Because it's expensive for them to make, and most smartphones are essentially portable video gaming and movie watching devices.
Oh, so it's "expensive" and irrelevant? Sounds exactly like what I was saying - niche.
Here's a mission. Grab a 920, and grab an 8X. Take them to a user, ask them which they'd rather use every day. Most will choose the 8X.
You still willing to bet that the 8X will outsell the 920? I haven't seen any reason to budge on my stance that the 920 will clearly win.
How are Windows Phones selling relative to non-Windows Phones? See, nobody wants a Windows Phone! (Bad logic leads to really bad logic).
Both platforms are considered to be doing extremely poorly, why are you using that comparison to state BB has relevance? People are aware of the BlackBerry form factor, the majority of consumers are not buying them. Most people don't have a proper understanding of Windows Phone, so it's not even a consideration. And, yes, to an extent, nobody wants Windows Phone at the moment. I'm not sure why you continually compare BB and WP sales.
You would be able to type perfectly fine on the Lumia 920 if it was your device and you used it for a few days. Similarly, I'd perhaps get used to the ridiculous hardware buttons on the 8X. What's the argument for thickness? That it's fine if it's only thick in one spot? What? Why does that matter? I'm calling quits on this argument, you draw completely invalid parallels then somehow convince yourself that your argument is valid. The 3GS is perfectly fine for people to hold in 2012, it's nothing like a 1994 Atari vs modern computers. Inane hyperbole isn't persuasive, it's pathetic.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram