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

Unless my phone can be a PC, I don't want to keep paying for extra performance

androidauthority.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 430 posts

Re: Unless my phone can be a PC, I don't want to keep paying for extra performance

#281

Post by david-gpu »

jakub_g wrote: post #204
hilbert42 wrote: post #102

I find it highly annoying that these rather powerful handheld smartphone computers don't have decent port access for use with instrumentation, etc. A huge range of features comes to mind from Geiger counters, oscilloscopes, sound level measurement, light intensity, etc , etc. The potential to expand the smartphone capability is enormous yet no manufacturer has tackled it. Why not? Why aren't there multiple USB ports?…

Whoever I talk to those says "smartphones are damn too big", and yet no manufacturer produces reasonably-sized phones anymore, because it apparently "they wouldn't sell" / "market size too small". If this is too difficult, than your use case is orders of magnitude more difficult. Unfortunately everyone tries to sell to the same generic user, with very little actual space for differentiation targeting niches.

People say want smaller phones that fit in their pockets -- myself included. But are they willing to accept the much lower battery life, the smaller text on the screen, and the reduced real estate on the screen?

The smaller iPhones didn't sell well.

Re: Unless my phone can be a PC, I don't want to keep paying for extra performance

#282

Post by nrclark »

Kirby64 wrote: post #107
hilbert42 wrote: post #102

I find it highly annoying that these rather powerful handheld smartphone computers don't have decent port access for use with instrumentation, etc. A huge range of features comes to mind from Geiger counters, oscilloscopes, sound level measurement, light intensity, etc , etc. The potential to expand the smartphone capability is enormous yet no manufacturer has tackled it. Why not? Why aren't there multiple USB ports?…

> Why aren't there multiple USB ports? By now why don't all phones use USB-3? Why isn't there general purpose D/A and A/D ports/outputs for instrumentation? Why don't they include a GPIB-like bus to connect to things? Why can't we use the screen as an oscilloscope with a bandwidth of say 100MHz? Because the population of people that would actually use that functionality rounds to approximately 0. There do exist phone…

A small correction here: 90%+ of audio I/O ports aren't general-purpose. This is because there are almost always DC-blocker circuits on each output, commonly a series capacitor. With very few exceptions, you can't use your soundcard to provide an accurate DC output such as a control voltage.

Re: Unless my phone can be a PC, I don't want to keep paying for extra performance

#284

Post by hilbert42 »

astrange wrote: post #266
Kirby64 wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why aren't there multiple USB ports? By now why don't all phones use USB-3? Why isn't there general purpose D/A and A/D ports/outputs for instrumentation? Why don't they include a GPIB-like bus to connect to things? Why can't we use the screen as an oscilloscope with a bandwidth of say 100MHz? Because the population of people that would actually use that functionality rounds to approximately 0. There do exist phone…

> Why isn't there general purpose D/A and A/D ports/outputs for instrumentation? There is one, it's the headphone jack. (Or dongle.)

Not useful, it's dedicated. You missed my point.

Re: Unless my phone can be a PC, I don't want to keep paying for extra performance

#285

Post by david-gpu »

hannofcart wrote: post #277
david-gpu wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is also security updates, as well as the wear and tear on a physical device that is constantly exposed to scratches, dust, and whatnot. I would like to use them for four or five years with a battery replacement at the midpoint.

I immediately put a transparent case around my device as soon as I get it and put a screen guard on it as well. My wife mocks me saying that it totally kills the device's looks but considering how integral having a functioning phone at all times is to... well, existing (and accessing any Govt. service in my country), I take the hit in aesthetics for extra durability. As a result, all my phones end up looking pristine…

> As a result, all my phones end up looking pristine several years into them being used.

They look pristine except for being wrapped in a case and a screen guard. It's a bit like how some people wrapped TV remote controls in plastic film.

Don't get me wrong, I also put a case around my phone, but it makes it look fugly from day one.

Re: Unless my phone can be a PC, I don't want to keep paying for extra performance

#286

Post by shinycode »

retskrad wrote: post #278

Observe a young person using their phone. They constantly multitask, rapidly switching between apps like Safari, camera, TikTok and YouTube. Unlike older generations who associate "heavy" apps with desktop software like Photoshop, today's mobile users experience app heaviness through frequent transitions between different apps, most of which are optimised poorly. While an iPhone 16 might be microseconds faster than t…

It’s true. I love photography and I prefer so much the experience of editing and doing albums on my iPhone. I stopped doing it years ago on my laptop. I take the pictures and when I’m done within minutes I filtered, edited and shared. Because it’s no pro work there is no point for me to do it on desktop, it’s slower and annoying. So I’m really happy for the enhancements in processing power for the camera and photography experience. The apps on the iPhone are really powerful, I can shoot and edit raw on the spot on a great screen without any delays even for 70mb pictures.

Re: Unless my phone can be a PC, I don't want to keep paying for extra performance

#287

Post by andrepd »

chvid wrote: post #270

As phones look today and as how they are used, I think we have reached peak usability at around iPhone X. Afterwards - the additional computing, camera, network, form factor that have come with iPhone up to 16 - have provided very little additional end-user value. So unless phone makers want to be in the situation where end-users are less and less willing to pay for and upgrade to a new phone, they have to figure out…

I would pay good money for a phone that isn't a literal tablet in terms of size, and yet there is literally zero options for this. I'm sticking with my Pixel 4a until it dies, and even that is already huge for me.

Re: Unless my phone can be a PC, I don't want to keep paying for extra performance

#288

Post by resource_waste »

divbzero wrote: post #191

Ubuntu Edge [1] was a Linux phone proposed in 2013 that never got built, but today we have the Purism Librem 5 [2] which becomes a full Linux desktop when plugged into a monitor. [1]: https://ubuntu.com/blog/ubuntu-edge [2]: https://puri.sm/posts/a-librem-5-video-made-on-a-librem-5/

The longer I live, the more I think Ubuntu/Canonical and the team is terrible at everything except marketing.

Their terrible and outdated OS was supreme for 2 decades from a simple 'Free CD' marketing trick. The actual performance has always been so bad, people made Mint and quickly abandoned Debian/Ubuntu-family for desktop use.

Hearing the Ubuntu phone failed is not surprising.

Re: Unless my phone can be a PC, I don't want to keep paying for extra performance

#289

Post by orf »

hilbert42 wrote: post #244
orf wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For starters I'm 1 person, so the market is not O. And I know of others, and I know I'm not alone Of all the people you interacted with in any way, shape or form this year, what percentage of those would benefit from this? It rounds to 0, assuming you’re not a shut-in

The point you are making is irrelevant as it has nothing to do with my point which is what I want as features on my phone. Whether manufacturers make them or how many other people may want the same as I do is a separate issue. What phone do you use now and are you satisfied with it? Tell me that and I may be able to then figure where you are coming from. BTW, read my comment to f6v.

You asked:

> How can you say that, where are your figures/stats/evidence?

I responded with:

> just look outside in the real world?

That’s totally relevant to you asking why no mass-market phones support increasingly niche features that ~0% of the population need or want, and you expanding on this by saying “me and one other person I know want this”…

Re: Unless my phone can be a PC, I don't want to keep paying for extra performance

#290

Post by Tepix »

zaptrem wrote: post #220
Tepix wrote: post #210

Until recently, the availability of software updates was a limiting factor, especially for midrange phones. (Before that, phones were so slow and had so little RAM that software updates made them unusable eventually). The mid-range Samsung A52 5G now comes with 7 years of security updates and you can get it with 8GB of RAM for less than 300€. That's a pretty good deal! You just need to replace the battery every three…

Have there been compelling use cases for on device LLMs where the value isn’t based on privacy benefits yet?

For me complete privacy is a must-have for an LLM that gets access to pretty much all my data (mails, calendar, location, browser history, chats, address book, health, app use, ...).

But there are other benefits such as the availability, even when your phone is offline, latency and no cost per use.

Post reply on HN