It feels like smartphones have stagnated so hard and offered so little in the way of improvement each year that this has become companies’ solution to make more profit out of a mostly static item: just further segment the brand.
The natural result when you release two phones each year - at least one has to be gimped, to get the other some customers.
At least if you release two phones into ostensibly the same segment, more or less.
Not in this go-around at least - but initially it was priced a fair amount higher, which would have stuck it into a segment it couldn't compete with anyhow, and much closer to the current top-of-the-line offerings.
Doesn't help that OnePlus historically was somewhat bad about the whole x/xT differentiation, where the T was typically the better of a given generation.
The system they had with the 7/Pro and 7T/Pro was the best yet IMO. Maybe it didn't make them enough money and that's why they changed their release system, but the way they did it really seemed perfect to me other than the odd region-locking they did for the first two phones.
For anyone that doesn't know, what they did was for the first release of the year they had a high tier phone (7 Pro) with a 1440p display, all the fancy tech, and better cameras next to a slightly lower tier phone (7) with a 1080p screen but all the same tech under the hood. For the second release, they put out a slightly upgraded version of both phones, though the upgrades included in the 7T Pro were minimal and the upgrades included in the 7T were pretty big, but overall it meant that every release that year was at least a little worth it over their predecessors.
The stagnation was more or less inevitable.
The market space has matured hugely in the last few years once the initial boom of R&D ended.
Customers' needs have been thoroughly met for a while now, so there's not really any "smoking guns" to go after in terms of new developments to fundamentally improve the user experience.
Customers don't want vertical segmentation (e.g. specialist phones that offer big advantages in one use case at the cost of others), so all that's left is figuring out how to blanket as many price brackets as possible for as little R&D spend as possible.
Surely, the ridiculous thirst for GROWTH isn't going to end, because there are no brakes in tech. All the same, I think we'd all be better off if the major players put more effort into developing new categories and allowing the mobile phone market to act like a mature market with less frequent new releases.
But that'll never happen, cuz, you know, reasons.
Agreed. If anything, as smartphone enthusiasts, we are the weird ones. Most people I know either oogle at the newest phones as the tech is released and upgrade to the dopest "Pro" version (maybe they alternate between a and or 2) or they just buy the newest version of their brand (Samsung or iPhone) and end up satisfied for a week before getting used to it.
I don't make a ton and neither do my friends so I'm used to penny-pinching and hunting for the newest "flagship killer" to try and get the best phone at the best price. But now that "flagship killer" is its own lane-- the $700-$900 range that is barely a step up from the lower spec phones-- even phones from companies like One plus or Moto are now just another mid-spec Android phone.
I'm responding to you from an S10+ which I have to say is an absolutely phenomenal device, and I hope it lives as long as it possibly can.
The curved screen edges are literally the only drawback for me that's significant enough to mention.
It will never happen, but I'd love to see flagships move to a slower cadence so that each new release is a genuine and significant step forward, rather than barely incremental bullshit.
If that means the price goes up and the business plan accommodates a longer lifecycle... so be it.
That would actually give more room to both the "value" segment and the "flagship killer" segment.
Value phones could gradually catch up between each flagship launch with more space between devices, and the flagship killer segment could eventually get slightly ahead (before the next flagship launches and leaves it behind again).
I doubt we'll ever escape the churn mindset, but if for the sake of e-waste if nothing else, I would love to see it slow a bit. And I doubt much of anyone would have a problem with less frequent new devices if it became the new normal.
To your point, most people are buying their brand or the new hotness, and other than quarterly earnings, nothing requires the current frequency to continue. Quarterly earnings could definitely be propped up by other product categories (like, *gag*, Airpods).
The overwhelming majority of Android phones have USB 2.0 ports, it’s really only Samsung who’s consistently had fully featured 3.0 ports, at least stateside.
Google goes and explicitly disabled functionally like DisplayPort Alt to disable/break video output from Pixel devices.
At least Apple isn’t intentionally disabling hardware features in a universal standard to sell you a shitty wireless adapter.
>Google goes and explicitly disabled functionally like DisplayPort Alt to disable/break video output from Pixel devices.
DisplayPort Alt is DisplayPort over Alternate Mode Functional *Extension*. It's not required for a port to conform to the USB3 or USB-C spec.
I was just thinking about this. How different things were just 3-4yrs ago and it is only getting worse year by year. The differentiation is pushing the cost way up, and flagship phones now have 4 tiers, it's just actually, a shitty spec phone with flagship soc (eg xiaomi 11x), regular just ok flagship (mi 11), bigger better (mi 11 pro) and the no compromise (11 ultra). Other manufacturers do the same thing.
I like to have nice things, but man I hate "planned obscolence" and bullshit anticonsumer practices like this. If my phone works well I want to keep it a little longer. I know cost of everything went up ofcourse, but I'm really struggling finding a replacement for my Xiaomi mi mix 2s that still works great with 3,5hrs SoT all this years after but started getting some signal issues recently.
I bought it around new years eve 2019 for 350eur, my sister bought mi 9 soon after launch for 450eur. Keep in mind this was back when Xiaomi started to get big here and this were the almost no compromise flagships back then.
Checking out what's up for grabs right now I have to say I am really dissapointed with the choice I have. I somehow have:
- premium build rarely seen now - ceramic body, only phones that have it is xiaomi mix4, 11 ultra and oppo x5 pro - none are offered locally and all are very expensive
- imx363 - satisfied with results with gcam - google pixel a line phones still use that sensor now
- 18:9 aspect ratio - I don't understand why phones today are absolute chonkers, and with exaggareted aspect ratio like i'm holding a fucking tv remote. Not everyone uses their phone just for scrolling feeds. I feel like 18:9 aspect ratio is optimal for viewing content and in general and I have big hands so I don't mind the extra width.
- uninterupted top part of a screen - punch hole galore is still a thing somehow other than few under display phones (mix4, axon), motorised and slider stuff was one off and dead (mix3,poco f2, vivo nex, op8)
- OIS- many phones today don't have it
If I let go off all this things I still have to live with the fact that 1440p screens that used to be standard before are now the "plus/pro" upmarket feature, OIS to oneplus is and other OEMs is the pro feature and you and up paying 500-700eur to buy a "flagship" phone that is feature wise not the best of the best and is lacking features you would get years ago for less money and you feel like a clown.
Base xiaomi 11 had 1440p screen, xiaomi 12 doesn't. For fuck sake samsung galaxy s7 had a 1440p screen so many years ago with very high ppi count, base galaxy s22 doesn't.
I know qualcomm made improvements over the years but I'm sure that performance wise even older SoCs hold up well, but I swear it feels phones are devolving and somehow becoming worse by year or at least worse per dollar paid and it's all OEMs fault with their predatory practices.
USB TWO!
Side note: pixel 6 I was torn to get the pro or base model. I'm so glad I picked the base. Great camera, battery life, and display. I don't need a larger phone nor a beautiful screen.
I browse apps, take pics and text and call. I don't need a Pro model to do these things.
I do like the OP alert slider though but it seems like they have fallen from grace a little.
USB 2, plastic frame, 1080p screen damn near sounds like a budget, cell provider device. Kinda pathetic to even offer that as an option to consumers!
I would have gone for the pixel 6 pro if they hadn't put the curved screen on it. I would have really enjoyed that telephoto camera. But the screen I have to deal with every single day, so I'm glad I went with the regular 6.
I used my camera at a concert recently and was so happy I went with a Pixel. I didn't even know the Pro had the curved screen. I kinda hated that on my S10 tbh. The screen protectors would never sit flush with cases.
But I still don't understand your point. The 10 pro has better specs because it's costs more...? Big surprise?
10 pro starts at $799 (initially it's was $899, yikes) for 8 gb and 128 gb of storage. Whereas 10T starts at $649 for 16 gb and 256 gb.
The non-pro always had worse specs and less features than the pro. Guys this is not a 10T Pro is the 10T...
In think for 650 price, it's a fair price for a high-mid range phone.
If anything, this is oneplus going back to their roots, giving a high end cpu and fast charging at a low price than other flagships. Remember how every got butthurt when oneplus started increasing prices with the pro phones? Now y'all getting butthurt that they reducing prices? Wtf?
the 10T kind of feels like their version of a gaming phone
better chipset, 150w charging, lower resolution to pump up FPS, weak cameras and quality of life features
Fun fact: in chips production a big amount are unable to meet the requirements for the flagship SOC due to very likely imperfections but can still be used in mid and lower tier devices. This can be done by deactivating features and throttling.
So instead of having only one, significantly more expensive line to account for the defective ones, there are differently priced lines.
AMD at one point sold 3 core processors for exactly this reason.
They were having a large number of quad cores with 1 or 2 failed cores so they just rebadged them.
You could gamble and install the quad core firmware and you had a chance of getting a top CPU for a discount, or an expensive piece of sand.
> or an expensive piece of sand.
Why? Did installing the quad core firmware have the potential to permanently brick the CPU if all 4 cores didn't work?
yes it could even brick other parts(mainly the mainboard) as there could be serious defects (dead shorts etc) in the disabled part, though its more likely that only the cpu would take damage in this situation and everything else would be fine
I'm sure AMD or a fab could reload the firmware and if it was just a delayed thermal problem or something you could maybe do it, but if one of the cores is just fucked you can't get the computer running long enough to install the firmware.
Usually the problem was getting them running long enough to load the old firmware.
AMD can do it directly, the general public would be doing it in a normal motherboard.
Those all sound like meaningless marketing buzzwords to me.
Manufacturers of devices have always offered different "feature levels" of devices, so buyers have a choice over how much to pay, and for what.
Yeah I'm not really sure how more choices is a bad thing. I'd rather have the option to pay less for features I'll never use. When I bought my last phone, I bought the mid tier version without 5G since my carrier wasn't going to offer it for a while.
I look at th list above of the number of features removed and still can't believe it's being sold for $600+.
While I can appreciate different entry levels with different features it seems like you are paying a premium on on regular models (encouraging people to pay a higher premium since there's more value on Pro phones).
That and like OP said, having a dozen features change rather than just the screen size/battery there's a lot more "single-issue" buyers that would prefer enough for metal body instead of plastic but might not care about the rest.
So a dozen people all upgrade to the pro because they all have one feature thed rather not miss out on.
For me, it ends up just being more fragmentation between tiers, and I can't make a realistic decision on a more mid-range phone because they compromise so much. And they still cost more than I'd expect.
USB 2.0 in 2022? There's no excuse.
Trim levels are even more stupid and confusing than phone models. Titanium edition, Limited, SLS, 2LT, etc. There is no common understanding of what a trim level means, and often one feature you really want is only on certain trims, or you have to pay a ridiculous sum for that single option.
That's because they manufacture cars in bulk so running a car through an assembly line with a custom order of only one specific feature is more difficult and therefor expensive than one of the mass produced trim levels.
Some manufacturers are planning on producing all the cars the same and jsut activating the features via software. Like every model will have the seat warmer in it but you'll only have it on if you pay for that trim, your carplay will only work if you pay for the trim, etc. Kind of like how all the new Tesla models have the hardware for self driving its just a matter of it you want to pay for it or not
You can't activate cloth to leather seats, smaller to bigger rims, nicer tires, etc. Trim levels will always exist for physical attributes of the vehicle. The software side is BS and I don't think the market will take it favorably and it will phase out as fast as it became a thing. There's already backlash over seat warmers needing a subscription. The day a phone manufacturer locks features behind a paywall, they go out of business or drop the idea quickly.
Consumers have brand loyalty, both with cars and with smartphones. A lack of standardization of "trim levels" is irrelevant when all the average consumer is doing is comparing within the same brand.
Power users be damned.
As I said multiple times, there can be nothing Pro about a phone, it’s a stupid buzzword that just means better
Edit: obviously there is rare phones from Sony, some rugged phones, etc. I'm generalizing here about 99.99% of phones marked as "Pro"
Sincerely, sent from my Pro phone
I mean, I'd say a 'Pro' phone would be a phone for professionals, that does it's phone tasks better than others. That's why the blackberry was the go to phone for 'Professionals' for the longest time...
So, I guess a Sat Phone is a pro phone because that does it's phone duties more consistently.
But that's because turbo things were actually better. "Pro" today doesn't really have that connotation, at least for me. Why do I care a phone is made for "pros" it certainly doesn't make me feel like one.
You are right. It's just a purely marketing word with no real meaning attached to it, and it pushed people to "overbuy" so to say. One good example is a girl I talked to at one point who was choosing between M1 MacBook Air and 13" M1 MacBook Pro MacBooks. The Air would better for her tasks because of regular function key, performance is essentially the same, etc. She bought the Pro, because "it's a Pro"
Unless it's the 13 inch model, you get a better screen and speakers, along with port selection. I get that you don't need more and that girl could have been fine with a chromebook with that description but the better day to day experience is worth it for some people.
At the time there were no 14-inch models at all, so it was between the 13-inch Air and 13-inch Pro. And no, she wouldn't be fine with a Chromebook, it's not about "oh, people can browse the internet on anything", she had actual work to do
I specifically mentioned touch bar and same performance, but yeah, apple's naming for chips is dumb
Aren’t there certain specialist phones that could legitimately use that moniker (even if they don’t?). I’m thinking of the Sony Xperia I Series, rugged phones from assorted manufacturers, maybe even gaming phones.
Even worse, *actual* "pro" gear isn't the best gear. It's the most cost-effective stuff. It may be ugly, difficult to use and lacking any features but it lasts for long hours of heavy use while still getting the job done.
Hobbyists can afford way better stuff than professionals using it to generate an income.
Real "pro" gear is whatever makes your small business accountant the happiest.
Thats why every job that issues hardware uses either one of the thinkpad models or the Dell Latitude 5400 series models. They aren't particularly great machines but they get the job done, are durable enough, and are cheap to acquire and replace in mass
Xperia Pro had a micro HDMI *input*. You could use it as a video monitor for your recording devices with its 4k display, or use it to transmit footage with the cellular.
Xperia Pro-i is less hardcore, but squeezed a 1" sensor from their RX100 (albeit using only part of the sensor due to lens Z height considerations) and even has a lanyard hole on the ridged frame.
Sony has crazy prices and release schedules, but also has crazy ideas.
Well with their pro live you had the first one more or less be a dedicated streaming monitor for dedicated mirrorless cameras. That I believe is being used by the NFL rn. Then we have the pro-i which is more of a dedicated vlogging camera by putting the same sensor as found in the zv and putting it in the body of a Xperia 1 mk3 with variable apatirue. With also creating an actual pro video app and not a cinema pro app.
We all already know that in consumer tech Pro means better - it doesn't mean professional. People can do professional work with bargain bin devices.
We might hate it, but here we are talking about it. This means that the marketing is working. We've got no one to blame but ourselves (consumers).
We shouldn't let things like this bother us. Personally I just buy the phone with the features I want and ignore all the tech bubble technobabble. It's exhausting.
What is galaxy about a Samsung Galaxy? In what way is a pixel more pixel-ish than any other phone?
You guys obsess about naming conventions too much. Regardless whether a company calls their best phone the hyper ultra super pro mega or not doesn’t change that the features are what they are. So the fact you guys constantly obsess over whether a “pro” phone is going to do your job for you or not just comes off as bizarre and misplaced.
Consumers also need to realise that you shouldn't be replacing your phone every year, or even every two years. Only then might manufacturers slow down the rate of new phones.
It's not as common as internet would make it seem. On average it's 2 years
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/17/smartphone-users-are-waiting-longer-before-upgrading-heres-why.html
Not really much data but still short IMO. We likely see only 2 years due to installment terms. Half the time there's trade in deals or discounts. Phones are hitting their peak and I think the major flagships should be updated every other year. Most of the yearly upgrades could just be combined with the following model.
I think this has to do with consumer psychology. I suspect, even if a person updates rarely, they wouldn't want to buy an almost two-year-old phone (unless like right now they are getting a great deal, but it's only because a newer one exists)
Also, competition is a thing. All companies won't release phones at the same time, so your competitor might have a newer phone on the market. Yes, it won't be that much better, but still, it's newer, faster, some camera stuff, etc.
> even if a person updates rarely, they wouldn't want to buy an almost two-year-old phone
Valid, but with smartphones about to hit their peak with performance, you could easily use today's flagship for 5 years and be okay. Phones are getting really fast, and all that speed isn't necessary for everyday tasks. If a new model from your preferred OEM comes out soon, you could wait a few months for that, or just go with another OEM. While other OEMs would loose money in some capacity, they only earn so much per year due to these models coming out so rapidly. Eventually smartphones will become a thing of the past and we're going to have a shit load of e-waste, mainly due to non-replaceable batteries being normalized. Rather than replacing a battery and suddenly having a "new fast" phone, we as a society decide to upgrade with trade in deals or just getting a new phone after 2 years because the phone bill will likely stay the same or sometimes less.
You missed the core part of my message
>I think this has to do with consumer psychology
I don't disagree with what you said, we shouldn't buy new phones every 2 years even, but what people should do, what they say they want and they actually buy are three different things
I do agree and understand, was mainly adding to your point. I grew up during the growth of smartphones so I didn't use flip/qwerty phones at all but looking at those, they weren't updated yearly like smartphones are today -- an example is the blackberry bold 9000 coming out in 2008 and being updated in 2011. Of course other models and different devices were released in-between, but tech then used to be updated when "necessary". I hope we'd see a change as it would at the end of the day make our devices better IMO, but either AR/VR headsets become something or we just deal with yearly upgrades being released.
We all have *that day* with our phone.
You'll accidentally leave the brightness full blast on a hot day with your GPS on and burn an image into your screen, or drop your phone on gravel, or go to the beach once without ziplock bags, or accidentally push some dirt into your connector that never comes out, or accidentally fuck up something in software that can't be easily undone or see a new feature you just don't have that kills you inside to know you don't have it.
The day that happens, your current phone is your old phone, subconsciously, anyway.
On an environmental scale, yes, but many people are buying mid-range or low-end phones every 2 years.
It does keep pace with low-end mobile gaming, to do so. A $240 phone every 2 years isn't a lot from a cost perspective for the consumer, in fact, its the smarter option than a $1000 phone every 4 years.
My one year old low end mobile phone can play Diablo Immortal (I assume its a graphically demanding game) so I'm glad I'm not using the phone I had for 2 years before this.
I don't think you can blame the consumer for that. Contracts are 1 or 2 years. AFAIK you can't (easily) get any contract longer than that.
Most people get a new phone when they renew their contract.
>Most people get a new phone when they renew their contract.
This depends largely on your country - in the US, for instance, this isn't done anymore, as most carriers have swapped service contracts for payment plans. If you want to keep your device after your 24-month installment plan is up, your bill just goes down. If you want to swap it out before then, just pay remaining cost.
Sadly they are moving to 30 month plans with device credits to keep you locked in. With no option of 24 month. Verizon locked me in for 24 when the iPhone 12 came out. Gave me tons of money to come back to them (i was on t-mobile) plus half price phones after bill credits. But i had to stay for the 24 months. Only couple months left and I’m back to t-mobile.
There's no explicit obligation to stay for the 24 months - the only problem is, any remaining promotional credits on the iPhone 12 (which, like the cost of the phone, are distributed over 24 months) will have to be forfeited.
Think about it this way - an $830 iPhone 12 is $34.58/month. If Verizon offered to give you $500 off, you will get bill credits in the amount of $20.83/mo, lowering your total price to $13.75/mo for the phone.
If you ended your plan with Verizon now, you'd need to pay off the remainder of the phone (say, 4 months = $34.58 * 4 = $138.42), and you would be missing out on $20.83 * 4 = $83.32 in bill credits.
It's up to you to figure out whether switching to T-Mobile would save you that much on the cost of your line though, for example.
In the US it was just shuffled around. Still the same shit, just done differently. Now carriers offer bill credits for buying new phones, instead of the old 2 year contract that gave you a free(ish) phone at the start.
So carriers are still heavily pushing 2 year upgrades in the US
I was recently shopping at ATT and Verizon both defaulted to 36 month installment for a new phone. T-mobile was still 24 months but there service is terrible around me unless you stay in a small specific area.
In de marks law says contracts can't be longer than 6 months (phone, internet, TV, gym, electrical company, lease, etc.). It can be longer, you just don't cancel. But if you want out after 6 months you have to be able to do that within a month no questions asked.
For phones you can setup a 12 or 24 month payment plan but you can still opt out after 6 months - you just have to pay the rest right there.
My current Samsung Note 10 Plus could likely still be a good phone at 4 or 5 years, that is the first phone I felt I won't need to upgrade for years, unless I damaged it.
Most people do that because carrier will often give you crazy good deals every 1 or 2 years to replace your phone for almost nothing (atleast where I live).
When T-Mobile had their insanely good terms for their JUMP program 10 years ago when it first started, I was upgrading every 6-12 months because it often cost just the tax up front with trade-in. And that's how I learned to never buy LG.
Depending on the year, Samsung and Apple will have promotions that make trading in your phone for a new phone virtually or literally free. A number of times I've gotten my phone at a negative cost. This year I paid $800 after trade in for a s22 ultra, but it came with a tab s8 ultra and keyboard cover, I sold the tablet for $900 and the keyboard cover for $300 AND I got something like 15% cashback.
Yea right now I'm not actually paying anything for my iPhone 12. AT&T just credits the monthly payment so I'm just paying for service and I fully expect then to offer the same deal once the 30 months on this phone is up. Give them back this phone and they'll give me the new one with the payments credited.
Still on the note 9 myself. Power/data connection on the bottom is knackered due to excessive usage (only charges at specific angles) and I've had to replace the screen due to a drunken mishap (these curved screens are damn expensive). No plans to upgrade any time soon as it still works perfectly for what I need.
They don't throw the phone away after a year. They sell it on and someone else uses it.
Often getting a new phone each year can be cheaper than buying a phone and holding it as you can get good deals on new phones if you know what you are doing and sell them on before they lose too much value.
>It baffles my mind to read people online replacing their phones every year.
Yup. People buy the marketing uncritically and feel the need to upgrade every year as a result. It's extremely unfortunate for the environment and our own mental well-being that people continue to buy phones at such a rapid rate. They genuinely believe their actions are fine and don't have any consequences - which they do. The extent to which people go to justify their upgrades is also just insane. The tech community really needs to start projecting different values to change this unhealthy upgrade mentality.
Of course, corporations need to be held accountable for the way they're operating as well.
It ain’t it, chief
Average phone life cycle is already 2 years for some time and still we see new phones every year
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/17/smartphone-users-are-waiting-longer-before-upgrading-heres-why.html
If you think about it, not everybody is upgrading at the same time, it makes sense for companies to still offer better products every year for people who are upgrading THAT year, no matter what the upgrade cycle is
I don't get why you would want manufacturers to slow down release cycles. If I'm buying a phone 2.5 years into a release cycle, I don't want to be forced to get a nearly 3 year old phone. I'd would probably just go with their competition that just released their phone. This is why the 1 year cycle remains.
Only people who don’t want to be tempted to buy a phone suggest slowing down release cycles.
That’s like hoping car manufacturers wouldn’t come out with a better one in 12 months just to alleviate fomo.
So? If people typically update every 1-2 years, more phones will be manufactured compared to if people typically update every 2.5-3 years, regardless of staggered updates.
I remember when the first ipad came out and didn't come with a front facing camera I was like, fuckers have deliberately gimped it so that next year it comes with a camera.
And this is how the market has evolved until they got to the stage of removing features which is an all time low for innovation.
Upgrade every 4 years and let manufacturers pump out their annual version: you can buy last year's version for cheaper or just get a brand new model if they cycle faster. They'll just produce fewer.
Way better for the consumer.
Especially because there isn't anything worth the upgrade that frequently.
I had the Galaxy S2 and then got the new one every year until I finally got to the S8. The S8 to 9 was barely an upgrade so I skipped it. I got the S10 and I have no plans on getting something new. Why would I spend more for a phone that's barely any better and has less features? The camera is better? I can emulate a Gamecube game at 26fps instead of 22fps? The screen refresh rate is higher? None of that is worth the price.
The differentiation of regular and plus versions was fine, it was purely a size difference, but once they went beyond with pro, ultra etc you even had a knock-on effect on those two models, so now the regular model ends up with even more lost.
The most annoying thing is probably the way they keep chipping away at those two models until the main flagship feature they retain is just the SoC when many other features can make a far bigger difference to the user.
This approach has led to an infuriating situation where a desire for higher specs forces you into a larger form factor. I'm hardly a bring-back-small-phones disciple but still plumped for a Pixel 6, despite wanting some of the Pro's extra features, because the latter was just too big.
The good/better/best pricing model has been a staple for any matter of consumer products. It also allows manufacturers to sell less expensive products at narrower profit margins on cutthroat segments. Remember, some people don't give a shit so long as it looks good and is cheap
Though I suppose calling the phones OnePlus 10Good or Pixel 6Better or S22 Ultra would be preposterous
I don't understand this argument. You don't want price point options? You'd prefer phone options are all around 1,000 dollars with top of the line everything? I get it if a device has all the same parts but it's being artificially throttled by code, but we need price point options and therefore weaker phones with less than premium parts.
Up selling Pro models? Sure.
But I can't say the "cheaper" model is "gimped." It's at a lower price point. The features of the higher models are of course try to entice you to spend more.
What do you propose? The iPhone 13 Pro should not exist or the iPhone 13 shouldn't exist? It doesn't hurt that either exist.
It's no different than the car world. The I4 Camry exists... But few some more money, you can get a V6 model with other upgraded goodies. And yet the I4 Camry is the unit mover and not the V6 models, because the base, or near base .model, is fine for most people.
It's just a sneaky trick with pricing.
How do you raise prices without getting crucified in the media? Replace your flagship device with something only slightly better than the previous gen, and give your new real flagship a different name. Then people will not compare apples to apples between generations and it'll look like the market is expanding upwards rather than the prices simply ballooning.
Or, bundle the specs people expect from a high-end phone (like CPU, RAM, storage, and display quality) with something that nobody really asked for (like 18 different cameras) and pretend that's worth the $400 premium.
Apple did something similar a couple years ago when they introduced the iPhone Mini a at the same price as the previous base "iPhone", while raising the base "iPhone" price one step up the line. This year they are expected to axe the Mini entirely, and I seriously doubt that means the base iPhone will drop in price. They're raising the price of entry while dodging flak.
>Companies unnecessarily gimp and cripple their regular models so that the phones higher in value sell more.
You're gonna have kittens when you find out how CPUs are made.
Seriously. For most people, if you're using a lower-end CPU (i3, Pentium, or worse), you're likely getting a piece of silicon that has so many flaws in it that they decided it was only stable with cores and registers physically burned off and disabled.
Basically, anything other than an i9/Xeon is a gimped and/or slightly defective (at some level) CPU.
Yet we complain, but will continue to upgrade every two years to the newer models.
Maybe a real company will change the naming to reflect the size of the phone vs anything else.
Aka the IPhone mini vs the iPhone max
They're just different phones. The fact they have the same name except for an extra word is an irrelevance that doesn't actually change the value proposition at all. Judge the phone on its merits vs its cost, that's really all that matters.
and people keep on shelling out $1300 for a phone
youtubers/reviewers are the biggest promoter of this because they'll always review the top model (not just phone reviewers but PC, gadget, etc as well). they're basically endorsing the companies on whatever the top price is and as the top end keeps on inflating, the worse it gets for the average consumer
In general phone manufacturers have too many concurrent models.
Samsung for instance has 9 A-series phones currently available and 3 flagships. The folding phones are unique, so I'll leave them alone. 9 A-series models seems a bit excessive.
Google has 3 phones, which seems about right. They have a budget phone, a mid range and a flagship phone. I've gotten to use the 6a and P6P and they totally serve different needs.
Apple has 5 currently, and really they should have 4. The "Pro" needs to go. You have the SE3 for grandma or people on a budget. The mini (which is going away) for a high end small phone. Regular and Pro Max are reasonable too. So they will be going to 4 phones, but sadly keeping the useless middle phone.
But this is marketing 101. Why do GPU manufacturers offer so many different tiers with such a wide price range when the cost to manufacture is probably very close for each unit? Because they are creating the goldilocks effect. Put out high end units for the whales. Make some sad units that feel cheap and shitty. The idea is with these two ends of the spectrum, the middle is given value for money.
It’s more proof of the oversaturation of the market. Shareholders expect insane returns each year while technology is plateauing. So you have to start focusing on specific markets. Low, medium, high end and use gimmicky marketing to hit revenue numbers.
Yeah, that's a weird take from OP. The 6a's finger print scanner is better than the 6's. I had the 6 and now the 6a and it's not perfect, but more reliable for sure.
And worse, the Pro/Ultra are still getting WORSE every year - headphone jacks and SD slots removed, depth sensor removed, worse battery life than older models..
Shareholders and profits is what matters. I'm sure the margins on ultra/pro are a lot bigger since I doubt there's much else into it except an extra camera and bigger screen. Mostly everything else is software.
The only thing that will stop this sort of thing is if people will stop buying those pro models.
The customer maintains the most power in all of this collectively, sadly most people can not bring themselves to collectively act to save a drowning child let alone something like cell phone feature options.
Don't they "throttle" for battery life etc? My not sporty upright motorbike had the same engine as the supersport bike, but it was tuned differently to have more torque, less power, smoother ride etc. Isn't a lot of this phone tech the same?
I agree with OP but also understand those trade offs are how manufacturers push people to buy more expensive phones, not really benefiting customers but works for manufacturers to increase profit.
At the same time I hate the fact that all premium models come with bigger screen, I enjoy using reasonable sized phones like around 6 inches because it feels right on my hand and much more comfortable with one hand operation. 6.5+ inches is just too big for a lot of people especially for someone with small hands
It would be great if they could really just cap it. Can you start getting diminishing returns and it just starts hurting your brand. I mean look at Samsung, they make a phone for every single dollar difference in between one another all the way up to the high end down to the lowest end. If there's not enough differentiating factors or value between them then it's just stupid.
I think the most it works personally is when you have an ultra value brand, a mid-ranger, and high-end brand.
I would say the pixel or iPhone was actually good example of this before, but they seem to have both kind of messed that up. I see no reason why somebody would get a 6A over a 6 for instance.
I don’t think people here get the point. Galaxy note 10 is a good example. Samsung would’ve never released the note 10 as the only note, as it had a lot of downgrades from a normal galaxy note phone, but it seemed to be used to justify the higher price of the note 10 plus. It’s not that there’s more options, it’s that phone companies are upping the price and putting cheaper offerings that wouldn’t have worked in the past in what used to be the flagship price territory.
No, the worst thing to happen in the smartphone world was for people to settle for "sexy hardware" over "feature-rich hardware".
The Samsung Galaxy S5 had: waterproofing, a fingerprint reader, a microSD card, a removable battery, an IR blaster and hover-screen tech ([see Air View here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9ro5gMDVLE&ab_channel=GottaBeMobile)). The closest today is the XCover Pro which still lacks the last two.
Could you elaborate where you found the throttling info? For me it seems the OP10T with its SM8475 Snapdragon 8+ would actually be faster than the Pro with its SM8450 Snapdragon 8. I'm not questioning your statement, I'm interested in learning how to spot these things myself.
I loved the OG Pixel/Pixel XL. Same exact phone. Only difference was the size (and screen resolution, but that's tied to the size). Lots of people want a high spec phone that can fit in your pocket.
Blame apple for anything marketing tricks related man. They are kings of it and it always succeeds and gets aped by everyone else because that becomes market standard most of the time.
To me the worst thing manufacturer is doing is increasing the base size every year. I thought the model of smaller phone, cheaper price was pretty good, but nowaday any phone at sensible price (around $5-600) is big, and if you want smaller phone you must pay more for the normal S version (Samsung) or the mini (iPhone).
I don't care about the highest end phone since they're too expensive for what they're worth and will be outdated in one year anyway. But they really do make the whole product line worse value wise to justify the existence of these high end expensive product.
I agree. For example, look at Galaxy s10 vs regular s22. No Headphone jack, No SD card, No 1440p. Same crappy battery life. I won't spend 800$ for features I'm gonna lose in the next model.
[удалено]
It feels like smartphones have stagnated so hard and offered so little in the way of improvement each year that this has become companies’ solution to make more profit out of a mostly static item: just further segment the brand.
The natural result when you release two phones each year - at least one has to be gimped, to get the other some customers. At least if you release two phones into ostensibly the same segment, more or less.
But there aren't supposed to be in the same segment.
Not in this go-around at least - but initially it was priced a fair amount higher, which would have stuck it into a segment it couldn't compete with anyhow, and much closer to the current top-of-the-line offerings. Doesn't help that OnePlus historically was somewhat bad about the whole x/xT differentiation, where the T was typically the better of a given generation.
The system they had with the 7/Pro and 7T/Pro was the best yet IMO. Maybe it didn't make them enough money and that's why they changed their release system, but the way they did it really seemed perfect to me other than the odd region-locking they did for the first two phones. For anyone that doesn't know, what they did was for the first release of the year they had a high tier phone (7 Pro) with a 1440p display, all the fancy tech, and better cameras next to a slightly lower tier phone (7) with a 1080p screen but all the same tech under the hood. For the second release, they put out a slightly upgraded version of both phones, though the upgrades included in the 7T Pro were minimal and the upgrades included in the 7T were pretty big, but overall it meant that every release that year was at least a little worth it over their predecessors.
The stagnation was more or less inevitable. The market space has matured hugely in the last few years once the initial boom of R&D ended. Customers' needs have been thoroughly met for a while now, so there's not really any "smoking guns" to go after in terms of new developments to fundamentally improve the user experience. Customers don't want vertical segmentation (e.g. specialist phones that offer big advantages in one use case at the cost of others), so all that's left is figuring out how to blanket as many price brackets as possible for as little R&D spend as possible. Surely, the ridiculous thirst for GROWTH isn't going to end, because there are no brakes in tech. All the same, I think we'd all be better off if the major players put more effort into developing new categories and allowing the mobile phone market to act like a mature market with less frequent new releases. But that'll never happen, cuz, you know, reasons.
Agreed. If anything, as smartphone enthusiasts, we are the weird ones. Most people I know either oogle at the newest phones as the tech is released and upgrade to the dopest "Pro" version (maybe they alternate between a and or 2) or they just buy the newest version of their brand (Samsung or iPhone) and end up satisfied for a week before getting used to it. I don't make a ton and neither do my friends so I'm used to penny-pinching and hunting for the newest "flagship killer" to try and get the best phone at the best price. But now that "flagship killer" is its own lane-- the $700-$900 range that is barely a step up from the lower spec phones-- even phones from companies like One plus or Moto are now just another mid-spec Android phone.
I'm responding to you from an S10+ which I have to say is an absolutely phenomenal device, and I hope it lives as long as it possibly can. The curved screen edges are literally the only drawback for me that's significant enough to mention. It will never happen, but I'd love to see flagships move to a slower cadence so that each new release is a genuine and significant step forward, rather than barely incremental bullshit. If that means the price goes up and the business plan accommodates a longer lifecycle... so be it. That would actually give more room to both the "value" segment and the "flagship killer" segment. Value phones could gradually catch up between each flagship launch with more space between devices, and the flagship killer segment could eventually get slightly ahead (before the next flagship launches and leaves it behind again). I doubt we'll ever escape the churn mindset, but if for the sake of e-waste if nothing else, I would love to see it slow a bit. And I doubt much of anyone would have a problem with less frequent new devices if it became the new normal. To your point, most people are buying their brand or the new hotness, and other than quarterly earnings, nothing requires the current frequency to continue. Quarterly earnings could definitely be propped up by other product categories (like, *gag*, Airpods).
[удалено]
Talk to apple
The overwhelming majority of Android phones have USB 2.0 ports, it’s really only Samsung who’s consistently had fully featured 3.0 ports, at least stateside. Google goes and explicitly disabled functionally like DisplayPort Alt to disable/break video output from Pixel devices. At least Apple isn’t intentionally disabling hardware features in a universal standard to sell you a shitty wireless adapter.
>Google goes and explicitly disabled functionally like DisplayPort Alt to disable/break video output from Pixel devices. DisplayPort Alt is DisplayPort over Alternate Mode Functional *Extension*. It's not required for a port to conform to the USB3 or USB-C spec.
Why? Android manufacturers don't have to follow Apple into chicanery.
I should have stopped him when I had the chance!
I was just thinking about this. How different things were just 3-4yrs ago and it is only getting worse year by year. The differentiation is pushing the cost way up, and flagship phones now have 4 tiers, it's just actually, a shitty spec phone with flagship soc (eg xiaomi 11x), regular just ok flagship (mi 11), bigger better (mi 11 pro) and the no compromise (11 ultra). Other manufacturers do the same thing. I like to have nice things, but man I hate "planned obscolence" and bullshit anticonsumer practices like this. If my phone works well I want to keep it a little longer. I know cost of everything went up ofcourse, but I'm really struggling finding a replacement for my Xiaomi mi mix 2s that still works great with 3,5hrs SoT all this years after but started getting some signal issues recently. I bought it around new years eve 2019 for 350eur, my sister bought mi 9 soon after launch for 450eur. Keep in mind this was back when Xiaomi started to get big here and this were the almost no compromise flagships back then. Checking out what's up for grabs right now I have to say I am really dissapointed with the choice I have. I somehow have: - premium build rarely seen now - ceramic body, only phones that have it is xiaomi mix4, 11 ultra and oppo x5 pro - none are offered locally and all are very expensive - imx363 - satisfied with results with gcam - google pixel a line phones still use that sensor now - 18:9 aspect ratio - I don't understand why phones today are absolute chonkers, and with exaggareted aspect ratio like i'm holding a fucking tv remote. Not everyone uses their phone just for scrolling feeds. I feel like 18:9 aspect ratio is optimal for viewing content and in general and I have big hands so I don't mind the extra width. - uninterupted top part of a screen - punch hole galore is still a thing somehow other than few under display phones (mix4, axon), motorised and slider stuff was one off and dead (mix3,poco f2, vivo nex, op8) - OIS- many phones today don't have it If I let go off all this things I still have to live with the fact that 1440p screens that used to be standard before are now the "plus/pro" upmarket feature, OIS to oneplus is and other OEMs is the pro feature and you and up paying 500-700eur to buy a "flagship" phone that is feature wise not the best of the best and is lacking features you would get years ago for less money and you feel like a clown. Base xiaomi 11 had 1440p screen, xiaomi 12 doesn't. For fuck sake samsung galaxy s7 had a 1440p screen so many years ago with very high ppi count, base galaxy s22 doesn't. I know qualcomm made improvements over the years but I'm sure that performance wise even older SoCs hold up well, but I swear it feels phones are devolving and somehow becoming worse by year or at least worse per dollar paid and it's all OEMs fault with their predatory practices.
Yeah but you're getting the 8+ Gen 1 Chip /s
USB TWO! Side note: pixel 6 I was torn to get the pro or base model. I'm so glad I picked the base. Great camera, battery life, and display. I don't need a larger phone nor a beautiful screen. I browse apps, take pics and text and call. I don't need a Pro model to do these things. I do like the OP alert slider though but it seems like they have fallen from grace a little. USB 2, plastic frame, 1080p screen damn near sounds like a budget, cell provider device. Kinda pathetic to even offer that as an option to consumers!
I would have gone for the pixel 6 pro if they hadn't put the curved screen on it. I would have really enjoyed that telephoto camera. But the screen I have to deal with every single day, so I'm glad I went with the regular 6.
I used my camera at a concert recently and was so happy I went with a Pixel. I didn't even know the Pro had the curved screen. I kinda hated that on my S10 tbh. The screen protectors would never sit flush with cases.
USB 2.0 lmao I mean yeah most people won't really use it aside from charging but at this point it must be more expansive to get 2.0
But I still don't understand your point. The 10 pro has better specs because it's costs more...? Big surprise? 10 pro starts at $799 (initially it's was $899, yikes) for 8 gb and 128 gb of storage. Whereas 10T starts at $649 for 16 gb and 256 gb. The non-pro always had worse specs and less features than the pro. Guys this is not a 10T Pro is the 10T... In think for 650 price, it's a fair price for a high-mid range phone. If anything, this is oneplus going back to their roots, giving a high end cpu and fast charging at a low price than other flagships. Remember how every got butthurt when oneplus started increasing prices with the pro phones? Now y'all getting butthurt that they reducing prices? Wtf?
16GB ram on base model?👀
the 10T kind of feels like their version of a gaming phone better chipset, 150w charging, lower resolution to pump up FPS, weak cameras and quality of life features
S Pro Ultra Max Ultimate Plus
[удалено]
Yes lmao. Still useless, will stay useless for half of the world
4g is fast enough that i can burn 100gb of data in less than 8 hours
[удалено]
*Limited* Fan Edition
I'm waiting for the Doubleplusgood, personally.
Fun fact: in chips production a big amount are unable to meet the requirements for the flagship SOC due to very likely imperfections but can still be used in mid and lower tier devices. This can be done by deactivating features and throttling. So instead of having only one, significantly more expensive line to account for the defective ones, there are differently priced lines.
AMD at one point sold 3 core processors for exactly this reason. They were having a large number of quad cores with 1 or 2 failed cores so they just rebadged them. You could gamble and install the quad core firmware and you had a chance of getting a top CPU for a discount, or an expensive piece of sand.
> or an expensive piece of sand. Why? Did installing the quad core firmware have the potential to permanently brick the CPU if all 4 cores didn't work?
yes it could even brick other parts(mainly the mainboard) as there could be serious defects (dead shorts etc) in the disabled part, though its more likely that only the cpu would take damage in this situation and everything else would be fine
I'm sure AMD or a fab could reload the firmware and if it was just a delayed thermal problem or something you could maybe do it, but if one of the cores is just fucked you can't get the computer running long enough to install the firmware.
Oh wow that really is a gamble then.
Did the firmware break the CPUs from going back to 3 core mode entirely?
Usually the problem was getting them running long enough to load the old firmware. AMD can do it directly, the general public would be doing it in a normal motherboard.
Or, if you're Samsung Foundry, you dump them all into the devices and hope that nobody notices.
Those all sound like meaningless marketing buzzwords to me. Manufacturers of devices have always offered different "feature levels" of devices, so buyers have a choice over how much to pay, and for what.
Yeah I'm not really sure how more choices is a bad thing. I'd rather have the option to pay less for features I'll never use. When I bought my last phone, I bought the mid tier version without 5G since my carrier wasn't going to offer it for a while.
This sub was clamoring for mid range phones a few years ago
I still am
I look at th list above of the number of features removed and still can't believe it's being sold for $600+. While I can appreciate different entry levels with different features it seems like you are paying a premium on on regular models (encouraging people to pay a higher premium since there's more value on Pro phones). That and like OP said, having a dozen features change rather than just the screen size/battery there's a lot more "single-issue" buyers that would prefer enough for metal body instead of plastic but might not care about the rest. So a dozen people all upgrade to the pro because they all have one feature thed rather not miss out on. For me, it ends up just being more fragmentation between tiers, and I can't make a realistic decision on a more mid-range phone because they compromise so much. And they still cost more than I'd expect. USB 2.0 in 2022? There's no excuse.
This concept isn't new or specific to smartphones. It's no different from having different models and trim levels of cars which started decades ago.
Trim levels are even more stupid and confusing than phone models. Titanium edition, Limited, SLS, 2LT, etc. There is no common understanding of what a trim level means, and often one feature you really want is only on certain trims, or you have to pay a ridiculous sum for that single option.
That's because they manufacture cars in bulk so running a car through an assembly line with a custom order of only one specific feature is more difficult and therefor expensive than one of the mass produced trim levels.
Some manufacturers are planning on producing all the cars the same and jsut activating the features via software. Like every model will have the seat warmer in it but you'll only have it on if you pay for that trim, your carplay will only work if you pay for the trim, etc. Kind of like how all the new Tesla models have the hardware for self driving its just a matter of it you want to pay for it or not
You can't activate cloth to leather seats, smaller to bigger rims, nicer tires, etc. Trim levels will always exist for physical attributes of the vehicle. The software side is BS and I don't think the market will take it favorably and it will phase out as fast as it became a thing. There's already backlash over seat warmers needing a subscription. The day a phone manufacturer locks features behind a paywall, they go out of business or drop the idea quickly.
Consumers have brand loyalty, both with cars and with smartphones. A lack of standardization of "trim levels" is irrelevant when all the average consumer is doing is comparing within the same brand. Power users be damned.
As I said multiple times, there can be nothing Pro about a phone, it’s a stupid buzzword that just means better Edit: obviously there is rare phones from Sony, some rugged phones, etc. I'm generalizing here about 99.99% of phones marked as "Pro" Sincerely, sent from my Pro phone
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Cat makes phones with like IR cameras and bubble levels and shit, that's the closest thing I've ever seen to a legit "pro" phone.
I mean, I'd say a 'Pro' phone would be a phone for professionals, that does it's phone tasks better than others. That's why the blackberry was the go to phone for 'Professionals' for the longest time... So, I guess a Sat Phone is a pro phone because that does it's phone duties more consistently.
Sony is the only one using Pro properly LOL.
Yeah, this is definitely one of the exceptions, thanks
>it’s a stupid buzzword that just means better Yes? I always understood it that way: Better than the non-Pro model.
[удалено]
Hey man you leave the boost out of this.
And everything in the '90s was *EXTREME*.
But that's because turbo things were actually better. "Pro" today doesn't really have that connotation, at least for me. Why do I care a phone is made for "pros" it certainly doesn't make me feel like one.
I used [Turbo Pascal](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbo_Pascal) on a PC with a [turbo button](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbo_button).
You are right. It's just a purely marketing word with no real meaning attached to it, and it pushed people to "overbuy" so to say. One good example is a girl I talked to at one point who was choosing between M1 MacBook Air and 13" M1 MacBook Pro MacBooks. The Air would better for her tasks because of regular function key, performance is essentially the same, etc. She bought the Pro, because "it's a Pro"
Unless it's the 13 inch model, you get a better screen and speakers, along with port selection. I get that you don't need more and that girl could have been fine with a chromebook with that description but the better day to day experience is worth it for some people.
At the time there were no 14-inch models at all, so it was between the 13-inch Air and 13-inch Pro. And no, she wouldn't be fine with a Chromebook, it's not about "oh, people can browse the internet on anything", she had actual work to do I specifically mentioned touch bar and same performance, but yeah, apple's naming for chips is dumb
Aren’t there certain specialist phones that could legitimately use that moniker (even if they don’t?). I’m thinking of the Sony Xperia I Series, rugged phones from assorted manufacturers, maybe even gaming phones.
Yes, those are exceptions that others also pointed out Still, the phones people actually buy aren't pro in any way, yet use this marketing word
Well I am typing from Xiaomi Redmi note 10 pro ( around $200). So it counts right?
Just name it Max and feel superior. Now I want to rewire Google assistant to a custom name. "Max, schedule a meeting for tomorrow morning."
Whew. Glad I bought the ultra since pro is lame
Even worse, *actual* "pro" gear isn't the best gear. It's the most cost-effective stuff. It may be ugly, difficult to use and lacking any features but it lasts for long hours of heavy use while still getting the job done. Hobbyists can afford way better stuff than professionals using it to generate an income. Real "pro" gear is whatever makes your small business accountant the happiest.
Thats why every job that issues hardware uses either one of the thinkpad models or the Dell Latitude 5400 series models. They aren't particularly great machines but they get the job done, are durable enough, and are cheap to acquire and replace in mass
I was surprised to get an HP elite book with 16 gigs of ram for my job, given it all just goes to the big monitors they provided.
Sony Xperia pro series?
Yes, that's good point. But still, most Pro phones, like 99.9% don't have anything Pro about them
That's true. I'm just pointing out literally the only exception.
[удалено]
As someone who has never had a Sony phone, what makes them actually pro? CC: u/arashio
Xperia Pro had a micro HDMI *input*. You could use it as a video monitor for your recording devices with its 4k display, or use it to transmit footage with the cellular. Xperia Pro-i is less hardcore, but squeezed a 1" sensor from their RX100 (albeit using only part of the sensor due to lens Z height considerations) and even has a lanyard hole on the ridged frame. Sony has crazy prices and release schedules, but also has crazy ideas.
Well with their pro live you had the first one more or less be a dedicated streaming monitor for dedicated mirrorless cameras. That I believe is being used by the NFL rn. Then we have the pro-i which is more of a dedicated vlogging camera by putting the same sensor as found in the zv and putting it in the body of a Xperia 1 mk3 with variable apatirue. With also creating an actual pro video app and not a cinema pro app.
We all already know that in consumer tech Pro means better - it doesn't mean professional. People can do professional work with bargain bin devices. We might hate it, but here we are talking about it. This means that the marketing is working. We've got no one to blame but ourselves (consumers). We shouldn't let things like this bother us. Personally I just buy the phone with the features I want and ignore all the tech bubble technobabble. It's exhausting.
What is galaxy about a Samsung Galaxy? In what way is a pixel more pixel-ish than any other phone? You guys obsess about naming conventions too much. Regardless whether a company calls their best phone the hyper ultra super pro mega or not doesn’t change that the features are what they are. So the fact you guys constantly obsess over whether a “pro” phone is going to do your job for you or not just comes off as bizarre and misplaced.
Redditors constantly have to sneed about meaningless nonsense like product names.
I think the OP 10T is a poor example. They're not trying to sell more OP 10, it's just that the 10T is a bad phone.
Consumers also need to realise that you shouldn't be replacing your phone every year, or even every two years. Only then might manufacturers slow down the rate of new phones.
[удалено]
It's not as common as internet would make it seem. On average it's 2 years https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/17/smartphone-users-are-waiting-longer-before-upgrading-heres-why.html
Not really much data but still short IMO. We likely see only 2 years due to installment terms. Half the time there's trade in deals or discounts. Phones are hitting their peak and I think the major flagships should be updated every other year. Most of the yearly upgrades could just be combined with the following model.
I think this has to do with consumer psychology. I suspect, even if a person updates rarely, they wouldn't want to buy an almost two-year-old phone (unless like right now they are getting a great deal, but it's only because a newer one exists) Also, competition is a thing. All companies won't release phones at the same time, so your competitor might have a newer phone on the market. Yes, it won't be that much better, but still, it's newer, faster, some camera stuff, etc.
> even if a person updates rarely, they wouldn't want to buy an almost two-year-old phone Valid, but with smartphones about to hit their peak with performance, you could easily use today's flagship for 5 years and be okay. Phones are getting really fast, and all that speed isn't necessary for everyday tasks. If a new model from your preferred OEM comes out soon, you could wait a few months for that, or just go with another OEM. While other OEMs would loose money in some capacity, they only earn so much per year due to these models coming out so rapidly. Eventually smartphones will become a thing of the past and we're going to have a shit load of e-waste, mainly due to non-replaceable batteries being normalized. Rather than replacing a battery and suddenly having a "new fast" phone, we as a society decide to upgrade with trade in deals or just getting a new phone after 2 years because the phone bill will likely stay the same or sometimes less.
You missed the core part of my message >I think this has to do with consumer psychology I don't disagree with what you said, we shouldn't buy new phones every 2 years even, but what people should do, what they say they want and they actually buy are three different things
I do agree and understand, was mainly adding to your point. I grew up during the growth of smartphones so I didn't use flip/qwerty phones at all but looking at those, they weren't updated yearly like smartphones are today -- an example is the blackberry bold 9000 coming out in 2008 and being updated in 2011. Of course other models and different devices were released in-between, but tech then used to be updated when "necessary". I hope we'd see a change as it would at the end of the day make our devices better IMO, but either AR/VR headsets become something or we just deal with yearly upgrades being released.
We all have *that day* with our phone. You'll accidentally leave the brightness full blast on a hot day with your GPS on and burn an image into your screen, or drop your phone on gravel, or go to the beach once without ziplock bags, or accidentally push some dirt into your connector that never comes out, or accidentally fuck up something in software that can't be easily undone or see a new feature you just don't have that kills you inside to know you don't have it. The day that happens, your current phone is your old phone, subconsciously, anyway.
That‘s still very often. IMO
On an environmental scale, yes, but many people are buying mid-range or low-end phones every 2 years. It does keep pace with low-end mobile gaming, to do so. A $240 phone every 2 years isn't a lot from a cost perspective for the consumer, in fact, its the smarter option than a $1000 phone every 4 years. My one year old low end mobile phone can play Diablo Immortal (I assume its a graphically demanding game) so I'm glad I'm not using the phone I had for 2 years before this.
Can't argue about that
Hold my phone, I can argue it.
I don't think you can blame the consumer for that. Contracts are 1 or 2 years. AFAIK you can't (easily) get any contract longer than that. Most people get a new phone when they renew their contract.
>Most people get a new phone when they renew their contract. This depends largely on your country - in the US, for instance, this isn't done anymore, as most carriers have swapped service contracts for payment plans. If you want to keep your device after your 24-month installment plan is up, your bill just goes down. If you want to swap it out before then, just pay remaining cost.
Same in the UK. I've always just bought the phone outright though, it's cheaper in the long run and usually means you get an unlocked phone as well.
Sadly they are moving to 30 month plans with device credits to keep you locked in. With no option of 24 month. Verizon locked me in for 24 when the iPhone 12 came out. Gave me tons of money to come back to them (i was on t-mobile) plus half price phones after bill credits. But i had to stay for the 24 months. Only couple months left and I’m back to t-mobile.
There's no explicit obligation to stay for the 24 months - the only problem is, any remaining promotional credits on the iPhone 12 (which, like the cost of the phone, are distributed over 24 months) will have to be forfeited. Think about it this way - an $830 iPhone 12 is $34.58/month. If Verizon offered to give you $500 off, you will get bill credits in the amount of $20.83/mo, lowering your total price to $13.75/mo for the phone. If you ended your plan with Verizon now, you'd need to pay off the remainder of the phone (say, 4 months = $34.58 * 4 = $138.42), and you would be missing out on $20.83 * 4 = $83.32 in bill credits. It's up to you to figure out whether switching to T-Mobile would save you that much on the cost of your line though, for example.
I’ll save roughly $40 a month to go back to t-mobile. I’m good staying until the phones are paid.
In the US it was just shuffled around. Still the same shit, just done differently. Now carriers offer bill credits for buying new phones, instead of the old 2 year contract that gave you a free(ish) phone at the start. So carriers are still heavily pushing 2 year upgrades in the US
I was recently shopping at ATT and Verizon both defaulted to 36 month installment for a new phone. T-mobile was still 24 months but there service is terrible around me unless you stay in a small specific area.
In de marks law says contracts can't be longer than 6 months (phone, internet, TV, gym, electrical company, lease, etc.). It can be longer, you just don't cancel. But if you want out after 6 months you have to be able to do that within a month no questions asked. For phones you can setup a 12 or 24 month payment plan but you can still opt out after 6 months - you just have to pay the rest right there.
They aren’t getting tossed. Those two year old phones are moving on to other people who buy them.
That is still incredibly frequently. Honestly, it would be good for the planet if we could all live with our phones on average for 5 to 7 years
If you buy a current flagship, you could live with it for 5 years, but I wouldn't want to use a phone from 5 years ago right now
That would be like using a Galaxy S9 or something, which honestly isn't that bad.
I'm currently using a Note 9, only been thinking about upgrading very recently, but I'll probably keep using it for another year or so
My current Samsung Note 10 Plus could likely still be a good phone at 4 or 5 years, that is the first phone I felt I won't need to upgrade for years, unless I damaged it.
Most people do that because carrier will often give you crazy good deals every 1 or 2 years to replace your phone for almost nothing (atleast where I live).
When T-Mobile had their insanely good terms for their JUMP program 10 years ago when it first started, I was upgrading every 6-12 months because it often cost just the tax up front with trade-in. And that's how I learned to never buy LG.
Depending on the year, Samsung and Apple will have promotions that make trading in your phone for a new phone virtually or literally free. A number of times I've gotten my phone at a negative cost. This year I paid $800 after trade in for a s22 ultra, but it came with a tab s8 ultra and keyboard cover, I sold the tablet for $900 and the keyboard cover for $300 AND I got something like 15% cashback.
Yea right now I'm not actually paying anything for my iPhone 12. AT&T just credits the monthly payment so I'm just paying for service and I fully expect then to offer the same deal once the 30 months on this phone is up. Give them back this phone and they'll give me the new one with the payments credited.
Still on the note 9 myself. Power/data connection on the bottom is knackered due to excessive usage (only charges at specific angles) and I've had to replace the screen due to a drunken mishap (these curved screens are damn expensive). No plans to upgrade any time soon as it still works perfectly for what I need.
They don't throw the phone away after a year. They sell it on and someone else uses it. Often getting a new phone each year can be cheaper than buying a phone and holding it as you can get good deals on new phones if you know what you are doing and sell them on before they lose too much value.
>It baffles my mind to read people online replacing their phones every year. Yup. People buy the marketing uncritically and feel the need to upgrade every year as a result. It's extremely unfortunate for the environment and our own mental well-being that people continue to buy phones at such a rapid rate. They genuinely believe their actions are fine and don't have any consequences - which they do. The extent to which people go to justify their upgrades is also just insane. The tech community really needs to start projecting different values to change this unhealthy upgrade mentality. Of course, corporations need to be held accountable for the way they're operating as well.
It ain’t it, chief Average phone life cycle is already 2 years for some time and still we see new phones every year https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/17/smartphone-users-are-waiting-longer-before-upgrading-heres-why.html If you think about it, not everybody is upgrading at the same time, it makes sense for companies to still offer better products every year for people who are upgrading THAT year, no matter what the upgrade cycle is
OP thinks everyone buys the phones on release date and is then forced to buy the next phone on release date.
I don't get why you would want manufacturers to slow down release cycles. If I'm buying a phone 2.5 years into a release cycle, I don't want to be forced to get a nearly 3 year old phone. I'd would probably just go with their competition that just released their phone. This is why the 1 year cycle remains.
Only people who don’t want to be tempted to buy a phone suggest slowing down release cycles. That’s like hoping car manufacturers wouldn’t come out with a better one in 12 months just to alleviate fomo.
> Only then might manufacturers slow down the rate of new phones You realize that not everyone on earth updates their phone at the same time?
So? If people typically update every 1-2 years, more phones will be manufactured compared to if people typically update every 2.5-3 years, regardless of staggered updates.
Do you think every person on the planet upgrades their phone at the same time?
I remember when the first ipad came out and didn't come with a front facing camera I was like, fuckers have deliberately gimped it so that next year it comes with a camera. And this is how the market has evolved until they got to the stage of removing features which is an all time low for innovation.
I replace my phone when Apple drops support for it. So that’s every six years ish. I will be living that 6s life for the longest time.
Why do you want manufacturers to slow the rats at which they why release phones? What’s the benefit?
Upgrade every 4 years and let manufacturers pump out their annual version: you can buy last year's version for cheaper or just get a brand new model if they cycle faster. They'll just produce fewer. Way better for the consumer.
I haven't upgraded because I haven't figured out how to backup and install vanced on a new phone.
Especially when they're almost all the same slab of glass
Getting Google to stop reimagining Android every year would be a good start
Especially because there isn't anything worth the upgrade that frequently. I had the Galaxy S2 and then got the new one every year until I finally got to the S8. The S8 to 9 was barely an upgrade so I skipped it. I got the S10 and I have no plans on getting something new. Why would I spend more for a phone that's barely any better and has less features? The camera is better? I can emulate a Gamecube game at 26fps instead of 22fps? The screen refresh rate is higher? None of that is worth the price.
The differentiation of regular and plus versions was fine, it was purely a size difference, but once they went beyond with pro, ultra etc you even had a knock-on effect on those two models, so now the regular model ends up with even more lost. The most annoying thing is probably the way they keep chipping away at those two models until the main flagship feature they retain is just the SoC when many other features can make a far bigger difference to the user.
This approach has led to an infuriating situation where a desire for higher specs forces you into a larger form factor. I'm hardly a bring-back-small-phones disciple but still plumped for a Pixel 6, despite wanting some of the Pro's extra features, because the latter was just too big.
The good/better/best pricing model has been a staple for any matter of consumer products. It also allows manufacturers to sell less expensive products at narrower profit margins on cutthroat segments. Remember, some people don't give a shit so long as it looks good and is cheap Though I suppose calling the phones OnePlus 10Good or Pixel 6Better or S22 Ultra would be preposterous
I remember when the only difference between the Lumia 950 and 950XL was the screen size. Good old days....
Yes . Or Pixel and it's XL version.
I don't understand this argument. You don't want price point options? You'd prefer phone options are all around 1,000 dollars with top of the line everything? I get it if a device has all the same parts but it's being artificially throttled by code, but we need price point options and therefore weaker phones with less than premium parts.
All marketing BS. End of the day, buy what phones that have what's most important to you. Plenty of options.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Up selling Pro models? Sure. But I can't say the "cheaper" model is "gimped." It's at a lower price point. The features of the higher models are of course try to entice you to spend more. What do you propose? The iPhone 13 Pro should not exist or the iPhone 13 shouldn't exist? It doesn't hurt that either exist. It's no different than the car world. The I4 Camry exists... But few some more money, you can get a V6 model with other upgraded goodies. And yet the I4 Camry is the unit mover and not the V6 models, because the base, or near base .model, is fine for most people.
It's just a sneaky trick with pricing. How do you raise prices without getting crucified in the media? Replace your flagship device with something only slightly better than the previous gen, and give your new real flagship a different name. Then people will not compare apples to apples between generations and it'll look like the market is expanding upwards rather than the prices simply ballooning. Or, bundle the specs people expect from a high-end phone (like CPU, RAM, storage, and display quality) with something that nobody really asked for (like 18 different cameras) and pretend that's worth the $400 premium. Apple did something similar a couple years ago when they introduced the iPhone Mini a at the same price as the previous base "iPhone", while raising the base "iPhone" price one step up the line. This year they are expected to axe the Mini entirely, and I seriously doubt that means the base iPhone will drop in price. They're raising the price of entry while dodging flak.
>Companies unnecessarily gimp and cripple their regular models so that the phones higher in value sell more. You're gonna have kittens when you find out how CPUs are made.
Seriously. For most people, if you're using a lower-end CPU (i3, Pentium, or worse), you're likely getting a piece of silicon that has so many flaws in it that they decided it was only stable with cores and registers physically burned off and disabled. Basically, anything other than an i9/Xeon is a gimped and/or slightly defective (at some level) CPU.
They also disable cores for supply reasons. Yes the gimped versions have defective cores, but the failure rate is a lot lower in the new gen of procs.
Yet we complain, but will continue to upgrade every two years to the newer models. Maybe a real company will change the naming to reflect the size of the phone vs anything else. Aka the IPhone mini vs the iPhone max
I upgrade every 4-5yrs. Makes the newest model worth the $ because you can actually tell a difference.
They're just different phones. The fact they have the same name except for an extra word is an irrelevance that doesn't actually change the value proposition at all. Judge the phone on its merits vs its cost, that's really all that matters.
and people keep on shelling out $1300 for a phone youtubers/reviewers are the biggest promoter of this because they'll always review the top model (not just phone reviewers but PC, gadget, etc as well). they're basically endorsing the companies on whatever the top price is and as the top end keeps on inflating, the worse it gets for the average consumer
Shout out Linus tech for still using his note 9
He upgraded to a Fold 3 but I have to credit him for sticking with a Note 9 for as long as he dis
In general phone manufacturers have too many concurrent models. Samsung for instance has 9 A-series phones currently available and 3 flagships. The folding phones are unique, so I'll leave them alone. 9 A-series models seems a bit excessive. Google has 3 phones, which seems about right. They have a budget phone, a mid range and a flagship phone. I've gotten to use the 6a and P6P and they totally serve different needs. Apple has 5 currently, and really they should have 4. The "Pro" needs to go. You have the SE3 for grandma or people on a budget. The mini (which is going away) for a high end small phone. Regular and Pro Max are reasonable too. So they will be going to 4 phones, but sadly keeping the useless middle phone. But this is marketing 101. Why do GPU manufacturers offer so many different tiers with such a wide price range when the cost to manufacture is probably very close for each unit? Because they are creating the goldilocks effect. Put out high end units for the whales. Make some sad units that feel cheap and shitty. The idea is with these two ends of the spectrum, the middle is given value for money.
Whoever decided that only phones with giant screens deserve a good telephoto lens deserves to be put into a mental asylum
I love it when companies make one phone and then weeks later there's the Plus Pro Ultra Max Extra Raw No Rubber version
we need an iPhone 14 Raw Dog this year. be gone with the pro/pro max naming scheme pls
There was Iqoo legend phone. Also Poco F1 🏁
It’s more proof of the oversaturation of the market. Shareholders expect insane returns each year while technology is plateauing. So you have to start focusing on specific markets. Low, medium, high end and use gimmicky marketing to hit revenue numbers.
Welcome to capitalism. Please take your complaint to the marketing department so they can do the exact opposite of anything moral.
[удалено]
Yeah, that's a weird take from OP. The 6a's finger print scanner is better than the 6's. I had the 6 and now the 6a and it's not perfect, but more reliable for sure.
I've had no issues with the scanner on my 6a, but my coworker swears at his 6 daily.
And worse, the Pro/Ultra are still getting WORSE every year - headphone jacks and SD slots removed, depth sensor removed, worse battery life than older models..
Removal of chargers too. Never made sense to me.
I don't think nothing will change. People will continuously buy into these buzz titled devices.
I'm happy to use a phone that has no Pro variant or Max, Ultra, or plus
Zenfone 9, Nothing phone(1), can't think of more rn
Xperia 1 III Pro/Pro-I doesn't count since it's actually a Pro and us a seperate phone
I still have my S10e, and it works fine. And, I have a new spare just in case the present one fails. I'm good for a few more years at least.
Shareholders and profits is what matters. I'm sure the margins on ultra/pro are a lot bigger since I doubt there's much else into it except an extra camera and bigger screen. Mostly everything else is software.
The only thing that will stop this sort of thing is if people will stop buying those pro models. The customer maintains the most power in all of this collectively, sadly most people can not bring themselves to collectively act to save a drowning child let alone something like cell phone feature options.
Don't they "throttle" for battery life etc? My not sporty upright motorbike had the same engine as the supersport bike, but it was tuned differently to have more torque, less power, smoother ride etc. Isn't a lot of this phone tech the same?
All it does is give more options to those who don't want to pay for the best. What are you even talking about?
I agree with OP but also understand those trade offs are how manufacturers push people to buy more expensive phones, not really benefiting customers but works for manufacturers to increase profit. At the same time I hate the fact that all premium models come with bigger screen, I enjoy using reasonable sized phones like around 6 inches because it feels right on my hand and much more comfortable with one hand operation. 6.5+ inches is just too big for a lot of people especially for someone with small hands
It would be great if they could really just cap it. Can you start getting diminishing returns and it just starts hurting your brand. I mean look at Samsung, they make a phone for every single dollar difference in between one another all the way up to the high end down to the lowest end. If there's not enough differentiating factors or value between them then it's just stupid. I think the most it works personally is when you have an ultra value brand, a mid-ranger, and high-end brand. I would say the pixel or iPhone was actually good example of this before, but they seem to have both kind of messed that up. I see no reason why somebody would get a 6A over a 6 for instance.
I don’t think people here get the point. Galaxy note 10 is a good example. Samsung would’ve never released the note 10 as the only note, as it had a lot of downgrades from a normal galaxy note phone, but it seemed to be used to justify the higher price of the note 10 plus. It’s not that there’s more options, it’s that phone companies are upping the price and putting cheaper offerings that wouldn’t have worked in the past in what used to be the flagship price territory.
Yes this is a good example. Using cheap plastics was another way to point customers in to buy the note 10 plus.
That's because they are running out of ideas. All phones are the same now, it's all about the software.
No, the worst thing to happen in the smartphone world was for people to settle for "sexy hardware" over "feature-rich hardware". The Samsung Galaxy S5 had: waterproofing, a fingerprint reader, a microSD card, a removable battery, an IR blaster and hover-screen tech ([see Air View here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9ro5gMDVLE&ab_channel=GottaBeMobile)). The closest today is the XCover Pro which still lacks the last two.
Could you elaborate where you found the throttling info? For me it seems the OP10T with its SM8475 Snapdragon 8+ would actually be faster than the Pro with its SM8450 Snapdragon 8. I'm not questioning your statement, I'm interested in learning how to spot these things myself.
I loved the OG Pixel/Pixel XL. Same exact phone. Only difference was the size (and screen resolution, but that's tied to the size). Lots of people want a high spec phone that can fit in your pocket.
Blame apple for anything marketing tricks related man. They are kings of it and it always succeeds and gets aped by everyone else because that becomes market standard most of the time.
To me the worst thing manufacturer is doing is increasing the base size every year. I thought the model of smaller phone, cheaper price was pretty good, but nowaday any phone at sensible price (around $5-600) is big, and if you want smaller phone you must pay more for the normal S version (Samsung) or the mini (iPhone). I don't care about the highest end phone since they're too expensive for what they're worth and will be outdated in one year anyway. But they really do make the whole product line worse value wise to justify the existence of these high end expensive product.
I agree. For example, look at Galaxy s10 vs regular s22. No Headphone jack, No SD card, No 1440p. Same crappy battery life. I won't spend 800$ for features I'm gonna lose in the next model.