Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 29th Oct 2012 18:14 UTC
Google While Microsoft is unveiling all about Windows Phone 8, Google ruined the party a little bit by 'leaking' all about Android 4.2, the Nexus 10 tablet, and the new Nexus phone, the LG Nexus 4. There's some pretty awesome stuff in here from Google - except for the fact the devices themselves are kind of ugly.
Thread beginning with comment 540809
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Nexus 4
by Alfman on Thu 1st Nov 2012 15:20 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Nexus 4"
Alfman
Member since:
2011-01-28

saso,

"I'm not talking about the environmental aspect. I agree with you that we are generating lots of waste, but the fact that batteries aren't replaceable doesn't really factor into people's decision to buy a phone anymore."

Well, the sales numbers don't lie, you are right.

However a purchase of a non-battery-accessible device cannot be construed as a vote against having accessible batteries. It's a subtle distinction having to do with the granularity of choices offered.

When given no fine grained choice about the battery, consumers will buy them anyways. However given a choice we may very well learn that many consumers would prefer an accessible battery and would even be willing to pay a bit more for it.

It is plausible a manufacturer may been aware that consumers wanted battery access, and never the less decided to do away with it for selfish reasons like built in obsolescence.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Nexus 4
by saso on Thu 1st Nov 2012 18:50 in reply to "RE[4]: Nexus 4"
saso Member since:
2007-04-18

However a purchase of a non-battery-accessible device cannot be construed as a vote against having accessible batteries. It's a subtle distinction having to do with the granularity of choices offered.

I never said I agree or disagree with the direction the manufacturers have taken. I was merely stating the fact of the market place - it simply doesn't factor into people's purchasing choices (I mean at large; not talking about individuals like yourself).

When given no fine grained choice about the battery, consumers will buy them anyways.

You can always purchase a smartphone with a removable battery, there's still plenty of choice, e.g. (nearly) all of Samsungs offerings, AFAIK, still have removable batteries.

However given a choice we may very well learn that many consumers would prefer an accessible battery and would even be willing to pay a bit more for it.

Sales numbers clearly show this to be false. Accept it, people just don't care.

It is plausible a manufacturer may been aware that consumers wanted battery access, and never the less decided to do away with it for selfish reasons like built in obsolescence.

Before you ascribe ulterior motives, try to look for valid technical reasons why a battery might not be field-replaceable. For instance, hinges, clips, connectors and release mechanisms all take up valuable space, compromise the device's mechanical integrity, add weight and make hardware design generally more complex. They also make certain features nearly impossible, like Nexus 4's laminated glass back (which adds scratch resistance - a feature consumers really want).

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: Nexus 4
by Alfman on Thu 1st Nov 2012 20:08 in reply to "RE[5]: Nexus 4"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

saso,

Your not contradicting anything I'm saying except in your conclusion.

"Sales numbers clearly show this to be false. Accept it, people just don't care."

I don't think you understood the subtle distinction I was trying to point out, let me try explaining it differently...When you vote for a candidate, it does not imply an endorsement of everything the candidate stands for, in fact there may be some areas that you are in complete disagreement with the candidate you vote for. Yet you'll vote for him because you make a holistic decision based on a multitude of factors. It would be a fallacy to assume that voters agree with everything about the candidate they've voted for. Had there been more fine grained choices available amongst candidates, voters would be better able to reflect what they actually want by their vote.

Can you see how this applies to more mundane things like consumer purchases? When you claim "Sales numbers clearly show this to be false.", you've extrapolated each sale to represent consensus about a specific aspect of a device, but you haven't managed to isolate the variables properly. We'd have a much better idea of what consumers want if they had an *explicit* choice on the matter in isolation of all other variables.

Just to reiterate for emphasis, you couldn't draw a conclusion from coarse election data alone about the whether the population believes in an aspect as specific as gun rights. There may be some correlation, but to even find it means asking specific fine grained questions and not just jumping to conclusions based on the coarsely grained votes.

Sorry for the length of this post, I just think it's important to get this distinction right since it's a common misuse of sales numbers.

Edit: In the end though, we can agree that a removable battery is probably not going to be a decisive priority even for those people who would prefer it.

Edited 2012-11-01 20:23 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2