One recent study from Strategy Analytics says 90% of current smartphone owners want a larger screened device than they currently have (as long as they're still thin), with the sweet spot being 4-4.5".
EDIT: Seems AI isn't allowing links to 9to5Mac? Tried a couple of times, but get asterisks replacing 9to5mac. ???
Let's see - who to believe?
- An unknown market research company who does some kind of survey with unknown methodology and unknown sample
or
- The fact that the #1, #2, and #3 phones in the world last year were 3.5" - and the top two still are.
Sorry, but I'll go with what people are actually buying.
I think it's also worth pointing out that even actual Android fans are panning this phone.
Meanwhile, the iPhone gets criticized more by people who don't even use one. Look at the fake reviews 'I'm a zzz' did for the iPhone (see 'Recent Reviews' below). I don't believe for a minute that he's got either of those phones, much less both.
I can understand why a fan of a product would post comments about a product they like on a fan site for that product like AI.
I can understand why someone who has actually used a product would post reasonable comments on a fan site for that product.
What I can't understand is what kind of mental illness would make someone spend countless hours on a fan site when they don't like a product, never used a product and are happy to admit that there's no way in the world they'd ever use a product. They have some unreasonable, unfounded hatred for the company or its products and spew endless venom on fan sites for that product - just out of spite. Yet there are a number of people who fit that bill here.
Unless they're being paid for spreading their FUD, they really need to seek professional help.
I assume a URL shortener would resolve that. I doubt their filter will look at long URL destination before submitting your post.
I think we'd rather have real links than URL shorteners. We're looking into the censoring problem now and we'll certainly fix it, but I think it's going to come out that URL shortening sites will be censored while all real URLs will be allowed.
I think we'd rather have real links than URL shorteners. We're looking into the censoring problem now and we'll certainly fix it, but I think it's going to come out that URL shortening sites will be censored while all real URLs will be allowed.
Sounds reasonable.
Off topic: One thing that I'm surprised we haven't seen with internet forums are award-based posting abilities. IOW, as you participate on a site your trust on that site starts to grow. With this you get options for using certain markup text, adding images or videos, et al. It could also be used to give you badges (like in FourSquare) that would further encourage more users to post and to post in responsible ways that would benefit the site in every sense. For instance, those that get x-many posts recommended as helpful would get t Thumbs Up badge and with so many certain badges you could get a reqard like full HTML markup instead of limited BB Code Edit markup.
- An unknown market research company who does some kind of survey with unknown methodology and unknown sample
They may be unknown to you, and not unsurprisingly. There's no reason you would have had to use them. As an mobile and automotive industry research source they're pretty well known and oft-quoted. I've read their reports before via press releases or while doing research on LBS business and issues.
Off topic: One thing that I'm surprised we haven't seen with internet forums are award-based posting abilities. IOW, as you participate on a site your trust on that site starts to grow. With this you get options for using certain markup text, adding images or videos, et al. It could also be used to give you badges (like in FourSquare) that would further encourage more users to post and to post in responsible ways that would benefit the site in every sense. For instance, those that get x-many posts recommended as helpful would get t Thumbs Up badge and with so many certain badges you could get a reqard like full HTML markup instead of limited BB Code Edit markup.
We've tried that with one of the forums I moderate, giving trusted posters a special icon alongside their name. They're also the only ones we allow to still PM other members, and live-links to internet retailers are somewhat tolerated from them (as long as no affiliate link), tho still not encouraged. We even have a special "experts" area restricted to trusted members.
EDIT: I just read an article that may explain the reason behind the design changes with this Samsung Galaxy compared to the last two. Is it a phone designed by lawyers?
They may be unknown to you, and not unsurprisingly. There's no reason you would have had to use them. As an mobile and automotive industry research source they're pretty well known and oft-quoted. I've read their reports before via press releases or while doing research on LBS business and issues.
As usual, you've managed to miss the point.
You have a market research firm saying that most customers prefer larger phones - yet the majority are buying smaller phones. The 4.5" and up phones are only about 10-20% of the market, IIRC. Given the fact that only a minority are buying the large phones, why should we believe that market research firm?
That's not was was said in the first place. The survey results offered that buyers would prefer a larger screen on their next smartphone. Since Apple doesn't offer one any larger then Apple buyers don't have a choice of a larger display. Given the choice I have little doubt that most would appreciate one closer to 4" (or larger). Changing the argument to something that suits you better doesn't invalidate the claim made by Strategy Analytics.
That's not was was said in the first place. The survey results offered that buyers would prefer a larger screen on their next smartphone. Since Apple doesn't offer one any larger then Apple buyers don't have a choice of a larger display. Given the choice I have little doubt that most would appreciate one closer to 4" (or larger). Changing the argument to something that suits you better doesn't invalidate the claim made by Strategy Analytics.
Since those people have not switched from the iPhone, and Apple's retention rate is sky high (far higher than Android), your 'logic' doesn't work. If those people thought that a larger phone was important, they would be buying something else.
You're not making any sense. I don't think even you believe your attempt at a a reasoned discussion. You're simply being a contrary little guy for whatever reason.
Sounds reasonable.
Off topic: One thing that I'm surprised we haven't seen with internet forums are award-based posting abilities. IOW, as you participate on a site your trust on that site starts to grow. With this you get options for using certain markup text, adding images or videos, et al. It could also be used to give you badges (like in FourSquare) that would further encourage more users to post and to post in responsible ways that would benefit the site in every sense. For instance, those that get x-many posts recommended as helpful would get t Thumbs Up badge and with so many certain badges you could get a reqard like full HTML markup instead of limited BB Code Edit markup.
You're not making any sense. I don't think even you believe your attempt at a a reasoned discussion. You're simply being a contrary little guy for whatever reason.
Gotcha Jr. You truly believe that Apple owners not ditching iPhones for a larger-screened Android device is proof they don't want a larger screen. What rule of logic are you using? I'm truly curious how you convinced yourself. Perhaps simple proof by hubris?
Gotcha Jr. You truly believe that Apple owners not ditching iPhones for a larger-screened Android device is proof they don't want a larger screen. What rule of logic are you using? I'm truly curious how you convinced yourself. Perhaps simple proof by hubris?
I never said that they didn't want a larger screen.
What I said was that the evidence is clear that when given a choice between phones, people are more often not choosing these huge screens - and that's true of Android as well as iOS. I'm not going to get into the reasons why because different people probably have different reasons, but the fact is that 4.5" and larger phones only make up a small portion of the market. So everyone whining that Apple can't be successful unless they increase the size of their phone is arguing against known facts.
Personally, I don't think screen size matters. I think the real issue is phone size. If Apple can increase the screen size without increasing the phone size much, it is very possible that they might do so. It looks to me like they could increase screen size by about 15" (to around 4" without making the phone any larger and that wouldn't surpass me in the least.
One recent study from Strategy Analytics says 90% of current smartphone owners want a larger screened device than they currently have (as long as they're still thin), with the sweet spot being 4-4.5".
<span style="color:rgb(24,24,24);font-family:'lucida grande', verdana, helvetica, sans-serif;background-color:rgb(198,204,208);">Originally Posted by </span>
<strong style="color:rgb(24,24,24);font-family:'lucida grande', verdana, helvetica, sans-serif;background-color:rgb(198,204,208);">Gatorguy</strong>
<span style="color:rgb(24,24,24);font-family:'lucida grande', verdana, helvetica, sans-serif;background-color:rgb(198,204,208);"> </span>
<a href="http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/149844/samsung-unveils-quad-core-galaxy-s-iii-with-4-8-amoled-screen/200#post_2105622" style="font-family:'lucida grande', verdana, helvetica, sans-serif;background-color:rgb(198,204,208);"></a>
<br style="color:rgb(24,24,24);font-family:'lucida grande', verdana, helvetica, sans-serif;background-color:rgb(198,204,208);">
<br style="color:rgb(24,24,24);font-family:'lucida grande', verdana, helvetica, sans-serif;background-color:rgb(198,204,208);">
<span style="color:rgb(24,24,24);font-family:'lucida grande', verdana, helvetica, sans-serif;background-color:rgb(198,204,208);">One recent study from Strategy Analytics says 90% of current smartphone owners want a larger screened device than they currently have (as long as they're still thin), with the sweet spot being 4-4.5".</span>
<br style="color:rgb(24,24,24);font-family:'lucida grande', verdana, helvetica, sans-serif;background-color:rgb(198,204,208);">
<br style="color:rgb(24,24,24);font-family:'lucida grande', verdana, helvetica, sans-serif;background-color:rgb(198,204,208);">
<a class="bbcode_url" href="http://www.marketwatch.com/story/strategy-analytics-smartphone-owners-demand-larger-displays-2012-03-14" style="font-family:'lucida grande', verdana, helvetica, sans-serif;background-color:rgb(198,204,208);" target="_blank">http://www.marketwatch.com/story/strategy-analytics-smartphone-owners-demand-larger-displays-2012-03-14</a>;
So there was no point in your original reply then.
Of course there was.
Let's see if I can put this into language that's simple enough for you.
1. People have a choice of smart phones today.
2. Many of the smartphones on the market are over 4.5"
3. If people overwhelmingly want smartphones over 4.5", they have quite a few to choose from.
4. People are not choosing the smartphones over 4.5".
Therefore, either the statement that people want larger phones is wrong or they are choosing their phones based on something other than size - and the size is not an important factor. If the latter is the case, then there's no need for Apple to introduce a 4.5"+ phone.
The evidence is that people are not buying many phones larger than 4.5", so the claim that Apple needs a phone that size to stay competitive is bull.
Maybe you're not a shill, after all. I can't imagine how much Google would have to pay you to make you act so incredibly foolish.
I'll keep the words really simple. Didn't you read the article? If so then your post is an obvious strawman argument rather than just ignorance of what was written.
It didn't comment on larger than 4.5" displays so why mention it in conjunction with Strategy Analytics? Nor did the article claim that the most important consumer feature was display size. It was an informational post by a well-regarded analytics firm that you have offered no evidence to refute, simple as that. There's no reason to blather on about something that in essence you've already agreed with by making it into something it wasn't.
A larger display wouldn't be rejected by iPhone owners and actually preferred by most based on all existing survey data that I've seen, which includes the SA article. If you have evidence otherwise I'd love to have your links for it.
It didn't comment on larger than 4.5" displays so why mention it in conjunction with Strategy Analytics? Nor did the article claim that the most important consumer feature was display size. It was an informational post by a well-regarded analytics firm that you have offered no evidence to refute, simple as that. There's no reason to blather on about something that in essence you've already agreed with by making it into something it wasn't.
A larger display wouldn't be rejected by iPhone owners and actually preferred by most based on all existing survey data that I've seen, which includes the SA article. If you have evidence otherwise I'd love to have your links for it.
It is entirely possible that some users would want a slightly larger phone. I'm sure most people would like a less expensive phone, too. Or a phone with more storage at the same price. But they're still buying iPhones, so those desires are not important enough to affect the purchase decision. Heck, if you ask people if they would prefer for their new phone to have ten $100 bills in the box, I'm sure they'd agree.
My point (that you keep consistently ignoring) is:
1. It's obviously not a major preference - certainly not enough to affect purchasing preference. If people wanted a larger phone badly enough, there are plenty to buy - and they're not doing so.
2. Even if they want a larger phone, there's a clear limit. These 4.5"+ phones are not very successful in the marketplace compared to smaller phones.
3. The argument that Apple MUST introduce a larger phone therefore has no basis in reality.
It is <probable> that <most> users would want a slightly larger phone.
(Fixed it for ya)
1. It's obviously not a major preference - certainly not enough to affect purchasing preference. If people wanted a larger phone badly enough, there are plenty to buy - and they're not doing so.
Except for the iPhone, every current best-selling smartphone at every major US carrier has a 4" or larger display. Some people apparently want a 4" or larger display bad enough to buy one since they're doing so.
Since they don't have any information on how they came up with their 'hottest selling phones', let's go with someone who actually measures the number sold and let's look at more than one month to add validity.
Comments
Gee. That means that almost half of the phones have whatever feature you were talking about. Inability to upgrade Android phones is well documented.
Let's see - who to believe?
- An unknown market research company who does some kind of survey with unknown methodology and unknown sample
or
- The fact that the #1, #2, and #3 phones in the world last year were 3.5" - and the top two still are.
Sorry, but I'll go with what people are actually buying.
Meanwhile, the iPhone gets criticized more by people who don't even use one. Look at the fake reviews 'I'm a zzz' did for the iPhone (see 'Recent Reviews' below). I don't believe for a minute that he's got either of those phones, much less both.
I can understand why a fan of a product would post comments about a product they like on a fan site for that product like AI.
I can understand why someone who has actually used a product would post reasonable comments on a fan site for that product.
What I can't understand is what kind of mental illness would make someone spend countless hours on a fan site when they don't like a product, never used a product and are happy to admit that there's no way in the world they'd ever use a product. They have some unreasonable, unfounded hatred for the company or its products and spew endless venom on fan sites for that product - just out of spite. Yet there are a number of people who fit that bill here.
Unless they're being paid for spreading their FUD, they really need to seek professional help.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
I assume a URL shortener would resolve that. I doubt their filter will look at long URL destination before submitting your post.
I think we'd rather have real links than URL shorteners. We're looking into the censoring problem now and we'll certainly fix it, but I think it's going to come out that URL shortening sites will be censored while all real URLs will be allowed.
Sounds reasonable.
Off topic: One thing that I'm surprised we haven't seen with internet forums are award-based posting abilities. IOW, as you participate on a site your trust on that site starts to grow. With this you get options for using certain markup text, adding images or videos, et al. It could also be used to give you badges (like in FourSquare) that would further encourage more users to post and to post in responsible ways that would benefit the site in every sense. For instance, those that get x-many posts recommended as helpful would get t Thumbs Up badge and with so many certain badges you could get a reqard like full HTML markup instead of limited BB Code Edit markup.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Let's see - who to believe?
- An unknown market research company who does some kind of survey with unknown methodology and unknown sample
They may be unknown to you, and not unsurprisingly. There's no reason you would have had to use them. As an mobile and automotive industry research source they're pretty well known and oft-quoted. I've read their reports before via press releases or while doing research on LBS business and issues.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Sounds reasonable.
Off topic: One thing that I'm surprised we haven't seen with internet forums are award-based posting abilities. IOW, as you participate on a site your trust on that site starts to grow. With this you get options for using certain markup text, adding images or videos, et al. It could also be used to give you badges (like in FourSquare) that would further encourage more users to post and to post in responsible ways that would benefit the site in every sense. For instance, those that get x-many posts recommended as helpful would get t Thumbs Up badge and with so many certain badges you could get a reqard like full HTML markup instead of limited BB Code Edit markup.
We've tried that with one of the forums I moderate, giving trusted posters a special icon alongside their name. They're also the only ones we allow to still PM other members, and live-links to internet retailers are somewhat tolerated from them (as long as no affiliate link), tho still not encouraged. We even have a special "experts" area restricted to trusted members.
EDIT: I just read an article that may explain the reason behind the design changes with this Samsung Galaxy compared to the last two. Is it a phone designed by lawyers?
http://www.androidpolice.com/2012/05/04/the-samsung-galaxy-s-iii-the-first-smartphone-designed-entirely-by-lawyers/
As usual, you've managed to miss the point.
You have a market research firm saying that most customers prefer larger phones - yet the majority are buying smaller phones. The 4.5" and up phones are only about 10-20% of the market, IIRC. Given the fact that only a minority are buying the large phones, why should we believe that market research firm?
That's not was was said in the first place. The survey results offered that buyers would prefer a larger screen on their next smartphone. Since Apple doesn't offer one any larger then Apple buyers don't have a choice of a larger display. Given the choice I have little doubt that most would appreciate one closer to 4" (or larger). Changing the argument to something that suits you better doesn't invalidate the claim made by Strategy Analytics.
Since those people have not switched from the iPhone, and Apple's retention rate is sky high (far higher than Android), your 'logic' doesn't work. If those people thought that a larger phone was important, they would be buying something else.
They're not.
You're not making any sense. I don't think even you believe your attempt at a a reasoned discussion. You're simply being a contrary little guy for whatever reason.
Good ideas!
The irony meter just went off the scale.
Gotcha Jr. You truly believe that Apple owners not ditching iPhones for a larger-screened Android device is proof they don't want a larger screen. What rule of logic are you using? I'm truly curious how you convinced yourself. Perhaps simple proof by hubris?
I never said that they didn't want a larger screen.
What I said was that the evidence is clear that when given a choice between phones, people are more often not choosing these huge screens - and that's true of Android as well as iOS. I'm not going to get into the reasons why because different people probably have different reasons, but the fact is that 4.5" and larger phones only make up a small portion of the market. So everyone whining that Apple can't be successful unless they increase the size of their phone is arguing against known facts.
Personally, I don't think screen size matters. I think the real issue is phone size. If Apple can increase the screen size without increasing the phone size much, it is very possible that they might do so. It looks to me like they could increase screen size by about 15" (to around 4" without making the phone any larger and that wouldn't surpass me in the least.
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
One recent study from Strategy Analytics says 90% of current smartphone owners want a larger screened device than they currently have (as long as they're still thin), with the sweet spot being 4-4.5".
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/strategy-analytics-smartphone-owners-demand-larger-displays-2012-03-14
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Let's see - who to believe?
- An unknown market research company who does some kind of survey with unknown methodology and unknown sample
or
- The fact that the #1, #2, and #3 phones in the world last year were 3.5" - and the top two still are.
Sorry, but I'll go with what people are actually buying.
So there was no point in your original reply then.
Of course there was.
Let's see if I can put this into language that's simple enough for you.
1. People have a choice of smart phones today.
2. Many of the smartphones on the market are over 4.5"
3. If people overwhelmingly want smartphones over 4.5", they have quite a few to choose from.
4. People are not choosing the smartphones over 4.5".
Therefore, either the statement that people want larger phones is wrong or they are choosing their phones based on something other than size - and the size is not an important factor. If the latter is the case, then there's no need for Apple to introduce a 4.5"+ phone.
The evidence is that people are not buying many phones larger than 4.5", so the claim that Apple needs a phone that size to stay competitive is bull.
Maybe you're not a shill, after all. I can't imagine how much Google would have to pay you to make you act so incredibly foolish.
I'll keep the words really simple. Didn't you read the article? If so then your post is an obvious strawman argument rather than just ignorance of what was written.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/strategy-analytics-smartphone-owners-demand-larger-displays-2012-03-14
It didn't comment on larger than 4.5" displays so why mention it in conjunction with Strategy Analytics? Nor did the article claim that the most important consumer feature was display size. It was an informational post by a well-regarded analytics firm that you have offered no evidence to refute, simple as that. There's no reason to blather on about something that in essence you've already agreed with by making it into something it wasn't.
A larger display wouldn't be rejected by iPhone owners and actually preferred by most based on all existing survey data that I've seen, which includes the SA article. If you have evidence otherwise I'd love to have your links for it.
It is entirely possible that some users would want a slightly larger phone. I'm sure most people would like a less expensive phone, too. Or a phone with more storage at the same price. But they're still buying iPhones, so those desires are not important enough to affect the purchase decision. Heck, if you ask people if they would prefer for their new phone to have ten $100 bills in the box, I'm sure they'd agree.
My point (that you keep consistently ignoring) is:
1. It's obviously not a major preference - certainly not enough to affect purchasing preference. If people wanted a larger phone badly enough, there are plenty to buy - and they're not doing so.
2. Even if they want a larger phone, there's a clear limit. These 4.5"+ phones are not very successful in the marketplace compared to smaller phones.
3. The argument that Apple MUST introduce a larger phone therefore has no basis in reality.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
It is <probable> that <most> users would want a slightly larger phone.
(Fixed it for ya)
1. It's obviously not a major preference - certainly not enough to affect purchasing preference. If people wanted a larger phone badly enough, there are plenty to buy - and they're not doing so.
Except for the iPhone, every current best-selling smartphone at every major US carrier has a 4" or larger display. Some people apparently want a 4" or larger display bad enough to buy one since they're doing so.
http://www.vision2mobile.com/galleries/2012/04/v2m-march-hottest-selling-smartphones.aspx?pg=2
Since they don't have any information on how they came up with their 'hottest selling phones', let's go with someone who actually measures the number sold and let's look at more than one month to add validity.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/24/top-selling-smartphones-us_n_1299089.html
#1, 2, 3 were all from Apple - 3.5" screen
#4 was Blackberry curve - 3.7" screen
#5 was the HTC-EVO 4G - which does have a 4.3" screen.
So 4 of the top 5 selling phones last year had screens smaller than 4". The iPhones alone accounted for 35% of the total market.
I think you're going to need some real data to support your claim other than "hottest selling phones" from some unknown source and methodology.