4 in 1 : Surface Phone?

[Guytronic]

I can think of a few things phone's could do that people would appreciate:

*Not have ads
*Not have in-app purchases
*Interface with the human being in a more human-centric manner. rather than tapping on glass
*type in a less annoying way
*have longer than a days battery life
*have a display that you don't have to hold 1 foot from your face and peer at, to see clearly
*be a size and shape that is comfortable and ideal for using as a phone
*be able to be used like a piece of paper,
*Be able to anticipate your needs and act proactively

As far as need goes, people don't "need" smartphones.

They only came to feel like it was a need when they were in commonplace useage. In that sense, nothing "new" would be needed, and would become universally needed, the moment it was universally used, whether that was a jack in the back of your brain, a chip in your hand, or whatever else.

Before smartphones people used features phones and they lacked nothing. Before feature phones they used basic mobile phones, and they lacked nothing. Before mobile phones, they used landlines and pagers, and they lacked nothing. Somewhere back in history, is a half naked dude roaming the African plains, and he lacked nothing. These are essentially conveniences that we pay for with our extremely long work weeks, that make us slowly more dependent, and less resilient, until we end up like the fat people with screens glued to their face in wall-e.

Thank you for the lecture.
I was typing about my use since becoming hooked on smartphones not anyone else.

 

[Drael646464]

Thank you for the lecture.
I was typing about my use since becoming hooked on smartphones not anyone else.

Here:

Too much is a determent as far as I see.
I think name brand device manufacturers are having difficulty figuring out what the best balance is.
These days it's getting very hard to charge big money for phones that really don't elevate the technology by much

You generalize your experience to market experiences, consumers in general, and OEMs.

While I don't disagree that current changes to smartphones are piffling on a practical level, and technical advances are minor to UX, making changes that aren't piffling, or minor, isn't impossible. It's just not the sort of innovation that OEMs are trying to shake down people for their money with.

They add things like dual camera's, or relatively useless AR technology, or a slightly faster processor, instead of something that changes and improves the design of the object, such as new input and output methods, new form factors etc, or radical departures in OS implementation.

It's completely true that premium phone sales growth has stalled, and that the entirety of growth now basically exists in budget products. That's also partly an effect of "post-adoption" economics. We've seen the same thing with non-hybrid/windows tablets, and prior to that desktop PCs, and a host of other previous technologies, that were also once 'exciting must have things'.

You need something that is new and novel enough to drive that "got to have it" mentality, that blinds consumers to all practicality and reason when purchasing, in order to drive that early smartphone era level sales.

Design wise, smartphones have flatlined. The apps are probably as good as they'll ever get, the chipsets are fast enough, and won't get much faster in a hurry. The incremental imaginationless advances, are just going to result in, like all products before it, a larger mid-range and budget section, due to increased brand awareness, and lowered r and d costs.

But it's not impossible for someone to come along, and offer something substantially different. Just at the moment, none of the players seem to inclined to take the risk.

Still something will come along. It always does.

Regarding the "lecture": Shh, no talking in class

 

[Guytronic]

@Drael646464
Again thank you.

I'm out since I really don't enjoy drawn out discussions that don't mean much to me.
Fewer words often say more.

 

[anon(50597)]

I can think of a few things phone's could do that people would appreciate:

*Not have ads
*Not have in-app purchases
*Interface with the human being in a more human-centric manner. rather than tapping on glass
*type in a less annoying way
*have longer than a days battery life
*have a display that you don't have to hold 1 foot from your face and peer at, to see clearly
*be a size and shape that is comfortable and ideal for using as a phone
*be able to be used like a piece of paper,
*Be able to anticipate your needs and act proactively

As far as need goes, people don't "need" smartphones.

They only came to feel like it was a need when they were in commonplace useage. In that sense, nothing "new" would be needed, and would become universally needed, the moment it was universally used, whether that was a jack in the back of your brain, a chip in your hand, or whatever else.

Before smartphones people used features phones and they lacked nothing. Before feature phones they used basic mobile phones, and they lacked nothing. Before mobile phones, they used landlines and pagers, and they lacked nothing. Somewhere back in history, is a half naked dude roaming the African plains, and he lacked nothing. These are essentially conveniences that we pay for with our extremely long work weeks, that make us slowly more dependent, and less resilient, until we end up like the fat people with screens glued to their face in wall-e.

But Apple and Android can easily accomplish all those things.

 

[N_LaRUE]

seems you aren't ready to accept anyones point.*

If there was a point I'd accept it.

 

[Drael646464]

But Apple and Android can easily accomplish all those things.

So which phone has no ads, no in-app purchases, is small enough to comfortably port around and hold as a phone, yet has big enough display that you don't need to hold it close/peer at it, like everybody does with smartphones, has a human-centric input (like a natural human behaviour, like 3d interaction, or conversation) instead of inaccurately swiping/tapping a screen, has an input that is accurate and efficient at typing, like a physical keyboard on a PC, versus shape writing or other compromises, can be used entirely with a pen OS and app wide, and proactively anticipates your desires like a true advanced AI?

The modern smartphone is a behemoth of compromises and its far from the most ideal form for a portable computing device. It's really just "capable of many things whilst not being entirely terrible at most of them".

 

[Drael646464]

If there was a point I'd accept it.

I guess there's a first time for everything, in terms of you accepting other peoples POV, but I'll believe that when I see it.

 

[N_LaRUE]

seems u havent read my previous comments. when folded, it will run uwp apps & behave like a phone. when unfolded it will run win32 apps like bluestacks. it is what Cshell is meant to be

I've read your comments. I don't believe a folding phone or dual screen phone is going to matter.

Whether win32 apps can run on a phone is irrelevant. How many people want PC on phone? Answer that question first. I can probably guess, not many.

I am to be exact here referring to CONSUMERS. Not enterprise.

PC on phone will only be worthwhile if and only if it becomes accessible to low end devices. This means countries where PCs are expensive but phones are easily bought can use this feature. Until they accomplish that, which MS doesn't seem interested in doing, it's a niche idea, meant mostly for enthusiast and enterprise.

We shouldn't forget that MS has mixed up the language here as well. We have two UWP acronyms now. Win32 apps can be converted to UWP but this does not make them a UWP app. They are two different things.

Even with that, we need to discuss the main issue. Consumers want what everyone else has. I've already stated this. If whatever phone MS brings out doesn't meet that criteria, it's DOA.

Doesn't matter how good it is. Doesn't matter what tech it has. Doesn't matter how good it looks. Means squat if no one buys it.

You haven't addressed my points. The reason you haven't is you can't.

 

[N_LaRUE]

I guess there's a first time for everything, in terms of you accepting other peoples POV, but I'll believe that when I see it.

Give me a reason to. I've yet to see it in conversations. There's lots of, Oh MS is going to be great! They have all this great tech! They're the best! Blah blah....

I don't buy that when we're talking consumer products. No one has address that aspect. You might like MS. I like MS but at the end of the day consumers want certain things. You have your desires and so do other people. MS needs to meet those to attract consumers. There's nothing MS is doing, as far as I can tell, that will do that yet.

Until you can prove differently, that's my point of view. I've yet to see anyone counter that.

 

[Drael646464]

I've read your comments. I don't believe a folding phone or dual screen phone is going to matter.

Meh, disagree. I think screen real estate has proven quite popular in the marketplace already, and more portable screen real estate will be even more popular. Its kind of logical IMO.

Whether win32 apps can run on a phone is irrelevant. How many people want PC on phone? Answer that question first. I can probably guess, not many.

Enterprise would love this feature. But win32 ain't the future anyway, windows on arm is just a bridge. So mostly agree. Although there is A LOT of money to be main from businesses with the right product, I don't think that product is a folding tablet - people want real input methods in enterprise, and a touch screen isn't one.

PC on phone will only be worthwhile if and only if it becomes accessible to low end devices. This means countries where PCs are expensive but phones are easily bought can use this feature. Until they accomplish that, which MS doesn't seem interested in doing, it's a niche idea, meant mostly for enthusiast and enterprise.

Strongly agree. As a consumer product, hybrid devices are of most benefit for saving money. There's the added benefit of reduced syncing and set-up, but the major selling point is dosh. ie - poor places will want this, if its cheap enough. As of right now, there is no effort from anybody to create that kind of product.

Even with that, we need to discuss the main issue. Consumers want what everyone else has. I've already stated this. If whatever phone MS brings out doesn't meet that criteria, it's DOA.

Yeah, sort of. When the iPhone was released it didn't see that well at first. But once it started selling it caught on fire, and at that point it wasn't "what everybody else had". Same with the ipod, when it started selling well it wasn't what everybody else had.
Cultural trends and device lust are a little more complicated than pre-existing mass adoption.

Doesn't matter how good it is. Doesn't matter what tech it has. Doesn't matter how good it looks. Means squat if no one buys it.

I wouldn't say those things are irrelevant. If its perceived as good looking, and advanced in technology, its quite likely people will buy it.

Give me a reason to. I've yet to see it in conversations. There's lots of, Oh MS is going to be great! They have all this great tech! They're the best! Blah blah....

I don't buy that when we're talking consumer products. No one has address that aspect. You might like MS. I like MS but at the end of the day consumers want certain things. You have your desires and so do other people. MS needs to meet those to attract consumers. There's nothing MS is doing, as far as I can tell, that will do that yet.

Until you can prove differently, that's my point of view. I've yet to see anyone counter that.

I don't think I've said anything resembling "oh, MS is going to be great". I have no idea how well the company will do in ten years time. I'm not even certain how apple will be doing in ten years time, or google.

I just don't think MSFT or anyone else is "out for the count" in any arena of tech. It's a industry who's history is marked by shifting sands and favours, by old versus new, and I think MSFT seems to have plans that could afford it some measure of success. Or not. Certainly I prefer their company attitude versus google and apple, but that doesn't mean they'll succeed, only that I am rooting for them too.

It's a bit like sports I suppose.

 

[anon(50597)]

So which phone has no ads, no in-app purchases, is small enough to comfortably port around and hold as a phone, yet has big enough display that you don't need to hold it close/peer at it, like everybody does with smartphones, has a human-centric input (like a natural human behaviour, like 3d interaction, or conversation) instead of inaccurately swiping/tapping a screen, has an input that is accurate and efficient at typing, like a physical keyboard on a PC, versus shape writing or other compromises, can be used entirely with a pen OS and app wide, and proactively anticipates your desires like a true advanced AI?

The modern smartphone is a behemoth of compromises and its far from the most ideal form for a portable computing device. It's really just "capable of many things whilst not being entirely terrible at most of them".

Who drive change now? I didn't say it existed, I said they could do it. Change doesn't only come from companies, change comes from consumers and their needs. MS can't create some new way of doing something if no one will will use it.
It will be very interesting to see what the future brings.

 

[fatclue_98]

Meh, disagree. I think screen real estate has proven quite popular in the marketplace already, and more portable screen real estate will be even more popular. Its kind of logical IMO.



Enterprise would love this feature. But win32 ain't the future anyway, windows on arm is just a bridge. So mostly agree. Although there is A LOT of money to be main from businesses with the right product, I don't think that product is a folding tablet - people want real input methods in enterprise, and a touch screen isn't one.



Strongly agree. As a consumer product, hybrid devices are of most benefit for saving money. There's the added benefit of reduced syncing and set-up, but the major selling point is dosh. ie - poor places will want this, if its cheap enough. As of right now, there is no effort from anybody to create that kind of product.




Yeah, sort of. When the iPhone was released it didn't see that well at first. But once it started selling it caught on fire, and at that point it wasn't "what everybody else had". Same with the ipod, when it started selling well it wasn't what everybody else had.
Cultural trends and device lust are a little more complicated than pre-existing mass adoption.



I wouldn't say those things are irrelevant. If its perceived as good looking, and advanced in technology, its quite likely people will buy it.



I don't think I've said anything resembling "oh, MS is going to be great". I have no idea how well the company will do in ten years time. I'm not even certain how apple will be doing in ten years time, or google.

I just don't think MSFT or anyone else is "out for the count" in any arena of tech. It's a industry who's history is marked by shifting sands and favours, by old versus new, and I think MSFT seems to have plans that could afford it some measure of success. Or not. Certainly I prefer their company attitude versus google and apple, but that doesn't mean they'll succeed, only that I am rooting for them too.

It's a bit like sports I suppose.

All interesting points of view, but I do disagree with your notion that no one else is out for the count. Microsoft has ceded the consumer space. By their own words and actions. They may technically not be out, but they're taking a standing 8 count. I use what works best for me and right now it's Windows. Do I wish it did more? Sure, but the core functions of a smartphone are best performed by this x3 than any Android or iPhone. I'll take slow and steady over fast and inefficient any day. If you know the adage of the old bull and his eager young son then you know what I mean. It's NSFW so I can't tell you the rest of the story if you're unaware.

Sent from my Elite x3 on mTalk

 

[Momin Shaikh1]

I've read your comments. I don't believe a folding phone or dual screen phone is going to matter.

Whether win32 apps can run on a phone is irrelevant. How many people want PC on phone? Answer that question first. I can probably guess, not many.

I am to be exact here referring to CONSUMERS. Not enterprise.

PC on phone will only be worthwhile if and only if it becomes accessible to low end devices. This means countries where PCs are expensive but phones are easily bought can use this feature.

Doesn't matter how good it is. Doesn't matter what tech it has. Doesn't matter how good it looks. Means squat if no one buys it.

You haven't addressed my points. The reason you haven't is you can't.

well. before iphone arena, nobody needed a phone that could run apps. there were lot of people including ballmer who used to think that their pc does everything. so there's no need a separate phone that would cost high. (1st iphone was super costly as much as an pc at that time!!!)

those were the people who used to think the pc will never lose its mojo. interestingly those people did ditch pc for smartphones. what a fortune!!

"smartphones will never lose it's mojo" beleivers remind me these people. I hope this clears out ur points.




@Drael646464 @TgeekB
in technology world, u never really know what's gonna change the world bcoz it moves so fast. so just wait n see what's next. That may be A SURFACE PHONE or HOLOLENS GLASS or anything other.

period

 

[travisel]

Surface Phone Pro (Win10M RS3 OS) ... At this point it needs to be able too emulate Android 8 (API level 26) minimum to fix app gap! Until they can get UWP up and running! We/they are running out of time! At this point something drastic has to be done! So Android 8 apps YES! Win32 YES! full Xbox one X intergraded capabilities YES! Backwards compatibility YES!

Using Killer hardware!! New upcoming Snapdragon 836 with 6GB of RAM minimum! (Note 8 specs) but with dual flip display (3K OLED) minimum! With 6 generation PureView Camera! And don't forget a killer 4000 mAh battery (Li-Metal) would be fantastic to have two days of power!

This device should be out in time for Christmas 2017! And be sold everywhere Apple iPhone 8 & Google Pixel 2 and Samsung Note 8 are! And don't forget too market the crap out of it MS!!!!

Sent from Lumia 950XL

 

[anon(50597)]

well. before iphone arena, nobody needed a phone that could run apps. there were lot of people including ballmer who used to think that their pc does everything. so there's no need a separate phone that would cost high. (1st iphone was super costly as much as an pc at that time!!!)

those were the people who used to think the pc will never lose its mojo. interestingly those people did ditch pc for smartphones. what a fortune!!

"smartphones will never lose it's mojo" beleivers remind me these people. I hope this clears out ur points.




@Drael646464 @TgeekB
in technology world, u never really know what's gonna change the world bcoz it moves so fast. so just wait n see what's next. That may be A SURFACE PHONE or HOLOLENS GLASS or anything other.

period

I don't think people are saying smartphones will never lose their mojo. Just not anytime soon.
Of course things change. It happens all the time. The argument is it only happens if consumers decide they want it and it's marketed well. Without those two things it just another product in the electronics graveyard.

 

[mtf1380]

@fatclue_98, I believe the joke refers to an 'Old' bull, talking to a 'Young' bull, not Father bull/ Son bull...LOL!!!!!

Cheers!

 

[fatclue_98]

@fatclue_98, I believe the joke refers to an 'Old' bull, talking to a 'Young' bull, not Father bull/ Son bull...LOL!!!!!

Cheers!

In Cuba it was a father/son combo but you obviously know how that story goes


Sent from my Elite x3 on mTalk

 

[mtf1380]

in cuba it was a father/son combo but you obviously know how that story goes


sent from my elite x3 on mtalk

lol!

 

[techiez]

well. before iphone arena, nobody needed a phone that could run apps. there were lot of people including ballmer who used to think that their pc does everything. so there's no need a separate phone that would cost high. (1st iphone was super costly as much as an pc at that time!!!)

those were the people who used to think the pc will never lose its mojo. interestingly those people did ditch pc for smartphones. what a fortune!!

"smartphones will never lose it's mojo" beleivers remind me these people. I hope this clears out ur points.




@Drael646464 @TgeekB
in technology world, u never really know what's gonna change the world bcoz it moves so fast. so just wait n see what's next. That may be A SURFACE PHONE or HOLOLENS GLASS or anything other.

period

Apps existed even before iphone, symbian had a huge collection of java applications and were hugely popular, smartphones long existed before iphone. Iphone was just an evolution of existing smartphones at that time, what iphone brought newly to the table was a full screen capacitive touch based phone running an OS which was optimized for touch, usage of which felt natural, Nokia missed the capacitive touch revolution and relied on resistive touch for a long time and relied on the aging symbian 6 to support it.

Now smartphones evolution brought basic computing tasks to ppls pockets and hence smartphones were bound to replace PCs for ppl who dont need heavy duty computing. now pcs are pocketable already.

 

[Drael646464]

Apps existed even before iphone, symbian had a huge collection of java applications and were hugely popular, smartphones long existed before iphone. Iphone was just an evolution of existing smartphones at that time, what iphone brought newly to the table was a full screen capacitive touch based phone running an OS which was optimized for touch, usage of which felt natural, Nokia missed the capacitive touch revolution and relied on resistive touch for a long time and relied on the aging symbian 6 to support it.

Now smartphones evolution brought basic computing tasks to ppls pockets and hence smartphones were bound to replace PCs for ppl who dont need heavy duty computing. now pcs are pocketable already.

I don't think touch screens feel "natural". More natural than a mouse sure, but I can think of no true analogue in nature for tapping and swipping on a 2d surface.

As for replacing PCs - really that's only happening in emerging markets, where poverty prohibits possession of multiple devices. Often people are even using such phones without LTE, just free wifi. In developed markets, people have multiple devices per household, including PCs. So generally speaking its a companion device, not a replacement device.

I don't want to come off argumentative, but there are a few things I wanted to chime in on here. When the iPhone was released it didn't have any app store. It mainly took off because of its iTunes compatibility, and its fully featured browser, and as you say capacitive touch. Symbian apps were never hugely popular. One can speculate multiple valid reasons why.

Apps were certainly never considered "must have" by any phone enthusiasts back in Symbian days, nor till many years after current style smartphones took off - and that was the original point being made, that "useful and essential" isn't always immediate with new technologies, sometimes its something that "comes about over time".

I'm sure that will be the case with folding screens and AR too - the consumer uses will emerge slowly over time. indeed your bringing up things like early windows phones, blackberry and so on illustrates something often lost on people today - the slow process of refinement and evolution. That's a good topic to rambled into

We started with the "mobile phone". Those huge chunky many thousand dollar things business elites owned in the 80s. We very slowly progressed to the point where iPhone type devices are considered "must have" at a consumer level, and those technologies enabled. That process took over two decades.

Future techs like folding screens, and AR/VR, IoT, as enthusiastic as fans might be, may well follow similar curves - expensive, niche moving gradually towards affordable, consumer, useful to everyone.

Which is something perhaps people should have in mind when people spout 'consumer is everything, MSFT is wasting its time focusing on enterprise'.

We wouldn't have smartphones at all, if it weren't for enterprise buying those expensive clunky 80s phones.

Not everything is yet desireable, developed enough or cheap enough, to be a mass appeal consumer driven product.

The smartphone itself, most peoples accessable example of "consumer rules everything, focus only on consumers", went from enterprise only 80s cheezeblock, to mainstream dumb phones, to mainstream feature phones, to enterprise smartphones to consumer smartphones. It went through _two nessasary_ phases of enterprise based use, in order to become a consumer product.

Consumers didn't want to pay multiple thousands for a portable phone the size of a pound of butter, nor did they care for advanced computing features at a point where such computing hadn't evolved into what it is today.

Those steps relied on both consumers AND enterprise to enable what we have today. So even with the smartphone, really consumers DON'T rule. They only ruled when the technology had evolved enough, via enterprise to appeal to them, and catch on. Which doesn't nessasarily apply to emerging techs like IoT, VR, AR, AI, graphene screens and so on - it could easily be niche groups, ethusiasts, gamers, enterprise, the elite etc - that are the ones with the application, the interest to pony up the cash to drive the tech further and NOT mainstream consumers.