Why won't phone manufacturers give us what we want?

pmduk

itm2 wrote: »

Purchasers of fruit-based smartphone products probably don't even know that it's possible.

Sadly many of them will buy whatever's just been released, regardless of quality.

System

itm2 wrote: »

Does anyone else here see a clear trend for phone manufacturers deliberately diverging from customer wants and needs when introducing new phones/features?
Here are three examples of seemingly irreversible trends that an awful lot of people DON'T WANT:
- Non-replaceable batteries - I've NEVER had a smartphone battery that lasted all day, or a smartphone battery that wasn't shot after about 18 months. Why should I need to buy a new phone every 18-24 months just to get around this, when newer phones typically offer such marginal improvements over their predecessors? I'm currently using a 2 year old LG G5 (WITH a removable battery), and I have no need for the marginal improvements offered by the G6, G7 or any of the other current handsets. I'll just replace the battery when it no longer retains enough charge for my use. I also have absolutely no need for a waterproof phone (which is one of the most common arguments made for sealing a battery into a phone).
- Glass backs - these are marketed as more attractive but basically they are guaranteed to smash within months of purchasing a phone, requiring the customer to buy another phone, which benefits nobody but the phone manufacturer
- Disappearing 3.5mm headphone sockets - even if Bluetooth "always worked", and never randomly disconnected, why would I want to rely on remembering to keep a pair of wireless headphones charged at all times? It's hard enough making sure that my phone retains enough charge (particularly as its battery will drain more quickly if it's connected to a Bluetooth headset). Why not just give us a CHOICE?

Everywhere I go I see poor suffering phone users desperate to top up their depleted batteries via whatever method they can, and the phone manufacturers simply look the other way and focus on the really important stuff like waterproofing, glass cladding and wireless headsets. How can we get them to get their heads out of their a*ses?

In short, phone manufacturers are cynically looking for new ways to force customers to replace their phones or invest in new hardware more frequently than they would like. While they have an obvious motivation, I was wondering how the masses could make their voices heard in a protest against the cynical product evolution cycles of the big manufacturers?

Offhand I can't think of any other market where manufacturers can get away with making their products less and less appealing to customers with every new release, while effectively giving customers no choice but to purchase them (because of the short lifespan of their existing battery).

Apart from everything else, their current policy means that an unnecessary number of discarded phones will finish up in landfill every year, when their owners would really rather have kept them.

Would anyone else here like to send a loud message back to them that they are flying in the face of their customers' wishes by cynically forcing these technology or design "advances" on them?

• Companies don't force you to buy any of their products.
  
• Companies are there to make products that they think people will buy and that they can make a profit on and continue to be around for as long as possible without going out of business.
  
• For companies to stay relevant in the future they have to push technology forward which means making a decision to leave old tech behind in the pursuit of pushing things forward. Sometimes they go too early and sometimes they go too late but at the end of the day the devices we have in out pocket nowadays blows away anything in our pocket 10 years ago..
  
• Companies are not obligated to serve everyone and give everyone what they need.
  
• If there is a need for something and a company can make it, scale it and make a profit then that need will be served.

NBLondon

indesisiv wrote: »

Why people would buy a non waterproof phone is beyond me!

i have been carrying mobile phones for nearly 20 years and I have never dropped one down a toilet/ in a puddle/ overboard. So it's not a big issue for me. Nor have I ever needed to swap batteries in the middle of the day. Maybe that's because I don't document my entire life as I go and I don't need to be contactable every single second. I change my phone maybe every 5 years - always on Pay as You Go. My ideal would be small and light enough to carry in a shirt pocket.

I think SuperHan is right. Most of my colleagues who do need their phones all the time simply plug them in at every opportunity throughout the day - office, coffee shop, train. When I last worked in a university I often saw gaggles of students waiting/squabbling for their turn at the power point in a corridor. If you are always on the go - then a powerbank in your bag does the job (and can be loaned out to boost someone else if needed).

indesisiv

NBLondon wrote: »

i have been carrying mobile phones for nearly 20 years and I have never dropped one down a toilet/ in a puddle/ overboard. So it's not a big issue for me. Nor have I ever needed to swap batteries in the middle of the day.

Neither have I on both accounts however I do use my phone to take pictures on long runs in the fells. When it is normally absolutely throwing it down, or where I have to wade streams etc.
Whilst my old phone never stopped working it is a minor miracle that it didn't. I also use it as a back up for navigation so want it to work when I need it in the rain.

wongataa

telemarks wrote: »

In the shop, most customers want:

• A thin light phone - which means building the battery in
• Waterproofing - which leads to removal of the jacks

It is perfectly possible to have a waterproof phone with a 3.5mm headphone jack. The Samsung Galaxy S9 has these features. Apple removed the jack to sell more accessories. Many other phone makers think they have to follow Apple (also see the notch).

telemarks

Gloomendoom wrote: »

My main gripe with new phones is the large size. I want something that will fit easily in my pocket... .

Had to check this the Moto G1 (4.5" 2013) was 129.9 x 65.9 x 11.6 mm, now that is small these days.

In the past Apple made a lot of money on these small form factors:

• 2013 iP5s (4") - 123.8 x 58.6 x 7.6 mm
• 2016 iP7 (4.7") - 138.3 x 67.1 x 7.1 mm,

But now high end phones sport 5.8" screens

• iPhoneX - 143.6 x 70.9 x 7.7 mm,
• Samsung S9 - 147.7 x 68.7 x 8.5 mm.

The bezel less deign helps reduce size, but still they are big and hard to use one handed.

But worse still, unfortunately even mid range phones now are coming with 6" screens, admitted bezels are getting thinner, but look at the Nokia 7+ or Xiaomi Redmi Note 5 - both 158 x 75 x 8 ish. Now thats VAST.

So the best way to get a smaller phone is go high end, or very low end. Sad but true.

Like many on this thread I'd love a 5" bezel less 18:9 phone of say 120 x 60mm I wouldn't mind it been 9mm thick if it had a decent 4000mAh+ battery.

I live in (probably futile) hope, as who would be brave enough to try and sell a phone that looked like they did in 2013??

System

wongataa wrote: »

[/LIST]
It is perfectly possible to have a waterproof phone with a 3.5mm headphone jack. The Samsung Galaxy S9 has these features. Apple removed the jack to sell more accessories. Many other phone makers think they have to follow Apple (also see the notch).

Correct you can waterproof a phone and still have a 3.5mm headphone jack. However just to say that the reason to simply remove the headphone jack is to make more money is I would say ignorant.

I would bet there is technical and design reasons for it and it will become more apparent in the years to come.

If the headphone jack is such a critical part of a user experience then that person should not buy an iPhone. Since they have removed it I have not seen iPhone sales fall through the floor.

If someone is going to put down £700-£1000 on a phone and moan that it does come with a 3.5mm headphone jack then they need to seek therapy to help them understand why they do such things.

mac.d

telemarks wrote: »

Had to check this the Moto G1 (4.5" 2013) was 129.9 x 65.9 x 11.6 mm, now that is small these days.

So the best way to get a smaller phone is go high end, or very low end. Sad but true.

I went from the Moto G to the Samsung Galaxy A3, so a little more expensive but still less than £200 to get a decent quality small phone. So far I'd highly recommend it (once you read up on the fingerprint sensor and how to get it to work better). It's a 2350 mAh battery but easily lasts a day (I'm not a heavy user so usually get 2 days from it), and its so much quicker to charge than the Moto G.

Samsung A3 dimensions are: 135.4 x 66.2 x 7.9 mm

telemarks

mac.d wrote: »

I went from the Moto G to the Samsung Galaxy A3, so a little more expensive but still less than £200 to get a decent quality small phone.

Had to look this one up, Samsung A3 Jan 2017:

• 4.7" Low res screen 720 x 1280
• 2Mb Ram
• Budget range chipset

In other words, a typical low end phone these days.

Nice and small, thin and light though because of that. :A

prowla

Hmmm - I just seem to get an iPhone every time I renew and/or when my work gives me one.


The things it does are pretty amazing, TBH: phone, email, camera, GPS, sat nav, internet browser, music player, movie player, spirit level, calculator, and so-on.