Hacker News Reader

Comment by whizzkid | Hacker News Reader

I disagree with you.

Just because a kid wants more chocolate does not mean you should give it to him. It may make him happy at first but is not good for him in long run.

What are people/me saying here is that, we should/can achieve the same functionality with smaller phones. We should.

In hundred years, people will laugh at these phones!

Too big considering what it does and provides to people.

View on HN

Your comment is pretentious and assumptive.

Consumers want bigger phones and manufacturers are providing them, it's as simple as that.

I'd say deriving moral superiority from phone form factor is sillier than a 6 inch screen.

I still can not see, much can be achieved with bigger screens. Google glass approach at least sounds better than this, by separating power to smaller devices will let people interact with real world better than trying to hold this phone with 2 hands.

Bigger screen allows me to sketch more easily on my iPhone 6 plus, and use iA Writer in a more satisfying way. Just two examples of what a bigger screen achieves (for me). A smartwatch coupled with this will perhaps fill the one-handed (and voice activated) use case rather well.

Plus, I can remote more comfortably to my office machine, and probably don't need my laptop to see and "feel" big family photos :).

Your comment is aggressive and uninformed.

I have an iPhone 6. So does everyone in my office. All but one of us pine for our 5/5s - they were, in our opinions, far superior in usability for a one-handed device.

The thing is, we could just go back to them, but then the 6s will come out, or the 7, and eventually, you have to either move to a new platform (Android maybe, but the options in high-end devices in smaller screen dimensions are limited if available at all, and we prefer iOS the operating system, so it's impractical) or suck it up and endure the ever-forward march towards bigger screens.

Consumers don't necessarily want bigger screens as an absolute. Having multiple sizes available is great, but the baseline being so big is not necessarily "what consumers want."

When talking about "what consumers want", the opinions of the people in your office really shouldn't indicate that much. Especially not if they just started using their big phones two weeks ago, and still need to get used to different usage patterns after using small iPhones for (I presume) a long time. Nobody disputes that larger phones are used differently than smaller phones (large phones have advantages and disadvantages), but "different" does not necessarily mean "worse". Although that's what people often think.

You can just easily argue the other way - recently I've switched from N5 (5") to Z3C (4.6" hovewer with small bezels) and I couldn't be happier. In fact, I would happily go under 4" if there was a flagship so small.

Again, I didn't say larger phones are better. If you tried a larger phone for a while and didn't like it, good for you. What I'm pointing out is that you cannot honestly say "I don't like large phones" without actually using them for a while. I'm also pointing out that personal anecdotes don't have any value in discussions about what the market really wants.

You voted with your wallet for a large screen phone, as people in the past voted with their wallet for large screen phones. You could have purchased the Z3 compact or some other device targeting the small device niche market, but you voted against it. Good job!

If he wanted an iOS phone, he had little choice, which was the point of his post. The only thing he could've done is forgo buying a new phone altogether; this is what I've chosen to do, I will stick with my iPhone 4S until it dies, then purchase a 5S and do the same.

I don't understand your comment. Are you saying people who prefer thinner/lighter phones over longer-lived phones are misguided? Maybe they have different priorities than you.

I don't see how this relates to regulating a child's junk food intake. Do you think companies should decide what we can buy?

I think the point isn't that companies should decide what you can buy, that makes no sense...

I think the point is more that just because people seem to prefer a product at first glance/first use doesn't mean that that's the product they will prefer in the long run.

Something like the pepsi challenge ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pepsi_Challenge ), if people are given a sample of pepsi and a sample of coke and not told which is which, they generally prefer pepsi if they just take one sip because of the extra sweetness, but if they drink a whole can of each then coke (the less sweet beverage) is usually preferred.

> In hundred years, people will laugh at these phones!

In one hundred years, people will laugh at all phones.

This reminds me of what a very wise person (a business owner I used to work for) once told me. In an answer to the question "Isn't the customer always right?", he told me "No, not always. And when they are wrong, it is our job to convince them otherwise. If successful you will have a customer for life."

It won't be a hundred years though, it'll be one or two years and then that new increased battery life will sell another phone. So if screens increase sales now, it might make sense to focus on them with the knowledge that battery life or something else will be the next feature that drives sales.

In a hundred years, I had better have my damned brain implant. Forget the phones.

Most android handsets are sold as candy and not fruit and vegetables. More GHz, more pixels, more mAh, more inches. Why should this be any different?

I want more gee bees!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com