Do you also want a phone with a hardware keyboard and a dedicated push to talk button?
I would love having a hardware keyboard again personally, especially when I need fire up a SSH session to fix something. The inaccuracies of touch keyboards are a real pain sometimes.
Let's fight repetitive stress first, the one related to the holding of smartphones for hours. Then we can tackle trigger-thumb related issues later (I hope) once, ie, it tracks eye movements reliably and efficiently. Our generation is bound for a lot of health issues related to hand-held devices.
Nobody is getting their physical activity via their smartphone usage.
Almost nobody wants this phone. Sure you'll get cheered on by some small group of people that wouldn't actually buy this phone either, but it just wouldn't sell well enough to justify its existence. There's probably already a phone with most of these features.
USB port = Mandated in the EU by end of 2024. Replaceable battery = Mandated in EU by 2027. Dual sim cards = common in the global south. Headphone jack = wanted by everyone not a youtube influencer.
Compromise: I'll accept TWO USB-C ports in exchange for the headphone jack. Usb to 3.5mm adapter wires cost maybe 6$ on amazon.
I'm not kidding when I say I recently saw someone on a plane using a wireless charging station. They had wrapped tape around the phone to hold it on the charger. Progress!
I've been using the same $9 Apple one for 3+ years at this point. There have been times when I've pulled it out of my bag and saved the day. Young people are amazed that it just works (microphone and all), Mac or Windows, computer or tablet. Ain't progress wonderful?
> It's going into a protective case anyway.
With that in mind, it seems it's not really customers that want ever thinner, ever more sealed and port-free phones. The very first purchase they make after buying a new phone already defeats the purported benefits of those design choices.
I maintain this market is supplier-driven, and customer preferences have near-zero bearing on how phones look like today.
While protective cases make the phones marginally thicker they don't make them less water proof. Which is in my opinion the purpose of making phones sealed and as port-free as possible.
And even with the protective case my current phone is much thinner than any phone I had with a user replaceable battery.
BTW, Samsung Galaxy S5 had all those features, even replaceable battery and was still waterproof.
I definitely do, to some extent. More sealed is good, I don't want water and dust inside my phone. The thinner the phone the thicker and more protective the case you can apply before it gets too thick. Or you could stick a battery in the case, or a USB hub, SD reader, etc. What stops this case from existing right now?
Like forever, some of the smartest people around admitted that they did not know. They created the entire field of market research. Today I think that is dead. In the past decade we moved to an entirely different model of force-fed consumerism, which is driven, as you say, entirely by the supply side. Oddly the near communist era uniformity we see goes against our stated beliefs in data-driven, targeted markets.
A whole other layer is how we increasingly project our own desires onto others and assume they must be crazy not to want the exact same thing as ourselves. Where does that come from? Here on HN I get tired of hearing these very strident, cock-sure remarks about "what people want is...". Let's just admit we don't have much idea about what other people want. There's nowt as queer as folk. And some of the most interesting markets may in fact be marginal. Smaller markets do not mean unprofitable ones.
Evidence?
> Sure you'll get cheered on by some small group of people that wouldn't actually buy this phone either
So all the people who say they want a phone like that are lying?
This suggests that however genuine the desire is, it’s just not widely shared enough to actually constitute a viable market – somewhere below the level of, say, manual transmissions on cars.
I do have a phone that is about two years old that has a headphone jack.
Replaceable batteries and lack of SD card slots is essential deliberately shortening the life of phones to get people to upgrade sooner.
The main use of user replaceable batteries for me was always when my phone only lasted a few hours so I had to swap another one. My Samsung Blackjack with 3G would die in like an hour if I was actively using the 3g connection lol. G1 and HTC Evo also didn't last a whole shift at work.
> Replaceable batteries and lack of SD card slots is essential deliberately shortening the life of phones to get people to upgrade sooner.
Phone batteries are replaceable, but most people do not want to do it themselves so they go to the mall and pay someone else $50 - it’s still much cheaper than a new phone. The flip side, of course, is that sealed phones are far more durable so instead of the over-simplified narrative about planned obsolescence we have a more nuanced trade off where something adds desirable traits (smaller, cheaper, waterproof, more durable) at the expense of a feature few buyers used. I wouldn’t fault you for being on the other side of that decision but I just don’t think there are that many people who look for that when phone shopping. An iPhone easily lasts 5 years and is probably getting replaced for something like a broken screen, not a battery.
SD cards are similar: yes, the extra storage is nice if you don’t use cloud storage but most people do, and those people avoid the data loss which many SD card users have been hit by and have smaller, more durable phones in exchange. Again, I think both preferences are reasonable but one of them is a niche.
They are not lying. Just there aren't enough of them to make such a phone worth producing.
There's phones with dual usb ports already, do they own one? If not, then it's not as important a feature as they are implying. And that goes for pretty much everything on the list.
> Evidence?
Asus ROG phone sales numbers? The fact that people keep complaining phones don't have whatever feature instead of just buying one?
I will say however, that I expect the biggest confounder is the expense to tool and maintain a niche phone makes it less feasible given the limited demand. It nonetheless does exist, and I hope that such costs can be reduced so the market can diversify its offerings and I can have another XZ1c experience.
It doesn't help when a very large number of phone users only care about one thing: it being an Apple phone. They will lap up anything Apple gives them every single time. It doesn't matter what the features are.
And yet every post about phones there's people acting like no phones that meet their requirements exist. They definitely exist. I think what they really intend to say is "Why doesn't Samsung put these exact features I want on the Galaxy S Whatever"
Or, Apple actually makes well made good phones which people find desirable?
I understand it is popular to talk trash about them, but maybe their popularity is not all just a product of misguided masses?
What is more likely: that millions of people spend money on something they use constantly without caring whether it’s actually good, or that your emotional attachment to Android has caused you not to reconsider whether your tastes are in fact universally shared?
Any time you see billions of dollars changing hands for years in a competitive market but don’t understand why, the answer is always to learn more about it.
While creating the effect with ceramic material requires relatively high voltages—in the range of 40 volts or more—it requires very little current
and, hence, little power—far less than the power used by mobile device speakers today."
I'm not too concerned about the high(er) voltage (than say 5V or 12V) requirement -- but the fact that this, well, let's call it "momentum in an oscillatory/vibratory (AKA trapped) mode" or, perhaps more broadly, "energy" -- requires very little current (AKA "power", AKA "energy") -- should be of interest!
In other words, what devices could be conceived of, for this effect, in the future?
Also, is there a potential connection here (if so, I don't see it yet! <g>) with warping space (AKA a future "warp field", if one could ever be created in the future) -- and "warping" (if ever so slightly -- on the microscopic scale) the dimensions of a piece of piezoelectric glass -- with a voltage?
Well, probably not!
(But then again... maybe! <g>)
Anyway, a very interesting article!
Didn't deep read the article however found no hard info as to if some kind of breakthrough has been made.
I don't really see the benefit because speakers are tiny as it is. And pressing on the screen will significantly alter its resonance.
However in the specs for the TV I saw it mentioned that Sony uses the entire display as a speaker. I was skeptical for sure, but man when I turned it on the first time I was actually blown away by how good it sounded. To the point where I have had people ask "Where do you have the speaker?" when looking at my presently speakerless setup.
It's not perfect, it has it's rough moments, but overall it's really damn good for what it is.
Haven’t thin/piezoelectric speakers been around for some time now without much success? What’s different now that makes them better
Then put the speakers on the front. Of course rear or side-firing speakers are going to sound like crap. This is a totally self-inflicted problem and could be solved by just having front-firing speakers like some phones still do. The ghost centre channel should be fine for smartphones. It's not like you have several people watching a single phone complaining that the ghost centre channel is 2 inches too far to the left/right...
That makes the bezel bigger, which (for a given screen size) makes the phone bigger and harder to fit in your pocket.
If this technology can move the speakers to the front without making the phone larger, that seems like a real benefit. Especially since phone size is such a common complaint.
You may even add haptic texture on the screen. close your eyes and scan the screen with your finger. It would feel like a series of mechanical switches and knobs. It would be useful for people who don't like using only the screen in their car because of lack of haptic feedback.