Debate: Pretty phones vs durable phones

Join the discussion
• 11mo ago
↵strbckboy said:

Do you find a Ferrari to be boring, just because they don't dramatically change the look with every new generation? It's called brand recognition and brand identity. Most mature smartphone brands have it figured out. There's a reason why iPhones, Samsung Galaxy, and Google Pixels are recognizable for what they are. The brands who look ridiculous and lost are those who constantly change their look. It's like they are throwing every design at the wall, to see what sticks. Why are smartphone enthusiasts, and apparently (so called) journalists, so slow to understand this?

cars are a bad analogy because, it costs millions to redesign a car. It doesn't cost millions to redesign a phone.


Many brands make an entirely new model every year. Only recently Samsung uses the same design for 2 or 3 revisions. But Apple does it for 4 or 5. That's worse.


The car analogy doesn't work here. Cars have thousands of parts that have to be moved, retooled to fit and safety concerns. Phones are a totally different thing in this case.

Like
1
Quote
• 11mo ago
↵pimpin83z said:

Any phone is durable with a case. Without a case iPhone are the most fragile devices out there.

Well the Samsung Fold is definitely more fragile. But yes I do agree with you 100%.

Like
1
Quote
• 11mo ago
↵fastanddubious said:

Same people here roasted Samsung for using plastic on the back of the s21 ?

It was both durable and pretty

Well it's not "plastic". Its a poly-carbonate material that is a composite. "Plastic" is used as a moniker to mean cheap. Well glass is cheap too, So is aluminum. Stainless Steel is expensive, but not the amount Apple uses. It's more expensive to tool metal vs composites that can be liquified and injected into a mold and cut out.


Imagine what the Pro Mxx would cost if Apple only sold 5M of them a year? It would be very expensive. But even if they got 100M sales, they won't reduce the price.


Some cheap materials do "feel" better. but it doesn't make them any less cheap.

Like
Quote
• 11mo ago
↵AltronLivez51 said:

cars are a bad analogy because, it costs millions to redesign a car. It doesn't cost millions to redesign a phone.


Many brands make an entirely new model every year. Only recently Samsung uses the same design for 2 or 3 revisions. But Apple does it for 4 or 5. That's worse.


The car analogy doesn't work here. Cars have thousands of parts that have to be moved, retooled to fit and safety concerns. Phones are a totally different thing in this case.

Not a bad analogy, at all. Ferrari’s still look like Ferrari’s, even after they’ve “spent millions” to change the design. There’s a reason for that…and it’s the one I described. You clearly don’t understand marketing, while that’s my actual job within the wireless industry.

Like
Quote
• 11mo ago
↵MariyanSlavov said:

Don't you find it a bit boring after the 12 Pro Max and the 14 Pro Max being almost identical?

Overly very much boring

Like
Quote
• 10mo ago
↵StanleyKubrick said:

DURABLE!!!!

This is a no brainer! How many people actually use their $$$$$$$glass sandwich WITHOUT a PLASTIC case on it? Not very many I'm sure. In fact I don't think I've ever seen anyone NOT using a case of some sort! I'm sure there are a few but not many!

Between the glass and the huge design it's almost impossible to use without a case. I loved the small size of iPhone 3G(S) which I could hold with a death grip in one hand, no case, without dropping. Who says plastic backs can't be attractive? Metal would be Ok too without wireless charging.

Like
Quote
• 10mo ago
↵AltronLivez51 said:

Samsung phones are generally more durable than the majority of brands. That says alot when you consider the scale of how many products they have.


As pretty and people think the iPhone 6 was, the single model was more prone to failure, than all the phones Samsung was selling in the same year.


You can have both. But some phones that pretend to be pretty are made of materials easier to damage. As much as it cost Apple to make an iPhone, the materials are much easier to damage vs Samsung phones as an example.


Pretty also means less features. Means you waited 3 years to get something others had and their version is still less capable.


PC's were criticized for years for being not so pretty but very functional. Then Apple cam and made a PC and its pretty. but less functional; even at more cost.


Paying extra because they make cheap materials look better is the craziest thing ever. My HP Envy is a 2017 model and it still looks almost new. Scratch's only. No dents like I see from Macs of similar pricing.


When the iPhone 6 came out, skimped on the case and it bent. For the 1st time they made a big phone they were wreckless. Even Samsung knew better when they 1st went big.


Pretty phones, liek the Fold are less functional, more fragile and cost to much. The Flip looks really cool. But it is a $1000 liability. Let rich people waste their easy money. My hard earned money means I need devices with substance and still look pretty.


I don't think any phone is any prettier than another. But those that concentrate on pretty make you pay more just for pretty.

A Ferrari is pretty, its also pricey. I can get something luxuriant, and sex and it will cost less than six figures and it will be more versatile.


Pretty is perception. It is not tangible. It is choice. If you're gonna put a case on it, it really doesn't matter how pretty it is.

Although, i agree with most of what you said, i MUST SAY, i frequently take my "pretty" phone out of its case, just to admire it (and CLEAN it obviously). ESPECIALLY when i had an auraglow note10.

GIMME THAT BLING, and ill keep it NICE! :-)

Like
2
Quote
• 10mo ago
↵strbckboy said:

The LG fanboys have entered the chat. Funny that ya'll still exist, even when your smartphone brand no longer does.

Wow. You're an imbecile. Here's my phone history:


2009-2014: OG Droid, Droid 2, Droid X2, Droid Razr Maxx, Droid Maxx

2014-present: Note 3, Note 4, Note 7, S7 Edge, Note 8, Note 10+, S22 Ultra.


My comment of "LG had some really nice looking phones. Their 2012-2016 run was pretty nice!" simply means I have the maturity level & brain capacity to acknowledge nicely designed phones by OEM's that I don't use. Let's work on stepping your not-assuming-s**t game up because you know what they say about people who assume.

??

Like
1
Quote
• 10mo ago
↵DudemanBrochief said:

Although, i agree with most of what you said, i MUST SAY, i frequently take my "pretty" phone out of its case, just to admire it (and CLEAN it obviously). ESPECIALLY when i had an auraglow note10.

GIMME THAT BLING, and ill keep it NICE! :-)

Same here

Like
Quote
• 10mo ago
↵pimpin83z said:

Wow. You're an imbecile. Here's my phone history:


2009-2014: OG Droid, Droid 2, Droid X2, Droid Razr Maxx, Droid Maxx

2014-present: Note 3, Note 4, Note 7, S7 Edge, Note 8, Note 10+, S22 Ultra.


My comment of "LG had some really nice looking phones. Their 2012-2016 run was pretty nice!" simply means I have the maturity level & brain capacity to acknowledge nicely designed phones by OEM's that I don't use. Let's work on stepping your not-assuming-s**t game up because you know what they say about people who assume.

??

You had the Note S7? I hope your house had fire insurance at that time ??.

Like
1
Quote
FCC OKs Cingular\'s purchase of AT&T Wireless