Then you're crazy. My wife's 4S runs circles around my 4. Imagine the difference in the next version. You have to be kidding.
Ah, welcome to the other side! See, over here, that stuff just doesn't matter. It's all about a single feature: having the idea put in your head that you want the feature, demanding that feature, not getting that feature, being furious at Apple because you were "entitled" to that feature, finally getting the feature in a future product, and then being furious with Apple because the feature has inherently changed how other features worked or doesn't work very well because you didn't want a different, actually important feature.
Right now it's "a larger screen". Before it was the vague thought of "a better camera", but that has mostly died down now.
What phone bested Apple's 37m last quarter? If I recall Samsung shipped 35m. And when it comes to being profitable in the phone space no one comes close to Apple. Samsung, Motorola and HTC can throw a bazillion phones out there to obtain high market share but Apple will enjoy the lions share of the profits.
It's absurd to compare Apple to just one single Android maker. The only comparison that matters is the amount of all iOS phones vs all Android phones, and in the case of the latter that obviously must include every Android device sold by Samsung, Motorola, HTC, LG, Sony, Sharp, etc. The only Android devices you could reasonably leave off would be the Amazon and Barnes and Noble ones.
The point I was making originally is that when you look at the state of Android phones now, big screens dominate. Manufacturers wouldn't do that unless they believed that big screens increase sales, and therefore justify the cost of including them. Apple are still shipping very small screens in the iPhone, so they will have to weigh up the potential extra sales a big screen would give them, versus the increased costs.
I'd be shocked if Apple didn't conclude that larger screens equal more sales, but then again, Apple are pig headed and may well do their own thing regardless.
The potential buyers say they want a larger iPhone display, the stated opinion of over 86% of respondents to the 9to5 poll on what size screen they would prefer on the next iPhone.
If potential buyers from Henry Ford's new venture were asked what they want, their reply would have been that they want a faster horse.
Apple has never really cared what their buyers want. Apple gives its buyers what they SHOULD want. And after people start using their new Apple device, they realize just how correct Apple always is. Customers would skate to where the puck used to be. Apple skates to where the puck is GOING to be.
Apple will never cave in to uninformed consumer wants. When Apple lets the unwashed masses dictate every design move, they will cease to be the same company. They would have released the iPad with OSX, for example, and it would have sucked shit. If Apple increases the screen size it will be because Apple knows best what is best for us. If Apple keeps the screen size that they determined is best, it will not be a surprise. Soon after using it, everyone except iHaters will realize that Apple Knows Best.
It's absurd to compare Apple to just one single Android maker. The only comparison that matters is the amount of all iOS phones vs all Android phones, and in the case of the latter that obviously must include every Android device sold by Samsung, Motorola, HTC, LG, Sony, Sharp, etc. The only Android devices you could reasonably leave off would be the Amazon and Barnes and Noble ones.
Let me get this straight. Comparing platform to platform is unfair. Comparing manufacturer to manufacturer is unfair. But comparing manufacturer to platform makes sense to you?
Quote:
The point I was making originally is that when you look at the state of Android phones now, big screens dominate.
What is a big screen? 4.5"? Of the 850k activations per day how many of those are over 4.5"? I'm guessing very few because most of these activations are from cheap "feature phones" running Android.
Quote:
Manufacturers wouldn't do that unless they believed that big screens increase sales, and therefore justify the cost of including them.
Let's look at why they went with larger displays for their flagship phones (which sell less than their cheap phones). For starters, they invest much less in engineering so they can't pack as much stuff into the same space as Apple so a larger display has allowed them to pack in more stuff with less technical savvy. Second, Apple has completely eaten their lunch so they had to try to find a gimmicky angle to exploit.
It's the same thing with tablets, but reversed. When Apple made the iPad 10" they knew they couldn't compete head to head so they made a 7" tablet (which reduced their costs yet still cost the same or more than the iPad) and marketed it as being much more portable than the iPad. That hasn't worked out well for them either.
Quote:
Apple are still shipping very small screens in the iPhone, so they will have to weigh up the potential extra sales a big screen would give them, versus the increased costs.
if 5.65"^2 is very small then what is small, very medium, medium, very large and large. Surely you must has detailed the how and whys of each device based on display area user interests and needs. I'd like to know how to came to the conclusion that the iPhone simply isn't less than ideal for you, but less than ideal for everyone to the point that it's not the perfect size, a little small, or small... but very small.
It's absurd to compare Apple to just one single Android maker. The only comparison that matters is the amount of all iOS phones vs all Android phones,
How does it make any sense to compare only one iOS phone to all Android phones?
Either compare the iPhone to one Android phone, or else compare all iOS devices with all Android devices. There are only two possible choices here. You need to pick one.
if 5.65"^2 is very small then what is small, very medium, medium, very large and large. Surely you must has detailed the how and whys of each device based on display area user interests and needs. I'd like to know how to came to the conclusion that the iPhone simply isn't less than ideal for you, but less than ideal for everyone to the point that it's not the perfect size, a little small, or small... but very small.
Good point. If he uses any descriptor at all, he must precisely define every possible descriptor. And he must have detailed knowledge of the hows and whys of every device based on display area and user interest.
That is the only thing that makes any sense at all. Not less than ideal sense, not a little small amount of sense, not small, not very medium or very large or medium large! That's just crazy talk!
The problem with this idea is that Apple would have to change the aspect ratio for it to work. This would be great for watching movies but not for anything else and people use iOS devices for watching movies but it isn't the dominant or even primary use.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Ah, apologies; I read that wrong.
Okay, what purpose does 16:9 serve in a phone? That's even worse than 4:3.
I don't understand the hatred towards 16:9 displays, especially on a phone. I can see why you would be aganist it on a tablet, but on a phone, a 16:9 display makes the most sense.
Why? Because phones are naturally taller than they are wide; any other design would seem awkward. The iphone itself is 115.2 x 58.6 mm, about 2:1 or a 16:8 ratio. On a device dominated by a screen, you'll want the screen to mirror the physical dimensions of the device itself, and considering the physical dimensions of the iphone, a 16:9 screen is a much better fit than a 4:3. With a 4:3 screen, you either have to redesign the device to be square-ish, which would be awkward to use, especially with 1 hand, or you end up with a lot of under utilized space on the top and bottom, as is the case with the iphone.
So what purpose does a 16:9 serve in a phone? Better use of the physical space. For the same device dimensions, you get more vertical screen space, which can be useful for a bunch of reasons (less scrolling, dock taking up less of the screen to name a few)
If they bump up the screen size i won't even consider an upgrade from my 4S, till at least this current phone i own gets way too old to handle the apps or os (aprox 2-3 years).
Why do people want to use mini ipads near their ears is beyond my understanding. I've seen how fugly the Galaxy S II and the Note looks when held near the ear. Might aswell cut the BS and give the iPad a cell phone capability and go with that.
IMHO a bigger cellphone (more than 3,5 inch in screen) look as terrible when someone talks on it, as the iPad looks when shooting videos or taking stills. Not cool at all !
Moreover my one handed fingers reach any point of the screen very easily on the 3,5" display. Move over that and you have to seriously reposition the phone at the very extremities of the hand (dangerous) or use both hands (not useful sometimes).
so we all know you are the Brad Pitt type and understand you not wanting to 'look bad' with a 'big' phone up to your ear. really, no one gives a s*** how you look. get real.
you do have a point with 'using' the phone. 4" is about as big as apple will probably go unless they can work miracles with the size of the housing. very hard to work the big screen with one hand.
I don't understand the hatred towards 16:9 displays, especially on a phone. I can see why you would be aganist it on a tablet, but on a phone, a 16:9 display makes the most sense.
Why? Because phones are naturally taller than they are wide; any other design would seem awkward. The iphone itself is 115.2 x 58.6 mm, about 2:1 or a 16:8 ratio. On a device dominated by a screen, you'll want the screen to mirror the physical dimensions of the device itself, and considering the physical dimensions of the iphone, a 16:9 screen is a much better fit than a 4:3. With a 4:3 screen, you either have to redesign the device to be square-ish, which would be awkward to use, especially with 1 hand, or you end up with a lot of under utilized space on the top and bottom, as is the case with the iphone.
So what purpose does a 16:9 serve in a phone? Better use of the physical space. For the same device dimensions, you get more vertical screen space, which can be useful for a bunch of reasons (less scrolling, dock taking up less of the screen to name a few)
the reason most here are anti 16:9 is because apple hasn't done it yet...when they do it will be proclaimed insanely great and 'revolutionary'
Thanks, but I will stick with my 2+ year old iPhone-4.
Unless Apple listens to overwhelming customer feedback requesting a screen bigger than the current 3.5" display, then i guess a lot of people will sticking with their old iPhones.
A larger display say 4" or 4.5" is easily doable without needing to change the software. The only difference between an iPhone with such a display is that it gives you more screen real estate, it would require minimal software changes and apps wouldn't need to be redesigned.
The other nice change would be a thinner form factor. which might be doable if the device was wider and taller. I guess last year's mock ups were too good - they gave us unrealistic expectations.
No, we don't like 16:9 because it's a size designed around media alone. 16:10 will always feel better to me, and that's just for computers, even.
The difference between a 16:9 and a 16:10 computer screen, keeping all other factors equal, is additional vertical display estate.
Given that, what is your objection to a 16:9 screen on a phone if implemented in such a way that the only difference between it and a 3:2 screen is additional vertical display estate?
Given that, what is your objection to a 16:9 screen on a phone if implemented in such a way that the only difference between it and a 3:2 screen is additional vertical display estate?
It's absurd to compare Apple to just one single Android maker. The only comparison that matters is the amount of all iOS phones vs all Android phones, and in the case of the latter that obviously must include every Android device sold by Samsung, Motorola, HTC, LG, Sony, Sharp, etc. The only Android devices you could reasonably leave off would be the Amazon and Barnes and Noble ones.
The point I was making originally is that when you look at the state of Android phones now, big screens dominate. Manufacturers wouldn't do that unless they believed that big screens increase sales, and therefore justify the cost of including them. Apple are still shipping very small screens in the iPhone, so they will have to weigh up the potential extra sales a big screen would give them, versus the increased costs.
I'd be shocked if Apple didn't conclude that larger screens equal more sales, but then again, Apple are pig headed and may well do their own thing regardless.
Large screened phones dominate because it's the no-brainer way to get decent battery life out of reasonably functional Android phone without making it 2" thick. Why is that? We know Apple's reasons for sticking with their design-- they think it works best. But Android is supposed to be all about "choice"? Where's the choice?
Try to find a marquee Android phone that has a 3.5" screen. Now tell me there's no market for same, that each and every Android user simply craves a big ass phone. Or is it because a full featured Android phone with a 3.5" screen and reasonably thin would get about 4 hours of battery life?
And you can't make correlations between sales numbers and features with Android, because it's become the de facto feature phone OS. If Samsung, HTC, LG and Motorola decided that the next wave of Android phones needed to have shark fins, then you'd be arguing that Apple must acknowledge the necessity of same. Because Android phones are what's for sale. Dumb phone due for a replacement? Walk into a Verizon store, that's what they have. Sure, they have a few iPhones, but that's not what they want to sell you.
Just look at tablet sales to get an idea of what the market actually responds to, sans the world of carrier subsidies and hard-sell.
I'd rather have a meaningful resolution that is visually appealing and doesn't relegate buttons and features to the rim.
Keeping the iphone the same size, a 16:9 screen will leave just over 13mm on the top and bottom of the phone for your buttons and features, hardly "on the rim."
Let me just also say that if Apple manages to get a 4" screen in roughly the same footprint as the current iPhone I'll welcome it, and that doesn't require some stupid "I hated it until Apple did it now I think they invented it" bullshit which some posters seem to rely on so heavily as their go-to straw man.
I don't want a 4.5" or 5" iPhone, although if that's all that's on offer I guess I'd suck it up, since I don't have much interest in Android or WP at the moment (juries still out on WP). Big screen is great for some stuff, but carrying it around with me at all times isn't one of them. I have to shake my head at the 'droidheads sagely informing me of how a 5" phone fits nicely into their "jacket pocket" as if I'm going to be wearing a jacket at all times. I keep my iPhone on my person like a set of keys, and I typically barely know it's there. I like that, I guess because I'm a mindless fanboy.
Comments
There is no way I am upgrading if it is less than 4". I want a bigger screen (ideally 4.5+) in the same form factor.
Thanks, but I will stick with my 2+ year old iPhone-4.
Then you're crazy. My wife's 4S runs circles around my 4. Imagine the difference in the next version. You have to be kidding.
Then you're crazy. My wife's 4S runs circles around my 4. Imagine the difference in the next version. You have to be kidding.
Ah, welcome to the other side! See, over here, that stuff just doesn't matter. It's all about a single feature: having the idea put in your head that you want the feature, demanding that feature, not getting that feature, being furious at Apple because you were "entitled" to that feature, finally getting the feature in a future product, and then being furious with Apple because the feature has inherently changed how other features worked or doesn't work very well because you didn't want a different, actually important feature.
Right now it's "a larger screen". Before it was the vague thought of "a better camera", but that has mostly died down now.
What phone bested Apple's 37m last quarter? If I recall Samsung shipped 35m. And when it comes to being profitable in the phone space no one comes close to Apple. Samsung, Motorola and HTC can throw a bazillion phones out there to obtain high market share but Apple will enjoy the lions share of the profits.
It's absurd to compare Apple to just one single Android maker. The only comparison that matters is the amount of all iOS phones vs all Android phones, and in the case of the latter that obviously must include every Android device sold by Samsung, Motorola, HTC, LG, Sony, Sharp, etc. The only Android devices you could reasonably leave off would be the Amazon and Barnes and Noble ones.
The point I was making originally is that when you look at the state of Android phones now, big screens dominate. Manufacturers wouldn't do that unless they believed that big screens increase sales, and therefore justify the cost of including them. Apple are still shipping very small screens in the iPhone, so they will have to weigh up the potential extra sales a big screen would give them, versus the increased costs.
I'd be shocked if Apple didn't conclude that larger screens equal more sales, but then again, Apple are pig headed and may well do their own thing regardless.
The potential buyers say they want a larger iPhone display, the stated opinion of over 86% of respondents to the 9to5 poll on what size screen they would prefer on the next iPhone.
http://9to5mac.com/2012/01/25/poll-w...bigger-screen/
If potential buyers from Henry Ford's new venture were asked what they want, their reply would have been that they want a faster horse.
Apple has never really cared what their buyers want. Apple gives its buyers what they SHOULD want. And after people start using their new Apple device, they realize just how correct Apple always is. Customers would skate to where the puck used to be. Apple skates to where the puck is GOING to be.
Apple will never cave in to uninformed consumer wants. When Apple lets the unwashed masses dictate every design move, they will cease to be the same company. They would have released the iPad with OSX, for example, and it would have sucked shit. If Apple increases the screen size it will be because Apple knows best what is best for us. If Apple keeps the screen size that they determined is best, it will not be a surprise. Soon after using it, everyone except iHaters will realize that Apple Knows Best.
It's absurd to compare Apple to just one single Android maker. The only comparison that matters is the amount of all iOS phones vs all Android phones, and in the case of the latter that obviously must include every Android device sold by Samsung, Motorola, HTC, LG, Sony, Sharp, etc. The only Android devices you could reasonably leave off would be the Amazon and Barnes and Noble ones.
Let me get this straight. Comparing platform to platform is unfair. Comparing manufacturer to manufacturer is unfair. But comparing manufacturer to platform makes sense to you?
The point I was making originally is that when you look at the state of Android phones now, big screens dominate.
What is a big screen? 4.5"? Of the 850k activations per day how many of those are over 4.5"? I'm guessing very few because most of these activations are from cheap "feature phones" running Android.
Manufacturers wouldn't do that unless they believed that big screens increase sales, and therefore justify the cost of including them.
Let's look at why they went with larger displays for their flagship phones (which sell less than their cheap phones). For starters, they invest much less in engineering so they can't pack as much stuff into the same space as Apple so a larger display has allowed them to pack in more stuff with less technical savvy. Second, Apple has completely eaten their lunch so they had to try to find a gimmicky angle to exploit.
It's the same thing with tablets, but reversed. When Apple made the iPad 10" they knew they couldn't compete head to head so they made a 7" tablet (which reduced their costs yet still cost the same or more than the iPad) and marketed it as being much more portable than the iPad. That hasn't worked out well for them either.
Apple are still shipping very small screens in the iPhone, so they will have to weigh up the potential extra sales a big screen would give them, versus the increased costs.
if 5.65"^2 is very small then what is small, very medium, medium, very large and large. Surely you must has detailed the how and whys of each device based on display area user interests and needs. I'd like to know how to came to the conclusion that the iPhone simply isn't less than ideal for you, but less than ideal for everyone to the point that it's not the perfect size, a little small, or small... but very small.
It's absurd to compare Apple to just one single Android maker. The only comparison that matters is the amount of all iOS phones vs all Android phones,
How does it make any sense to compare only one iOS phone to all Android phones?
Either compare the iPhone to one Android phone, or else compare all iOS devices with all Android devices. There are only two possible choices here. You need to pick one.
if 5.65"^2 is very small then what is small, very medium, medium, very large and large. Surely you must has detailed the how and whys of each device based on display area user interests and needs. I'd like to know how to came to the conclusion that the iPhone simply isn't less than ideal for you, but less than ideal for everyone to the point that it's not the perfect size, a little small, or small... but very small.
Good point. If he uses any descriptor at all, he must precisely define every possible descriptor. And he must have detailed knowledge of the hows and whys of every device based on display area and user interest.
That is the only thing that makes any sense at all. Not less than ideal sense, not a little small amount of sense, not small, not very medium or very large or medium large! That's just crazy talk!
/s
Never happen.
The problem with this idea is that Apple would have to change the aspect ratio for it to work. This would be great for watching movies but not for anything else and people use iOS devices for watching movies but it isn't the dominant or even primary use.
Ah, apologies; I read that wrong.
Okay, what purpose does 16:9 serve in a phone? That's even worse than 4:3.
I don't understand the hatred towards 16:9 displays, especially on a phone. I can see why you would be aganist it on a tablet, but on a phone, a 16:9 display makes the most sense.
Why? Because phones are naturally taller than they are wide; any other design would seem awkward. The iphone itself is 115.2 x 58.6 mm, about 2:1 or a 16:8 ratio. On a device dominated by a screen, you'll want the screen to mirror the physical dimensions of the device itself, and considering the physical dimensions of the iphone, a 16:9 screen is a much better fit than a 4:3. With a 4:3 screen, you either have to redesign the device to be square-ish, which would be awkward to use, especially with 1 hand, or you end up with a lot of under utilized space on the top and bottom, as is the case with the iphone.
So what purpose does a 16:9 serve in a phone? Better use of the physical space. For the same device dimensions, you get more vertical screen space, which can be useful for a bunch of reasons (less scrolling, dock taking up less of the screen to name a few)
If they bump up the screen size i won't even consider an upgrade from my 4S, till at least this current phone i own gets way too old to handle the apps or os (aprox 2-3 years).
Why do people want to use mini ipads near their ears is beyond my understanding. I've seen how fugly the Galaxy S II and the Note looks when held near the ear. Might aswell cut the BS and give the iPad a cell phone capability and go with that.
IMHO a bigger cellphone (more than 3,5 inch in screen) look as terrible when someone talks on it, as the iPad looks when shooting videos or taking stills. Not cool at all !
Moreover my one handed fingers reach any point of the screen very easily on the 3,5" display. Move over that and you have to seriously reposition the phone at the very extremities of the hand (dangerous) or use both hands (not useful sometimes).
so we all know you are the Brad Pitt type and understand you not wanting to 'look bad' with a 'big' phone up to your ear. really, no one gives a s*** how you look. get real.
you do have a point with 'using' the phone. 4" is about as big as apple will probably go unless they can work miracles with the size of the housing. very hard to work the big screen with one hand.
I don't understand the hatred towards 16:9 displays, especially on a phone. I can see why you would be aganist it on a tablet, but on a phone, a 16:9 display makes the most sense.
Why? Because phones are naturally taller than they are wide; any other design would seem awkward. The iphone itself is 115.2 x 58.6 mm, about 2:1 or a 16:8 ratio. On a device dominated by a screen, you'll want the screen to mirror the physical dimensions of the device itself, and considering the physical dimensions of the iphone, a 16:9 screen is a much better fit than a 4:3. With a 4:3 screen, you either have to redesign the device to be square-ish, which would be awkward to use, especially with 1 hand, or you end up with a lot of under utilized space on the top and bottom, as is the case with the iphone.
So what purpose does a 16:9 serve in a phone? Better use of the physical space. For the same device dimensions, you get more vertical screen space, which can be useful for a bunch of reasons (less scrolling, dock taking up less of the screen to name a few)
the reason most here are anti 16:9 is because apple hasn't done it yet...when they do it will be proclaimed insanely great and 'revolutionary'
the reason most here are anti 16:9 is because apple hasn't done it yet...when they do it will be proclaimed insanely great and 'revolutionary'
No, we don't like 16:9 because it's a size designed around media alone. 16:10 will always feel better to me, and that's just for computers, even.
We have proof positive 3:2 is good for phones.
We have proof positive 3:2 is good for phones.
Correlation != causation.
Thanks, but I will stick with my 2+ year old iPhone-4.
Unless Apple listens to overwhelming customer feedback requesting a screen bigger than the current 3.5" display, then i guess a lot of people will sticking with their old iPhones.
A larger display say 4" or 4.5" is easily doable without needing to change the software. The only difference between an iPhone with such a display is that it gives you more screen real estate, it would require minimal software changes and apps wouldn't need to be redesigned.
The other nice change would be a thinner form factor. which might be doable if the device was wider and taller. I guess last year's mock ups were too good - they gave us unrealistic expectations.
No, we don't like 16:9 because it's a size designed around media alone. 16:10 will always feel better to me, and that's just for computers, even.
The difference between a 16:9 and a 16:10 computer screen, keeping all other factors equal, is additional vertical display estate.
Given that, what is your objection to a 16:9 screen on a phone if implemented in such a way that the only difference between it and a 3:2 screen is additional vertical display estate?
Given that, what is your objection to a 16:9 screen on a phone if implemented in such a way that the only difference between it and a 3:2 screen is additional vertical display estate?
That real estate is exactly the problem.
That real estate is exactly the problem.
Wait, so you'd rather have a bunch of black glass on the front of your phone instead of a larger display?
Wait, so you'd rather have a bunch of black glass on the front of your phone instead of a larger display?
I'd rather have a meaningful resolution that is visually appealing and doesn't relegate buttons and features to the rim.
It's absurd to compare Apple to just one single Android maker. The only comparison that matters is the amount of all iOS phones vs all Android phones, and in the case of the latter that obviously must include every Android device sold by Samsung, Motorola, HTC, LG, Sony, Sharp, etc. The only Android devices you could reasonably leave off would be the Amazon and Barnes and Noble ones.
The point I was making originally is that when you look at the state of Android phones now, big screens dominate. Manufacturers wouldn't do that unless they believed that big screens increase sales, and therefore justify the cost of including them. Apple are still shipping very small screens in the iPhone, so they will have to weigh up the potential extra sales a big screen would give them, versus the increased costs.
I'd be shocked if Apple didn't conclude that larger screens equal more sales, but then again, Apple are pig headed and may well do their own thing regardless.
Large screened phones dominate because it's the no-brainer way to get decent battery life out of reasonably functional Android phone without making it 2" thick. Why is that? We know Apple's reasons for sticking with their design-- they think it works best. But Android is supposed to be all about "choice"? Where's the choice?
Try to find a marquee Android phone that has a 3.5" screen. Now tell me there's no market for same, that each and every Android user simply craves a big ass phone. Or is it because a full featured Android phone with a 3.5" screen and reasonably thin would get about 4 hours of battery life?
And you can't make correlations between sales numbers and features with Android, because it's become the de facto feature phone OS. If Samsung, HTC, LG and Motorola decided that the next wave of Android phones needed to have shark fins, then you'd be arguing that Apple must acknowledge the necessity of same. Because Android phones are what's for sale. Dumb phone due for a replacement? Walk into a Verizon store, that's what they have. Sure, they have a few iPhones, but that's not what they want to sell you.
Just look at tablet sales to get an idea of what the market actually responds to, sans the world of carrier subsidies and hard-sell.
I'd rather have a meaningful resolution that is visually appealing and doesn't relegate buttons and features to the rim.
Keeping the iphone the same size, a 16:9 screen will leave just over 13mm on the top and bottom of the phone for your buttons and features, hardly "on the rim."
What do mean by "meaningful resolution"?
I don't want a 4.5" or 5" iPhone, although if that's all that's on offer I guess I'd suck it up, since I don't have much interest in Android or WP at the moment (juries still out on WP). Big screen is great for some stuff, but carrying it around with me at all times isn't one of them. I have to shake my head at the 'droidheads sagely informing me of how a 5" phone fits nicely into their "jacket pocket" as if I'm going to be wearing a jacket at all times. I keep my iPhone on my person like a set of keys, and I typically barely know it's there. I like that, I guess because I'm a mindless fanboy.