By 2016, only 3% of smartphones won't have a touchscreen
0. phoneArena 27 Aug 2011, 17:47 posted on
Research firm ABI says that by 2016, a whopping 97% of smartphones will feature a touchscreen of some type, up from the 7% that had a touchscreen back in 2006 before the introduction of the Apple iPhone; the study says that the touchscreen has played a big part in the huge growth of smartphone usage...
This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here
1. biophone (Posts: 1896; Member since: 15 Jun 2011)
No pa everyone used touchscreen before the iphone. Its not like everyone was copying the iphone by including a capacitive touch screen. The fact that only 7 percent of smart phones was touch screen in 2006 and 75 in 2010 is just because of the current trend of phones. There was nothing revolutionary about the iphone it didnt change the industry at all. Its just a trend.
9. E.N. (Posts: 2357; Member since: 25 Jan 2009)
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not
10. stealthd (Posts: 974; Member since: 12 Jun 2011)
The iPhone did in fact change the industry. Someone had to set the trend. If you'd like to use the word "influence" instead you're welcome to, but there's a reason every phone manufacturer started pumping out a lot more touchscreen phones after the iPhone. Android was heavily influenced by WinMo and Blackberry, and it wasn't until the iPhone was announced that much of that design shifted from the trackball to the touchscreen. It wasn't the first, but it was obviously the most influencial.
And no, everyone was not using touchscreens before the iPhone. Everyone was using the Razr, and a good number of people had Blackberries. The iPhone proved you could make a awesome phone with just touch, which was not a proven theory at the time for mass appeal.
19. biophone (Posts: 1896; Member since: 15 Jun 2011)
I was being an illogical fandroid. I am thinking about being an illogical isheep next.
20. remixfa (Posts: 14061; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
the iphone set the trend for sure. before the iphone blackberry ruled the roost. Every palm and almost every windows phone that was sold before that was touch screen though, so its not like the iphone was anywhere near first. It was just the most popular.
and technically, the iphone was not a smartphone when it launched. If i remember correctly it took it till ios4 to get all the regular smartphone features like cut n paste, multitasking (though its FAKE), MMS, and other smartphone staples.
21. biophone (Posts: 1896; Member since: 15 Jun 2011)
The 3gs had mms and I think copy and paste. I like apple's multitasking because it saves battery by not having everything in the background but can still resume tasks.
I also never said the iphone was the first touch screen. Before the iphones touch screen phones were not popular or well regarded. After the iphone almost all smart phones had touch screens. It changed the mobile industry. Thats kinda a big deal.
The iphone was certianly a smartphone. Just because its easy to use and lacked some trivial features doesnt not make it a smartphone.http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki
If you read the definition of a smartphone the iphone had all those things.
22. E.N. (Posts: 2357; Member since: 25 Jan 2009)
It's fine, remixfa is just being a fanboy as usual. I do prefer Apple's multitasking as well, but don't waste time trying to explain it to him. He knows the benefits of Apple's approach but he chooses to ignore it.
He should just go back to his Android phone and find how many different clocks his phone has and how many different ways he can make his phone tell him time. Decorating your phone is everything these days. If it wasn't for the ability to decorate your homescreen, why would anyone want Android? Haha, that's right, they won't!
25. biophone (Posts: 1896; Member since: 15 Jun 2011)
People like remixfa and miz and taco can make this place so annoying sometimes. To say the iphone is a feature phone is just plain dumb.
26. biophone (Posts: 1896; Member since: 15 Jun 2011)
Also en there are alot of good reasons to like android phones and i can see why people buy them. However on both sides people can go a bit far.
31. remixfa (Posts: 14061; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
this coming from the guy that parroted Taco for like 2 weeks straight.. lol.
32. biophone (Posts: 1896; Member since: 15 Jun 2011)
Taco isnt always wring remixfa. Alot of the time sure but not always. I agreed with him about data speeds as in right now lte is faster then hspa+ which i still agree with as i posted many articles supporting that. Im sorry if you cant deal with being wrong. the fastest hspa+ phone runs at 21 mb per second no argument. It wasnt even iphone related at that so fanboy or not taco's love of apple is unrelated. Anyway multitasking and copy and paste doesnt make something a smartphone. If you dont like wikipedia go find me a valid definition of a smartphone. Ok fine there isnt one but really all a smartphone is, is a advanced feature phone that can browse the full web, check email, and has a keyboard. All Iphones do that.
33. biophone (Posts: 1896; Member since: 15 Jun 2011)
There it is from phonescoop.com smartphones are ussually devices that have a pda larger display and faster processor's according to them. All iphones meet that to. Btw saying the og iphone is a feature phone is a fanboy thing to say. The fact you cant even recoqnize a iphone as a smartphone with a twisted logic because it was missing a couple of unimportant featues just goes to show how big of a fanboy you are. You dont see me going androids arent smartphones they dont have a retina display. Who is to determine what trivial features such as a retina display and copy and past make a smartphone.
37. remixfa (Posts: 14061; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
ask a business person if those features make it a smartphone or not. I remember when the iphone first came out. There were many people and businesses that left VZW to go get the new hotness. Within 6 months to a year a large % of them came back, because it wasnt a real smartphone. That multitasking, cut n paste, exchange sync, n all the other stuff is really important when your actually using your phone for WORK purposes.
It didnt have the standard features of every other "smart phone" at the time, therefor it was not a smart phone. I watched them all return and go back to their blackberrys and windows 5/6xx phones because they needed the features of a true smartphone.
It was clever billing by apple and their fans to call it a smartphone because it had apps like smart phones did, but it wasnt one otherwise.
40. biophone (Posts: 1896; Member since: 15 Jun 2011)
Just because another phone might be better suited for business such as a blackberry doesn't not make the iPhone a smartphone. It still is compared to a feature phone more advanced. There is no one feature that makes a phone a smartphone. And really all smartphone means is a advanced feature phone not a business phone. Maybe the iPhone might not have been the best business phone but it certainly was a smartphone.
41. remixfa (Posts: 14061; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
the whole smartphone distinction has always been a divider between business class and personal class. until the iphone came along and popularized apps and games, the only type of smartphone was business class. Windows, Palm, and BB all had things in common. Multitasking, cut n paste, exchange/BB email support, documents, folders, calendar syncing, contact syncing, and apps. These are the things that make a smartphone.. smart.
The iphone is NOW a smartphone, but it wasnt when it came out. It was very nice feature phone. Why do u think those early "iphone killers" were all feature phones like the LG Voyager and such? Business phone makers laughed at the iphone's lack of features.
Maybe they were wrong to dismiss the iphone (obviously) but they were right in not calling it a smartphone.
42. biophone (Posts: 1896; Member since: 15 Jun 2011)
I reccomand you watch this video. Its only two minitues long but as you can the traditional thinking then was touch screen wasnt good. Heck if you asked him what a smartphone was he talked about email and music and a browser. I had
the voyager and its crappy touch screen. It did nothing. All that represented was how terrible cell phones were. I was jealous of iphone users. The iphone redefined what a smartphone is. It was so revolutionary it didnt fit into the mold of current phones then. It redefined smartphones and people didnt even know how to compete with it. If you really wanted those features you could have even jailbroke your phone. So when you jailbreak your og phone now its a smartphone? That would nake now sense. How would downloading an app on cydia magically make ur phone smart.
48. remixfa (Posts: 14061; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
cydia didnt exist for the iphone 2g/3g at first. those extra features were non existant.
and you dont want to open the jailbreaking can of worms. you had to jailbreak an iphone to GET those features.. phones that came with those features could be modded to get MORE features. You dont think there was a BB and windows mod community??? lol. The crazy things you used to be able to do with a windows phone would make your head spin.
Your justification is "when apple brought the iphone it was a smartphone in its own class".
class A) is a flip phone
class B) is a feature phone
class C) is a smart phone.
there is no class D) iphone.
regardless if you want to think it or not, the iphone when it LAUNCHED was a nice feature phone. when it gained smartphone features, then it was a smartphone.
49. biophone (Posts: 1896; Member since: 15 Jun 2011)
It redefined what a smartphone was. A couple features does not make something a smartphone. BTW what i said was "The iphone redefined what a smartphone is. It was so revolutionary it didnt fit into the mold of current phones then. It redefined smartphones and people didnt even know how to compete with it." Yes they tried competing with a feature phone which was a fail. Smartphone vs feature phone the feature phone had no chance. Only a fandroid would say o yeah that iPhone is a feature phone it doesn't have copy and past lol what.
O yeah and i wasn't comparing mods of iPhone to mods of windows. It is you trying to compare the iPhone to them. All I am saying is jail breaking your i device could give them those trivial features you talk about. So what when someone downloads copy and paste on the iPhone 2g now they have a smartphone. Thats illogical. It a smartphone not because of its features but because of it specs and the fact you can check email and browse the full web. Which really is the main difference between smartphones and feature phones. Not copy and paste.
Also I am sorry for my bad grammar in these last couple of posts I kinda don't have a lot of free time to check my grammar.
30. remixfa (Posts: 14061; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
have you ever had a writing college class that allowed wikipedia as an official source? sorry, i dont accept wiki as a 100% truthful answer.
The iphone at launch was a very nice feature phone with some unique features. It didnt become a smartphone until it had what I listed before.
EN, your post had... what.. to do with anything?
I didnt say a single fanboy thing. Just honest tech babble. Maybe u dont like it because u dont agree but that doesnt make it less truthful.
35. E.N. (Posts: 2357; Member since: 25 Jan 2009)
You're right, I did trail off. I had just revisited the post about the Droid Bionic video preview and was still thinking about that a little when I commented. My bad.
You were stating your opinions but I wouldn't really call it "honest tech babble." And just because you think its true doesn't mean its truthful.
I think your whole attitude is kinda funny. Wiki might not be recognized as an official source, but I don't remember any of my professors ever referring me to remixfa for credible information.
- "The iPhone at launch was a very nice feature phone with some unique features. It didn't become a smartphone until it had what I listed before."
- "I don't accept wiki as a 100% truthful answer"
- "Maybe you don't like it....but that doesn't make it any less truthful"
- Who the hell are you? Some of your posts are so snobbish and know-it-all its crazy. As if whatever you say means more than what I or someone else has to say. iPhone may not have been the first touchscreen device but it definitely set the standard for years to come and no other device has been able to change the industry like the iPhone has, even 4 years later. Secondly, the whole point of Apple's multitasking was so it wouldn't be like Android's. MISSION ACCOMPLISHED. Do you really think it would have been more difficult to just let the apps run in the background? No that's easy and also ineffective. Apple's method actually required extra work and extra programming.
38. remixfa (Posts: 14061; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
EN, inflection in online writing is solely in your head. You read it with the attitudes and tones that you put into someone else's writing. That doesn't always match what was actually meant. Heck, most of the time it doesn't. If you think I come off as authoritative then you must think I'm authoritative. Personally, I'm just having a normal conversation.
29. biophone (Posts: 1896; Member since: 15 Jun 2011)
I guess I am good at it then. However your post is still revalant.
2. att.arn.rno (Posts: 9; Member since: 21 Aug 2011)
Honestly, I'd be surprised if it were even as high as 3%.
3. firebo14 (Posts: 77; Member since: 16 Aug 2011)
Watch out for Apple suing those 97% touchscreen phones. Loool.
Will Apple win?.. :[
6. firebo14 (Posts: 77; Member since: 16 Aug 2011)
Im not on side with Apple.. forgot to say that. :]
23. E.N. (Posts: 2357; Member since: 25 Jan 2009)
I think its sad that you have to state "i'm not on side with Apple" for you comment to be complete. Shows how you're not thinking for yourself and how you're looking for the acceptance/approval from other Android users. How cult-like
27. biophone (Posts: 1896; Member since: 15 Jun 2011)
As long as they can differantiate themselves they dont have to worry. Look at the dx and the galaxy s . Both touch screen one is a clear copy and the other isnt. Apple could never win a lawsuit against the dx. I have faith in our legal system to say that.
4. JeffdaBeat (unregistered)
At first, I was kind of confused as to whether they meant that only 3% of smartphones sold won't have a touch screen or if 3% of smartphones in use won't have a touch screen. There are a lot of people nowadays holding on to their Blackberry Curves and Motorola Q's, but I can't imagine outside RIM there are many companies making non-touch screen smartphones.
I do wonder what the next big step will be though. For the longest time, to keep costs down, companies used directional pads to navigate phones. Then resistive touch screens as they became more affordable. Then came multi-touch import on the capacitive touchscreen. Will touch screens be old technology in a world where technology only accelerates? Besides a phone reading your mind, I'm not sure how easier input can be other than touch...
39. remixfa (Posts: 14061; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
holographic touch. that would be cool. the next level in 3d technology. :)
7. InspectorGadget80 (Posts: 6678; Member since: 26 Mar 2011)
Yeah right. It's not like we're going back in time with classic black berries or oldie windows phone. theirs a huge market share in touch screen. AND APPLE DIDN'T CREATE THE TOUCH SCREEN PHONE they re invent it and also didn't invent the touch screen.
36. E.N. (Posts: 2357; Member since: 25 Jan 2009)
lol Thank you. Sometimes I wonder where all these arguments are coming from. its like some of these people have little voices in their heads that are saying things like "iPhone is the king," "Apple was the first touchscreen device" "Apple invented everything first" "Apple invented the smartphone" "Apple is completely 100% original" "Apple is the only innovative company in the world" "Apple products are flawless" etc etc etc.
And then they come on sites like these and contradict them all. No one says these things.
44. protozeloz (Posts: 5379; Member since: 16 Sep 2010)
I've seen people say those arguments and underestimate other OS's, the problems it that some people believe its every iPhone user's argument, iPhone Is a excellent device and some people cant deal with that
45. biophone (Posts: 1896; Member since: 15 Jun 2011)
Both ios and android have great devices.
8. ltr (unregistered)
Kinda funny because, I went on craigslist, people are still stupid enough to sell a RAZR for $100.
Maybe for a collectors item.
rumor going around is Motorola might still trying to bring back the RAZR, but this time with Android. Its supposed to look kinda like the Blackberry style.
15. som (Posts: 768; Member since: 10 Nov 2009)
Did you said Apple inc. will ban other companies from making touch screen phones. Can IBM ban Apple from making touch screen phones for patent infringement because IBM "Simon" was a first touch screen smartphone but Apple built a king of smartphone that suprised the whole World.
17. ilia1986 (unregistered)
"Resistive screens are pretty much extinct now".
Thank god. I owned a Nokia 5800 before an iPhone 4. Using a resistive "touch screen" (it's not really a touch screen - more like a press screen) was akin to using a goat to travel 80 miles every day from home to work.
18. gargoyle (Posts: 14; Member since: 17 Aug 2011)
i love touch screen myself but i have a friend that works for a best buy mobile and he was telling me the other day that alot of pp come into the store looking for the old model flip phones saying thats all they need it for is to talk or maybe sent a text every once and awhile. they don't want to pay the 15-30 dollar data when they won't use it.
24. att.arn.rno (Posts: 9; Member since: 21 Aug 2011)
...and those aren't smartphones, so this article isn't about them.
43. iShepherd (unregistered)
i actually hate the iphone and apple and all the cheap backstage tricks they pull (unneccessary lawsuits) to lower the competition
but even a guy like me has to admit that the first iphone did start the mass trend for touchscreen phones thanks to the multitouch capacitive display