nunzy
About
- Banned
- Username
- nunzy
- Joined
- Visits
- 13
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 885
- Badges
- 1
- Posts
- 662
Reactions
-
Newegg card skimming hack stole customer payment details for over a month
-
Compare the iPhone XS and iPhone XR versus the size of other iPhones with this printable g...
-
How Apple has hit 2 billion iOS devices sold, and when it will hit 2 billion iPhones
-
No sign of updates to Mac or iPad Pro in leaked Apple website file
-
Apple's push for bigger iPhone screens expected to drive services profits
lorin schultz said:nunzy said:Apple did extensive testing and determined that the 3.5 inch screen was the optimal size. Samsung made screens the size of dinner plates that made Android fanboys look ridiculous. Apple knew better and kept the optimal screen size that they knew was the best.What happened?
I'll bet part of the "optimal" equation was the cost of larger screens making them less attractive to buyers not yet familiar with the concept of a touchscreen pocket computer that makes phone calls.
What buyers would most readily accept would also form part of the "optimal" assessment. In a world full of flip phones, consumers would have freaked out at the notion of something the size of an iPhone Plus because at that point they had no idea how they would benefit from the extra size. And there wasn't as much benefit then as there is now, as applications for the category hadn't yet evolved to exploit it. They have now, which further alters the "optimum" equation.
I'm sure it's frustrating for those who prefer a smaller device, but the fact that 3.5 inches was optimal back then does not mean it still is.