471–480 of 580 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, except in America where discussion of the metric system is banned in 48 states and therefore the unit of screen size measure is the stevethumb, defined as the area of the legendary thumbprint of Steve Jobs. Example usage: “Did you know the first iPhone’s screen was only nine stevethumbs? So tiny!”
Uh, the area should be measured like everything else. In fractions of football fields.
These foldables are a great demonstration of why the screen diagonal is an unintuitive metric. This device has a 5.8” screen when folded, and a 7.6” screen when open. Looking at those numbers, it doesn’t sound like a very big difference. Yet anyone can see that the 7.6” screen is twice as big as the 5.8” one! The diagonal only made sense for TVs because the aspect ratio was fixed at 4:3 (and later 16:9). It shouldn’t…
I'm not entirely sure it made sense even then. I completely understand the point (knowing the AR allows one metric to consistently compare and derive the other dimensions) but in my opinion, diagonals became ubiquitous because when looking at TVs, bigger was typically better in the consumer mind and the diagonal is of course one of the largest justifiable dimensions they could plaster over the product and cheaper to print/advertise (less text to put on boxes and flyers).
I think we were handed diagonals in the same way prices are often advertised at near complete fractions of dollars ($9.99): it projects more value to the average consumer's perceived value than it actually provides.
I just don't understand who wants these foldable phones, especially at the $1799 price point. I guess a use case is wealthy frequent travelers who don't want a separate device with a larger screen to watch movies/videos on the go? Someone help me out here.
Just like many people still don't understand why people have Kindles. They would think -- you can read books on phones, many of which are as large as 6.7 inches? Or Why not get an iPad or iPad mini, and you can do so many more things on it? So on and on. (I have two kindles and I don't personally know anyone who has a kindle. But that is fine.)
I'll never understand why "thin" is still a standout feature of a phone when they add a fat ugly camera bump on it anyway. Why not make a thicker phone and the camera flush with the casing?
Really looking forward to future generations of foldables when the price is closer to $1000 than $2000. I've had my Flip 3 for almost 2 years now and it's been a blast; I'm genuinely interested in the larger foldable size, but the price is still too steep for me.
Meanwhile, I paid $250 for a used Pixel 6a and plan to use it for another 2-4 years.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, that explains it. Seems like US has a lot of these inside jokes that don't make sense to someone who only sees snippets of the whole historical timeline. Thanks for sharing.
It's more of a petty "joke" that leftists use because they don't have anything else. It's at the level of a modern SNL skit, all superficial and more of a "mean girl" insult on appearance than satire. GP was correct in saying "no one cares about that or if it is true." That's not the point, the point is to insult.
Or is "let's go Brandon" not a cheap joke used by "rightists"?
I just don't understand who wants these foldable phones, especially at the $1799 price point. I guess a use case is wealthy frequent travelers who don't want a separate device with a larger screen to watch movies/videos on the go? Someone help me out here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, that explains it. Seems like US has a lot of these inside jokes that don't make sense to someone who only sees snippets of the whole historical timeline. Thanks for sharing.
It's more of a petty "joke" that leftists use because they don't have anything else. It's at the level of a modern SNL skit, all superficial and more of a "mean girl" insult on appearance than satire. GP was correct in saying "no one cares about that or if it is true." That's not the point, the point is to insult.