Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Jelly Star – The Smallest Android 13 Smartphone

unihertz.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 276 posts

Re: Jelly Star – The Smallest Android 13 Smartphone

#141

Post by teruakohatu »

neltnerb wrote: post #59
wkat4242 wrote: post #6

Part of the problem with this brand is that this "Android 13 Smartphone" will probably stay that forever. Updates are very very minimal. I have their first jelly and it didn't even get the upgrade they promised. Other than that, it's not so bad. Swype-typing makes a small keyboard still useful. But the updates really are the achilles heel here.

They managed to lose all of their records of my purchase of one of their phones, directly from their store. I couldn't have sent it back for a warranty repair if I'd needed, they deleted my entire account. I even have email confirmations for the order from their system, it's kind of amazing. That said, I'd still buy another phone from them. This Atom L is years old and still has a three day battery life and no physic…

> They managed to lose all of their records of my purchase of one of their phones, directly from their store.

That seems super convenient for them from a warranty perspective.

Re: Jelly Star – The Smallest Android 13 Smartphone

#142

Post by ksec »

RachelF wrote: post #78
grishka wrote: post #70

It's a bit too small, but I like that it's a thing. However, for my own use, I want something in-between. A 4" phone would be ideal. I'm still confused how there aren't any phones for people who still use a computer as their primary means of accessing the internet . Even for this one, the media review section makes it look like it's "to distract oneself from social media". As if a phone's primary purpose isn't to be…

iPhone 4 or 12 mini size is probably ideal for me personally. While this is small, it is double the thickness of most modern phones. Still, it is great to see a bit of creativity in the smartphone market. Most phones are pretty much the same these days.

>While this is small, it is double the thickness of most modern phones.

My only problem with the Mini was the battery, they could have increased the thickness to iPhone 4 ( 9.3mm ), to increase the battery life. They could have also make it slightly bigger so it matches the same size as iPhone SE, while increasing battery life. Instead the iPhone mini was a compromise too far that very few people wanted it for its price.

Had the iPhone SE also have two size of phone to choose from, there should definitely be a mini at 5.6" and a normal at 6.1".

Re: Jelly Star – The Smallest Android 13 Smartphone

#144

Post by TeMPOraL »

grishka wrote: post #70

It's a bit too small, but I like that it's a thing. However, for my own use, I want something in-between. A 4" phone would be ideal. I'm still confused how there aren't any phones for people who still use a computer as their primary means of accessing the internet . Even for this one, the media review section makes it look like it's "to distract oneself from social media". As if a phone's primary purpose isn't to be…

Just give us a commbadge then.

Star Trek had it right all along. Commbadge (or flip communicator) is for talking. A PADD is for reading, writing, media consumption. A tricorder is for recording, remote sensing and remote operating needs. You always have at minimum the first one when in the go. When working, you usually have all on you. But then, at home and work you also have proper computer terminals available and then some.

10 years ago, I thought this was a quite obsolete vision, given how our smartphones are so multifunctional. These days I feel it was prescient, and that our phones are a bad idea, for human nature reasons.

Re: Jelly Star – The Smallest Android 13 Smartphone

#145

Post by normie3000 »

samatman wrote: post #99
grishka wrote: post #70

It's a bit too small, but I like that it's a thing. However, for my own use, I want something in-between. A 4" phone would be ideal. I'm still confused how there aren't any phones for people who still use a computer as their primary means of accessing the internet . Even for this one, the media review section makes it look like it's "to distract oneself from social media". As if a phone's primary purpose isn't to be…

I'll be holding on to this Mini 13 until Apple makes another model in that form factor, or until it's unusably obsolete. So far, it does what I need, and does it fast enough.

How's the battery life?

Re: Jelly Star – The Smallest Android 13 Smartphone

#146

Post by mook »

jzymbaluk wrote: post #20
DidYaWipe wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. The headphone jack would be my main reason for buying this thing. Recently forgot my iPad on a trip, and couldn't listen to anything on the plane because my goddamned iPhone lacks a headphone jack. So offensively stupid.

Why not just get a 3.5mm to lightning adaptor? They have knock-off/generic versions at gas stations that cost like 5 dollars and it beats lugging around a whole extra device just to use your headphones

The knockoff lightning adapters might, in fact, be Bluetooth, per https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40528410

Re: Jelly Star – The Smallest Android 13 Smartphone

#147

Post by goodburb »

wkat4242 wrote: post #6

Part of the problem with this brand is that this "Android 13 Smartphone" will probably stay that forever. Updates are very very minimal. I have their first jelly and it didn't even get the upgrade they promised. Other than that, it's not so bad. Swype-typing makes a small keyboard still useful. But the updates really are the achilles heel here.

I have used my Android 9 flagship smartphone for 6 years without issues, but had all sorts of issues on iOS when I avoided updates, specifically with apps, missing or broken.

Unlike iOS, most feature updates on Android are apps, not OS versions. iOS tends to be monolithic.

You don't need to update to use the latest apps or security updates (which is also a patch), at least for a while.

Android updates would make sense if the smartphone hardware advancments stop and the battery is easily replacable for a decade usage and more. e.g 8+ year old Android 7 devices are still supported and usable but slow.

Many manufactures release OS updates without incrementing the version, they're usually low level fixes (mic, battery, speaker, sleep etc).

Re: Jelly Star – The Smallest Android 13 Smartphone

#148

Post by grishka »

sharts wrote: post #136
grishka wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That and I also have small hands. My current phone is a Pixel 4a, and it's already way past my comfort zone. It's frustrating to use with one hand, and, believe it or not, most of my phone usage is one-handed. It's like all phone manufacturers have collectively forgotten about ergonomics.

Has there ever been a focus on ergonomics over aesthetics by any manufacturer of any tech product over the last decade? Nothing comes to mind.

Those curved keyboards and mice come to my mind.

Re: Jelly Star – The Smallest Android 13 Smartphone

#149

Post by throwaway2037 »

numpad0 wrote: post #106
e2e4 wrote: post #65

Japan has some nice small phones for kids. Although the specs are quite basic. https://youtu.be/AmthGJ5Qwvk?feature=shared https://onlineshop.smt.docomo.ne.jp/products/detail.html?mob...

I don't think there is any with official or unofficial Play Store support. Japanese phone are rarely flashable too.

    > I don't think there is any with official or unofficial Play Store support.
I am sure that is a feature, not a bug.

Re: Jelly Star – The Smallest Android 13 Smartphone

#150

Post by ghayes »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #144
grishka wrote: post #70

It's a bit too small, but I like that it's a thing. However, for my own use, I want something in-between. A 4" phone would be ideal. I'm still confused how there aren't any phones for people who still use a computer as their primary means of accessing the internet . Even for this one, the media review section makes it look like it's "to distract oneself from social media". As if a phone's primary purpose isn't to be…

Just give us a commbadge then. Star Trek had it right all along. Commbadge (or flip communicator) is for talking. A PADD is for reading, writing, media consumption. A tricorder is for recording, remote sensing and remote operating needs. You always have at minimum the first one when in the go. When working, you usually have all on you. But then, at home and work you also have proper computer terminals available and t…

I tend to feel the Commbadge and communicator are tropes to make it easy to communicate to viewers. Given the technology in real life, I prefer text over voice for quick, rapid messages.
Post reply on HN