• unmagical@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      So let’s keep making phones thinner and thinner while simultaneously growing the camera bump instead of making a flat profile with, say, 2 days of life!

      • areyouevenreal@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        You’re missing something though: phone cell or battery capacity has been getting bigger, not smaller. The issue isn’t the batteries, it’s the other hardware and software needing more and more energy. Modern phones are much faster, have better screens at higher resolution, brightness, even refresh rate. All of this uses energy, even with modern technology being as awesome as it is. Qualcomm, TSMC, ARM, and Apple put quite a bit of work into making these things as efficient as they can be, but we keep demanding more and more from these devices. For many they replaced laptops after all.

        It’s a bit like complaining that your new ultra high performance sports car is getting bad range, and complaining about the fuel tank or battery instead of the engine. The tank has only gotten bigger or at least stayed the same, but the engine has gotten hungrier and hungrier with each generation.

        • unmagical@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          That’s a contributing factor to battery life remaining stagnant. Manufacturers use those advances while continuing to slim phones rather than making an actually flat brick that uses those advances to drastically increase battery life. Regardless of the energy needs of the phone manufacturers can use the difference in height between the back of a phone and the camera bump to include more battery capacity and it will increase both the daily and usable life of the phone.

      • bamboo@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        So on one hand, I agree with you. On the other hand, I think lightness is a thing people care about. I recently needed to get some photos backed up off an old phone of mine, and I didn’t realize how heavy my current one is until I picked up my old one. Thinness is irrelevant, but a 50% weight difference is not. Other than that, I don’t think most people get much utility out of more than a day of battery life, so 1.5 days new degrading down to 1 seems reasonable and in line with what most people want.

        • helenslunch@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          I think lightness is a thing people care about.

          It is. Specifically it is something people do not want.

          I have had a LG V30, Pixel 4a and 5, all of which are incredibly light. When I hand it to an iPhone user they tell me it “feels cheap”. You can see this sentiment reflected in phone reviews also.

          • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            Well, cheap or not, but in terms of fitting into my pocket a fat rubber-covered dumbphone is better than a modern thin and light one. That plate is just inconvenient. It’s too big. I don’t care how thin it is. A newspaper is thin too.

          • bamboo@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            I agree for first impressions that heavier is perceived as more premium, but after months of actually using a device I can’t fathom that a reasonable person would actually prefer a heavier phone given an equivalent, lighter phone. Even Apple, king of making devices with mass appeal, decided last year that shedding weight was a priority when moving some iPhones from aluminum to titanium.

            • helenslunch@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              Okay well try convincing a consumer that they just need to try it for a few months before they’ll like it.

              • bamboo@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 months ago

                I mean nobody had to convince me. I just picked up an old phone and was immediately “why am I carrying around this brick when clearly this exists”

        • localme@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Totally agree! I picked up an old iPhone 6s yesterday and I just couldn’t believe how much lighter and thinner it is than the latest models.

        • Dave.@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          I have a Samsung A71. It permanently lives in its protective case which gives it good bumpers around the easily-breakable edge-to-edge screen. It’s now 4 years old and has survived numerous tumbles and drops over the years.

          Occasionally I have to swap the SD card in it and I am always astonished at how thin and light and fragile it is when not in the case.

          I would quite happily have an actual similar size phone to what “I have now” if the battery size was bumped up another 50 percent.

          • areyouevenreal@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            You’re blaming the wrong thing again. Newer phones have higher capacity batteries than the old bricks by far. The issue is the screen, SoC, and modem power consumption has gone up too.

        • MonkderDritte@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          On the other hand, I think lightness is a thing people care about.

          Yeah, my Galaxy S3 is half as heavy as my current phone. It couldn’t do less but had superior battery life. Smartphones and their OS all have grown bloated.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Exactly. I really liked my old phone, the Moto G Power, which:

        • had no camera bump
        • had 2+ days battery life
        • was pretty affordable (I think it was $250 new?)

        I still have it for stuff around the house (gets like 3-4 days w/o the SIM), and I would totally still be using it as my main phone if it still got security updates. The screen is a little larger than I want, but it has been a solid phone for me.

        I got a Pixel 8 mostly because of the longer software support and GrapheneOS support, and I honestly don’t care about the camera, and the big bump is pretty annoying. I really wish I could just have my Moto G Power w/ a small screen and longer software support. In fact, I’d totally use a Pinephone if it had reliable calls and texts, better battery life, and better audio quality. I really don’t need much, I just need a phone that will keep working for years and not need to be recharged throughout the day…

    • DudeDudenson@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Ah but if our batteries last longer people won’t have to buy phones as often, someone think or the shareholders

      • BaroqueInMind@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Looks like you had plenty of time to complete it since you took the time to type out the ellipses. If only you had wri

        • WindyRebel@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Here you are thinking it was the device when it was actually the robot that malfunctioned over the period and then lost battery.

        • Azzu@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Looks like you had plenty of time to complete it since you’ve managed to hit the “Send reply” button and the request thus sent to the Lemmy server actually completed, allowing us to now view your intentionally unfinished comment. I think this is

    • shalafi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      My phone has a 22000mAh battery. I never consider charging it unless I’m going to the woods overnight, and then only to be sure I have a power bank.

      • bamboo@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Almost half of over 50 hospitals already have these new devices? I highly doubt that. Are you referring to one of the really bad old windows on arm devices, or like an android tablet or something?

          • bamboo@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            Some of them aren’t super age-old, but their processors are in an entirely different class, not competitive with these new devices or any of their x86 contemporaries. I really wanted to get one but could never justify them given the performance was so abysmal.

            • areyouevenreal@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              The 8cx Gen 3 was only released like one or two years ago, and is fast enough for day to day use. Sure the new ones are a fair bit faster, but the old ones were more than fast enough for web browsing, light programming, and running emulators. Heck they are also fast enough for server use if you need a power efficient cheap home server. They did make a couple desktop versions after all.

      • catloaf@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Qualcomm is a company that makes a lot of different products. This post is about PCs, but Qualcomm doesn’t make PCs as far as I know, so you might need to be more specific.