What are you wearing? Skinny jeans??Originally Posted by WaltA
|
|
|
|
|
I've climbed a cellphone tower
I agree this is a bit wishful. 55 thousandths each side of actual pixel boundary to edge of device would be a bit tight. And that's with the RAZR's larger width. My guess is you would need goto almost 3" for it to work in his suggest screen size and still be durable and manufacturable. We will soon find out with the Note at 3.27" on possibly most carriers in some form just how broad the market is for such unwieldy devices. I myself and I am guessing anyone looking for maximum possible large pocket pocketable screen size will PAY for such unwieldy stuffs also. I am doubting the same is true for those looking for similar bleeding edge specs in a smaller screen and overall package. This leads me to believe they should just offer similar speced devices with smaller screens and sizes for a discounted price. That's kinda what you get with the D4, but it's actually pretty large and just small screened with LOTS of bezel bulk. I tend to believe bezel is less important on sliders anyhow as you don't even need the grab bezel as you do with a slate like the nexus for pinch holding. Even then you don't NEED it, it just makes it easier to handle the device without inadvertently making inputs. With a keyboard slid out though you can use that area to pinch hold and not worry about inputs.
Pretty sure the sweet spot will be found at about 5" and I have said this ever since I realized the iPhone is 5" diagonally if it had more pointy corners(aspect ratio would be longer than 16:9, but shorter than anamorphic). So it could basically have a 5" screen if zero bezel were possible. It's not possible so such a device would need to have a bit more area, but wouldn't NEED to take up A LOT more area than an iPhone. It would be a bit wider than iPhone to work. 5" 16:9 would put you around 4.36"x2.45". So you could possible fit this in something the size of a RAZR. The RAZR would give you 1/8" side bezels and .4" top and bottom bezel with a 5" 16:9 screen. That might be a bit tough, but I KNOW my GNex has bezel in the realm of .1875" so if I just go with .19" bezel that would give a width of 2.83" or about an 1/8" wider than the RAZR. And length would be similar to RAZR or GNex with minimum .19" bezel on bottom with onscreen buttons and .6" for speaker and cams and such on the top which is similar to top of GNex. Allow thickness to go into the .5"+ range and I think it's all doable with Keyboard and such. I'm actually probably fine upto .6" thickness if it gets me better keyboard, battery, and camera. 1" if it's a mid-priced POS grade fixed focal quality camera. Most all point and shoots are zooms so I see no reason a thicker phone can't have a shooter with fixed focal length lens that can out shoot most point and shoots in about any situation where a zoom or extra flash power isn't needed.
My screen is bigger than yours
What are you wearing? Skinny jeans??
I've climbed a cellphone tower
Thoroughness? What does too big need to be "thorough" in your eyes? Or, do you just like to pick arguments to boost your post count?
Tom
"Fundamentally, there are only two ways of coordinating the economic activities of millions. One is central direction involving the use of coercion - the technique of the army and of the modern totalitarian state. The other is voluntary cooperation of individuals - the technique of the marketplace."
-- Milton Friedman
Phone Collector
Just curious, anyone ever wonder if maybe the bezel serves another purpose than just for holding onto? Maybe a design consideration? Seriously, do you really believe that manufacturers spend extra to put in a bezel that isn't needed?
Maybe there are reasons why you like Motorola phones more than HTC and Samsung? Stuff like call quality, reception, build quality? I don't know, just rambling I guess.
My screen is bigger than yours
It definitely does, it is a part of the styling of the razor line. However, I think that many here r not in favor of the new style that emphasizes thinness rather than overall reduction in dimensions. The reduction in thickness of the D4 is minimal at best anyways, so its mostly for them to achieve uniform styling with the rest of their line.
I myself am not too stressed about the thickness of the bezel, as long as the screen is high rez enough, then it would be fine. But there r people who would like a Gnex like screen on the same chassis.
Sent from my DROID3 global using Tapatalk
I've climbed a cellphone tower
I am sure they may cram something other than structure into the side bezels. The problem is that I want as much display as possible without making the device take up more area. I would rather add thickness than bezel and keep screen size at maximum possible for length and width dimensions. Not to mention extra bezel limits one handed use as displays reach a certain size. If Moto is cramming circuits and antennas and whatever else into bezel space that is a BAD design choice if the device is NOT at Tablet where pocket size and one handed use are not of utmost CRITICAL concern.
If bezel is used in helping call quality and reception through some antenna handy work there, I would rather have a nub/protruding or even retractable antenna like the old days with all the advantages of such designs reception wize than a big bezel.
I've got more phones than fingers
Thoroughness is Jasaero's well thought out analysis above. An actual contribution to understanding.
My entire point from the beginning is only that screen size is not evenly proportional to phone width. Nothing more. The 5-1/4" vs. 5" is trivial; the point is that meaningfully larger displays will fit in the phones we now carry. No I don't like fights. And I have no idea what my post count is or why it might help me to "boost" it
Perspective instantiates reality.
( By DX w/HoFo app. )
Learning Android root on my SGSIII while waiting for Ubuntu Phone OS.
The Borg has assimilated US: Supreme Court Blocks Ban on Corporate Political Spending ~ "Resistance is futile."
Perspective instantiates reality.
I've got more phones than fingers
I am guilty of assuming that the larger bezels are the result of the wish for skinnier phones without the expense of larger screens.
They spread the internals wide as possible to maximize slimness and then just lay on the same display as before so the extra space at the sides naturally becomes wider bezels.
That was my assumption.
Perspective instantiates reality.
( By DX w/HoFo app. )
I've climbed a cellphone tower
This was my assumption also being that the RAZR seemed to have a good bit extra bezel compared to Bionic which was otherwise a pretty similar phone other than thickness, display type, and battery type. Don't get me wrong Bionic probably had more bezel than samsung phones also, but was a good bit less than RAZR being that it was atleast narrower than GNex ended up. Really if bionic had a better display I would probably prefer it to razr in most respects.
I have a blue tooth
I am not as sure that all the "extra" bezel was done totally just for fun, and not a mechanical or electrical requirement.
Phone Collector
Those protruding antenna won't really work anymore, there are just too many antennas in a modern smartphone. On a Verizon phone you have the EVDO antennas, LTE, Bluetooth, WLAN, GPS, and in some NFC. With those you have some major interference issues, especially with LTE destroying WLAN, and Bluetooth and WLAN interferring with each other.
The RAZR was a little wider to achieve that thinness, but I have seen complaints about the bezel on every Motorola phone and some people calling for phones with no bezel. That display is a massive source of interference.
The better the antenna design, the better the phone works as a phone.
Since this is a D4 thread though I will add to please go an feel this phone in your hand. I love this phone, and the keyboard is so much better than the D3 (which I use to love, until the D4).
As for all those blogs claiming the D4 is a minor update, they got issues. Better mechanicals (keyboard), better display, more RAM, new processor... what were they looking for?
The jokes everywhere on the D4 following the D3 are funny. No one expected the D3 to be a success, so the D4 was pushed up so there would be a good Droid on the shelves. Go figure. Don't expect the D5 to come so close to the D4 this time.
I've climbed a cellphone tower
That's not really the point. The point is did it HAVE to be done. The Galaxy Nexus obviously doesn't have it and isn't in any way vastly inferior. It may have some small weak points, but I am guessing less focus on thinness and more on bezel and ultimate screen size could have got us a very similar sized device to RAZR other than thickness with MUCH bigger display and matching performance all around. And actually I am for these new weird batteries even, but only if they focus on 3000mah+ ones like the MAXX and leave normal removable batteries in devices that aren't going to have extreme capacity batteries.
Basically what goal made the large bezel such a needed requirement? It's obviously a goal that didn't exist with the Galaxy Nexus or Bionic even though they are VERY similar performing device that just happen to be a tiny bit thicker. Just the need to put ALL jacks on the top of the RAZR seems a bit ridiculous to me and it's OBVIOUS what drove that. The naming further cements what the primary goals in the design of this device were and those goals created a device I just COULD not consider for purchase over most other devices arriving at the same time. I woulda rather bought a ReZound stupid name and all if the Galaxy Nexus didn't happen.
I've climbed a cellphone tower
re: thoroughness. Pish posh. My one and ONLY point in the posting I made that you quoted is that I don't WANT a phone that would be large enough to accommodate a 5" screen. If I want a tablet, I'll buy a tablet. I don't want a tablet. I want a phone. If the entire front surface of my D2G was consumed with screen (no bezel at all), that would be 4.75" diagonal. The existing 3.75" diagonal usable screen size is plenty large for anyone except those that want an entertainment center that also can send texts and post to twitter. I don't. I want a phone that can also access the internet from time to time, and I'm not wanting to pay a plug nickel for a larger screen and the associated larger phone.
Get it? That's the sum total of the "thoroughness" required to make my point. You can analyze-away all you want on all the other mostly pointless issues that get raised in these pre-release threads. Have at it.
A physical keyboard is a natural and useful thing for a smaller screen phone targeted at people who still are more interested in communicating than in firing angry birds and watching the super bowl while driving.
I've climbed a cellphone tower
I wasn't really saying a standard protruding antenna of the old days would still work so much as protrusion from some end making the device longer would be MUCH more desirable than something that widens the device. The devices just can't get too much wider than RAZR and still be real useable with one hand. I am ok shifting the device in my hand a bit to reach top and bottom of screen, but you basically just need a second hand as the device gets too wide and included too much side bezel. Protrusion or large upper and lower bezel for antenna don't affect use one handed in portrait. Not to mention if you are less focused on thinness I am sure you can add RF shielding behind display and other interfering components and isolate antennas better in general while still giving them good access to air all directions to pull in signal.
Basically my whole point is that this affliction with OEMs thinning devices is ruining our devices for everyone other than skinny jean wearing goofs who need paper thin devices. There is a pretty good aftermarket for gargantuan and unwieldy 3000mah+ batteries and covers for about ANY phone with a removable batter so it's pretty obvious many of us are plum fine with a near 1" thick device if we can use it heavily and still not have to worry about battery often. Why not just try a device with these people in mind from the get go and improve not only battery size, but everything else that can be better specified such as Antennas, cam, display, and keyboard in the process by allowing thickness to go up to more traditional/original smartphone regions. It is a power user market not even being targeted AT ALL as it stands. The Note sorta targets them, but is still pretty heavily focused on thinness and battery capacity seems to have suffered a good bit being that it has less capacity than the Maxx, but a much more power hungry display it's users are going to want to have on A LOT. There is ALREADY a big 4500mah or so cell and backplate up for offer from Mugen for the international one though and they usually aren't nearly that quick to offer up an option so they obviously see this as a big potential market or just got a flood of requests before the device was even really selling at most retail outlets.
Oh and D3 should have had 1gb of RAM in the first place and a .2mhz processor clock bump is not big cheese. The keyboard, LTE, and rest seem pretty nice though so I can't really fault it as a $199 LTE device. I want a similar QWERTY device though that could be sold for a justified $300-350 price.
I like your no extra plug nickel point. I don't see any reason why mid/lower priced devices can't be very similar spec wise to top priced devices, but just be smaller more phone/communication oriented options. As I said above, even the D3 should have had 1gb of RAM in the first place. Such a regime would also further put price pressures on Apple who seems more focused on people with your line of thinking that want a very svelte device that maybe is a bit limited video and web media wise due to smaller screen, but quite competitive otherwise. Any approach that really starts to put pressure on Apple price wise I think is a good move for all Apple's competitors.
My screen is bigger than yours
I kind of remember that I. The OG droid, the antenna is part of the 'lip' structure blow the screen and the capcitive buttons. I wonder whether by removing this design element they are forced to increase the bezel width to fit in the same antenna. It seems that laptops, no matter how thin the bezel, always has room to fit in wifi or cellular antenna around the screen; but then again, its on a diff scale for the phone. I don't see how we can have such a such a design while having no effect on the rest of the phone.
Maybe it was because they needed to make the exterior of the phone appear symmetrical (away with the lip) that lead to the antenna being placed around the screen, and in turn leading to thick bezels.
Sent from my DROID3 global using Tapatalk
Droid "superphone" Pre-release thread
Bookmarks