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

Is a Dumber Phone a Better Phone?

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 141 posts

Re: Is a Dumber Phone a Better Phone?

#81

Post by combatentropy »

People would be better off if they turned off the notifications. Even better would be if notifications were at first off, rather than on. Your phone should ring for calls and beep for text messages, and that's about it. Well, it should buzz if you set an alarm. But it should not interrupt you for an email or post on Facebook. Each app you install has all notifications on at first too. I think it would be healthier for all to be off. On first launch, the new app pops up a screen with checkboxes for each kind of notice, with all unchecked. You have to put a check in each one yourself.

Other than that, the only problem I have is that the average screen is too big. The right balance is about 4".

I like having all these things in one device: map, flashlight, camera, calculator, walkman, encyclopedia, newspaper. Then again I am not tempted to open it while driving.

Re: Is a Dumber Phone a Better Phone?

#82

Post by [deleted] »

floren wrote: post #5
Clubber wrote: post #2

Phones are pretty boring now. I'd write another iPhone app if I thought there was any chance in hell I could make a living on it without a million dollar marketing budget. I intentionally went without a cell phone for 2-3 years in the early aughts. That's still an option.

Not just boring but inflexible and a pain to hack on. I'd really like something more like a PDA with a straightforward scripting language that lets me build primitive GUIs for my own tasks.

[deleted]

Re: Is a Dumber Phone a Better Phone?

#83

Post by jotm »

apricot wrote: post #40
phil248 wrote: post #23

The article uses the word "phone" about 40 times. Based on my own usage patterns, I don't even have a phone. I have a portable computer. I happen to use it to make phone calls a few times every week. I use my desktop to make video calls a few times a month, but I don't call that a phone. We all know a smartphone is a computer, and I'm not trying to be pedantic about the words we use, but I think our insistence that t…

You object to calling them "phones" because they're not often used as phones, yet you want to call them "computers". What exactly do you compute with them? We should all be honest and call them "trackers" or "distractors".

Rarely use the phone, often use it to check emails, reply to customers, create shipping orders, manage bank accounts and credit cards, view Reddit and Slacker News.

Yeah, you're right. I wish the Android hosts file would fucking block hotspot traffic, as well.

Re: Is a Dumber Phone a Better Phone?

#84

Post by moonbug »

floren wrote: post #5
Clubber wrote: post #2

Phones are pretty boring now. I'd write another iPhone app if I thought there was any chance in hell I could make a living on it without a million dollar marketing budget. I intentionally went without a cell phone for 2-3 years in the early aughts. That's still an option.

Not just boring but inflexible and a pain to hack on. I'd really like something more like a PDA with a straightforward scripting language that lets me build primitive GUIs for my own tasks.

If you think that, I've got a Zaurus to sell you.

Re: Is a Dumber Phone a Better Phone?

#85

Post by Koshkin »

apricot wrote: post #40
phil248 wrote: post #23

The article uses the word "phone" about 40 times. Based on my own usage patterns, I don't even have a phone. I have a portable computer. I happen to use it to make phone calls a few times every week. I use my desktop to make video calls a few times a month, but I don't call that a phone. We all know a smartphone is a computer, and I'm not trying to be pedantic about the words we use, but I think our insistence that t…

You object to calling them "phones" because they're not often used as phones, yet you want to call them "computers". What exactly do you compute with them? We should all be honest and call them "trackers" or "distractors".

Well, the correct name is, of course, "PDA".

Re: Is a Dumber Phone a Better Phone?

#86

Post by walshemj »

aurailious wrote: post #62
phil248 wrote: post #23

The article uses the word "phone" about 40 times. Based on my own usage patterns, I don't even have a phone. I have a portable computer. I happen to use it to make phone calls a few times every week. I use my desktop to make video calls a few times a month, but I don't call that a phone. We all know a smartphone is a computer, and I'm not trying to be pedantic about the words we use, but I think our insistence that t…

I think other languages call "phones" different things. In German I think it's a "handy". While like most German words its a bit awkward, it does seem closer to the truth.

But for English speakers it seems childish which also reinforces some of the stereotypes of European attitudes to tech.

Re: Is a Dumber Phone a Better Phone?

#87

Post by walshemj »

ctrl-j wrote: post #19
rubidium wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not OP, but can answer. What everyone used to do.

Get lost and have to stop/call for directions? Abandoning modern technology doesn't seem like the better alternative in this case.

No in a city you buy an A to Z guide

Re: Is a Dumber Phone a Better Phone?

#88

Post by always_good »

apricot wrote: post #40
phil248 wrote: post #23

The article uses the word "phone" about 40 times. Based on my own usage patterns, I don't even have a phone. I have a portable computer. I happen to use it to make phone calls a few times every week. I use my desktop to make video calls a few times a month, but I don't call that a phone. We all know a smartphone is a computer, and I'm not trying to be pedantic about the words we use, but I think our insistence that t…

You object to calling them "phones" because they're not often used as phones, yet you want to call them "computers". What exactly do you compute with them? We should all be honest and call them "trackers" or "distractors".

Wow, that's very stoned-college-freshman level sociotechnological commentary.

You must think very highly of yourself for not being one of those stupid Sheeple who don't have anything productive to do with a phone than be tracked and play Farmville.

Re: Is a Dumber Phone a Better Phone?

#89

Post by John_KZ »

cglouch wrote: post #67

I'm still using my "dumb phone" from 2010. I like it cause it has a physical keyboard, a long battery life, and I can drop it without worrying about breaking the screen. Plus I don't have to worry about the privacy issues that come from apps collecting data. Honestly the only feature I feel like I'm missing out on is GPS. But I've actually found that not having GPS improves my sense of direction, since I force myself…

The two things I've missed without a smartphone is maps and the ability to find phone numbers and addresses of businesses on the fly. Other than that, there's no substantial reason to carry a smartphone. It's funny how much R&D was used up to build what essentially is a digital phone book.

Re: Is a Dumber Phone a Better Phone?

#90

Post by coldtea »

Koshkin wrote: post #85
apricot wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You object to calling them "phones" because they're not often used as phones, yet you want to call them "computers". What exactly do you compute with them? We should all be honest and call them "trackers" or "distractors".

Well, the correct name is, of course, "PDA".

It would be that if it was used by people as an "assistant" -- and not to play games, tweet BS, send dick/vagina pics, and watch cat videos...
Post reply on HN