Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

>* they add a lot of weight and could result in more wrist/arm pain for those using their phones for extended time.*

Seriously? I think we somehow survived the nineties, early '00s without such issues.

>* You certainly don't want your phone to be as heavy as a brick.*

It's been at least 5-10 years that we've been very far away from that situation...




> Seriously? I think we somehow survived the nineties, early '00s without such issues.

Smartphones were not mainstream in the early '00s. All the "normal" phones were very light and very portable.


For about 100 years or so the handset was a lot heavier than todays smartphones and nobody thought anything of it. My grandmom had one of those old black bakelite jobs, it must have weighed at least 2 pounds and could be used as a means of self defense.


But no one was tapping on the screen and looking at it to interact with it …

I would personally argue that I’m unsure about the connection between weight and comfortableness and the tolerances. Would 200g be ok? I really don’t know.

However … making phone calls is not the main use case for smartphones. You just cannot design them with that in mind as something to optimise for. That’s non-sensical, weird, and a total non-sequitur. Your comparison makes zero sense in that regard. It just doesn’t even apply, so it’s not a valid argument in any way, shape or form.


> making phone calls is not the main use case for smartphones

Try marketing a smart phone that can't make phone calls and see how it goes.

> You just cannot design them with that in mind as something to optimise for.

Every smartphone has been primarly a phone, secondary a camera and thirdly something that runs apps.

It's essentially a computer with a telephony interface but that telephony bit is absolutely essential and not an afterthought.


> Try marketing a smart phone that can't make phone calls and see how it goes.

http://www.apple.com/ipod-touch/


> Try marketing a smart phone that can't make phone calls and see how it goes.

I think that's called a (mini) tablet.


How many people that have mini tablets also have a phone? How many people that have a phone also have mini tablets?


Are you serious?! How is it even possible to hold that opinion? I mean, really?! I’m so confused right now.

http://www.uxmatters.com/mt/archives/2013/02/how-do-users-re...

It’s not the phone part you have to design around, it’s obviously all the other stuff, especially – really, really, especially – if your argument basically boils down to “Oh, but it’s fine for making phone calls!” I mean, yeah, you can easily argue making the situation better for phone calls in your design since they still play some role, but the argument you made just doesn’t fly at all. It makes no sense.


It makes no sense to you. But the world is a lot larger. If there is an interruption in data services most people wouldn't even notice. But when you can't make or receive calls that's major and in extreme cases will lead to loss of life. Apps are nice-to-have, phone calls are a must.


That argument of yours is so confusing and non-sensical, mostly in that you don’t link it back to the original point you made.

Basically, there is just no connection between what you just said and the original point you made. It’s utterly irrelevant, unconnected.


Even if weight were a problem, a hands free headset trivially solves it.


I thought that, but it only solves the voice/audio portion - doesn't solve anything about holding the device to interact with the screen.


Good point. I got to thinking about a remote screen attachment, sort of the touchscreen version of a headset, then realized you just do that now by using an external battery pack and a smartphone with a decently long cable between them.




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: