Front facing speakers revolutionary?

[Nreeldeep]

The front facing speakers on the HTC One were widely regarded as revolutionary and game changing. Are you surprised that no other mobile manufacturer has adopted the design element? Why do you suppose noone has? Do you think anyone will in the future?

 

[D13H4RD2L1V3]

The front facing speakers on the HTC One were widely regarded as revolutionary and game changing. Are you surprised that no other mobile manufacturer has adopted the design element? Why do you suppose noone has? Do you think anyone will in the future?

I have no idea why no one else has implemented it.

But it's basic common sense. Speakers facing towards you will always sound better than speakers facing away from you.

 

[chrisxpierce]

Things that make you say.....hmmmm???

 

[bbinder]

The only real complaint is how much stuff can fall in them or if you spilled something on them. Other than that I simply love it and would prefer devices to do this.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4

 

[garublador]

The front facing speakers on the HTC One were widely regarded as revolutionary and game changing. Are you surprised that no other mobile manufacturer has adopted the design element? Why do you suppose noone has? Do you think anyone will in the future?

Perhaps it's because it's neither revolutionary nor game changing. It's a nice and all, and those who rely on their phone speakers will really like it, but it's not a "killer app" type feature. It's more of a niche feature.

Even if we make the assumption that it is revolutionary and a must have feature, the phone hasn't been out long enough for anyone else to implement it in their designs. It's a lot of work to move a speaker in such a tight package so you'd have to do it at the start of a design. We haven't seen any phones that have started their designs since the One has been out.

 

[Nreeldeep]

Perhaps it's because it's neither revolutionary nor game changing. It's a nice and all, and those who rely on their phone speakers will really like it, but it's not a "killer app" type feature. It's more of a niche feature.

Even if we make the assumption that it is revolutionary and a must have feature, the phone hasn't been out long enough for anyone else to implement it in their designs. It's a lot of work to move a speaker in such a tight package so you'd have to do it at the start of a design. We haven't seen any phones that have started their designs since the One has been out.

Revolutionary defined as "radically new or innovative; outside or beyond established procedure, principles, etc." You don't see the front facing speakers as radically new or innovative? If not, please explain. How many wireless devices have been created since their inception? Thousands, right? How many have front facing speakers? One. I would say that would carry a little bit more weight than "nice and all."
Game Changer: "A newly introduced element or factor that changes an existing situation or activity in a significant way." You don't think the HTC One qualifies in this regard as a game changer? If not, please explain.
I do take your second point that perhaps possibly the newest released and soon to be released devices didn't have time to implement front facing speakers. OR, they had time and just decided, for whatever reason, to forego front facing speakers.
I wonder if the HTC One had been a monster success would that have made a difference in what other devices chose to do with design.
Do you think next year Samsung, LG, Motorola and other Android manufacturers will institute front facinng speakers on any of their upcoming devices?

 

[cgardnervt]

I love the speakers on the HTC One personally. When I move on to my next device I will surely miss them! Thinking the next Nexus device my be in my future with the One becoming a backup. But to date this is my favorite phone ever owned! Finally a device better than my WebOS device .

 

[justafew]

I think one of the main reasons why nobody else has done it is the amount of time for R&D. I'm sure the HTC design took a long time to develop, test, refine and tweak. Thus with it just having come out in May, other manufacturers who may even be considering something similar will need months to determine design, develop it and get it into production.

I personally really love the idea, especially when on speaker phone. I have lots of conf calls each day and I had the Note 2 and hated the muffled sound when on speaker phone and turning the phone over. And then if I was on mute, having to turn it back over to take it off mute, then back, then over again.

 

[garublador]

Revolutionary defined as "radically new or innovative; outside or beyond established procedure, principles, etc." You don't see the front facing speakers as radically new or innovative? If not, please explain.

HTC didn't come up with the concept of speakers that point at the user. The person who made the very
first speaker figured that part out almost immediately. "Hey, it's louder if I point it at me." Many other mobile devices have had speakers that point at the user for years. Here's a cell phone from 2008 with a front facing speaker:

New Casio Boulder Appears with Front-Facing Speaker (Phone Scoop)

I work for a company that makes mobile devices and all of them that have speakers are front facing.

It's just that in current cell phones it isn't the norm because it's difficult to fit in the form factor. HTC made it a point to emphasize audio performance (but that's not a first for cell phones, either) which differentiates itself from most other Android phones, but it's not any more revolutionary than a phone that emphasizes camera performance.

How many wireless devices have been created since their inception? Thousands, right? How many have front facing speakers? One. I would say that would carry a little bit more weight than "nice and all."

Only if the desire to both point the front of the phone at you while listening to music is seen as important. The Galaxy S4 has tons of new features not seen on phone before, but I wouldn't call any of them revolutionary. Just being unique isn't enough for something to be revolutionary or even useful. I almost never use the speaker in my phone (in fact, I use it the most when my phone is in my pocket and the speaker is facing out), so front facing speakers are barely "nice and all" for me. It's just another feature I don't care about. There are many others that think this way, too. There are some that don't, thought, and that's the definition of a niche.

Game Changer: "A newly introduced element or factor that changes an existing situation or activity in a significant way." You don't think the HTC One qualifies in this regard as a game changer? If not, please explain.

No because it's not changing a situation at all. "Slightly louder music when the phone is oriented a certain way" isn't all that significant, especially when using that speaker isn't used like that by many people. Some will like it and other companies may make phones with front facing speakers, but it won't be a "must have" feature.

OR, they had time and just decided, for whatever reason, to forego front facing speakers.
I wonder if the HTC One had been a monster success would that have made a difference in what other devices chose to do with design.

Don't both of those point to the front facing speakers not being game changing? If it really were revolutionary and game changing then the demand for the device would be through the roof and everyone would be copying it on all future designs.

It seems to me that you need to be the one to prove why it's revolutionary and game changing. There's no evidence that it has started any sort of revolution or changed any games. It's just a neat feature.

Do you think next year Samsung, LG, Motorola and other Android manufacturers will institute front facinng speakers on any of their upcoming devices?

Any? Perhaps. Definitely not on all or even a majority of devices, though. If it really were revolutionary then people would demand it on most devices. I just don't see the fidelity and volume of the built in speakers as being important enough to enough people. There's a physical limitation to how good and loud tiny speakers can sound that prevent them from being anything more than being only kind of important to some people.

 

[Habiib]

If no other smartphone on the market can duplicate both the engineering and sound quality of the Boomsound, then I personally see it as revolutionary. I equate this to the Pureview technology of the Nokia lineup. Cellphone cameras are nothing new, but how many can do what the Pureview 808 and 1020 can do and generate 41MP images?

If sales and demand determine what is revolutionary, then everything about the iPhone would qualify (i.e., retina display, SIRI, etc).

Posted via Android Central App

 

[D13H4RD2L1V3]

TBH, Siri was overhyped.

 

[garublador]

Siri was revolutionary. Both Google and Samsung have implemented the same thing so now voice recognition that allows for conversational type input is on a vast majority of smartphones. The "Retina" display was evolutionary. The resolution of phone screens has been increasing each generation for a while now. Screens getting that type of PPI was more or less inevitable. It's the same with storage. The first phone to have 128GB internal memory won't be revolutionary, it will just have fortunate timing. It won't be some new idea that someone had, it will just be a better version of an existing feature. The speakers in the One fall into that same category. It's just a slightly better version of a feature that's already on pretty much all phones.

 

[Habiib]

Slightly better?

What speakers are currently able to reproduce audio at 90%+ maximum volume that is free from distortion, maintains clarity, maintains a wider range of coverage throughout the frequency range, true stereo reproduction (including ability to pan).

The sound quality for system sounds, simulated vocal sounds (i.e., Navigation assistant and Google Voice assistant), and speakerphone are a significant improvement over any mobile phone that I've heard.

When it's stated that the maximum volume of the Boomsound is lower than other devices, they lack the sound quality at the same time.

I see the retina display as revolutionary in the same manner that High definition televisions were revolutionary. It became the defacto standard for televisions, driven by consumer demand. If 'Retina' labeled displays became a consumer driven demand, why should it not be deemed revolutionary?

Posted via Android Central App

 

[Good OL MC]

The front facing speakers on the HTC One were widely regarded as revolutionary and game changing. Are you surprised that no other mobile manufacturer has adopted the design element? Why do you suppose noone has? Do you think anyone will in the future?

I'm not all that surprised. While the speakers on the front are REALLY nice they come with design compromises that manufacturers don't seem keen to make. Samsung for instance chose to have a larger screen on the S4 where HTC has a phone the same length but smaller screen. It's just choice.

And while nice I think that the speakers aren't making the One go gangbusters with sales.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

 

[garublador]

Slightly better?

What speakers are currently able to reproduce audio at 90%+ maximum volume that is free from distortion, maintains clarity, maintains a wider range of coverage throughout the frequency range, true stereo reproduction (including ability to pan).

The sound quality for system sounds, simulated vocal sounds (i.e., Navigation assistant and Google Voice assistant), and speakerphone are a significant improvement over any mobile phone that I've heard.

Having the best sounding cell phone speakers is like saying you have the world's smartest pet hamster. Sure it may be smart for a hamster but in the realm of animal intelligence they're still pretty dumb. A significant improvement in sound form a normal phone speaker is a Bluetooth speaker or a car stereo, not a better phone speaker.

I see the retina display as revolutionary in the same manner that High definition televisions were revolutionary. It became the defacto standard for televisions, driven by consumer demand. If 'Retina' labeled displays became a consumer driven demand, why should it not be deemed revolutionary?

"Retina" is just a marketing name for the Apple displays. People have been demanding higher PPI screens since smart phones have existed. TV's are different where the only content you care about getting is in one of a handful of standard resolutions. Smart phone screens are morel like computer screens where their resolutions grow more gradually rather than in big jumps like with TV and movies.

Again, it's more analogous to storage or battery capacity. People always want more of both of those. If Samsung made a 128GB eMMC and called it "Monster Storage" would it really be revolutionary or just clever marketing of an evolutionary and inevitable advancement?

 

[Darth Mo]

Almost any advancement in cell phone tech is driven by size limitations. Once you cram in all of the necessities to make a phone a phone/media device, you're probably only left with 10% of the remaining space in what is now considered a "standard" size cell phone.

Samsung chooses to have a larger screen and removable storage. Moto chooses a larger battery. Sony/Nokia do whatever they do with the camera. Blackberry chooses to keep digging their grave. Apple does nothing. HTC chose to do away with the removable battery and storage and add larger speakers, higher fidelity speakers.

So as someone said above, it's not really revolutionary; it's just choice.

 

[jeverts]

May not be revolutionary but, it's the main reason I got the One. I could never understand why, with the business part of the phone facing me, all sound wasn't facing me. Common sense to me, and much appreciated...

Sent from my One

 

[Habiib]

A significant improvement in sound form a normal phone speaker is a Bluetooth speaker or a car stereo, not a better phone speaker.

Wait...what? A significant improvement in sound from a normal phone speaker isn't a better phone speaker? I'm not understanding your reference to Bluetooth and car audio. Are you implying that a Bluetooth speaker and car stereo are an improvement because they sound better than a "normal phone speaker" or how they transmit the audio?. If so then how does BoomSound not meet the same criteria? A phone speaker transmits audio. If the measurable quality of the audio is better, how is that not an improvement? With that said, my question is this: Is BoomSound a significant improvement (how it transmits audio) over a "normal phone speaker" (Yes or No)?

"Retina" is just a marketing name for the Apple displays. People have been demanding higher PPI screens since smart phones have existed. TV's are different where the only content you care about getting is in one of a handful of standard resolutions. Smart phone screens are morel like computer screens where their resolutions grow more gradually rather than in big jumps like with TV and movies

I have doubts that people were demanding higher PPI since the inception of smartphones. How could that be true if very few (if any) displays at the time were in color and had a relatively small screen size, not to mention that ASCII text was displayed most of the time? Smartphone screens also progressed in the same fashion when it comes to the resolution. Looking at the scale of progression with each increase in resolution, I don't see how that's any different from TVs going from SD to HD to UltraHD. Or 480p, 720p, 1080p, to 4K UHD.

For your last example, that depends on how someone wants to interpret it. If how the memory performs its function is not being implemented by anyone else and offers a measurable improvement or advancement over existing applications of that identical technology (within scope), then I deem that as being revolutionary. Of course this example will spiral down to what someone considers as evolutionary/revolutionary, at which point this entire thread would be deemed moot since everything is based on perception and interpretation.

I'm curious as to what smartphone technology you consider to be revolutionary. Maybe that will help me get a better understanding of the criteria you've established.

 

[freddyttt]

revolutionary in a small sense I say yes... as is zoe... it could end up game changing-. look at the S4... it could have been revolutionary with it's TouchWiz and such but it was immediately panned as gimmick.... (fail)..... Zoe and the front speakers were hits with users and critics... it's definitely something to grow on. as for other phones with front facing speakers. trust me on this-. they are coming.!

 

[garublador]

Wait...what? A significant improvement in sound from a normal phone speaker isn't a better phone speaker? I'm not understanding your reference to Bluetooth and car audio. Are you implying that a Bluetooth speaker and car stereo are an improvement because they sound better than a "normal phone speaker" or how they transmit the audio?. If so then how does BoomSound not meet the same criteria? A phone speaker transmits audio. If the measurable quality of the audio is better, how is that not an improvement? With that said, my question is this: Is BoomSound a significant improvement (how it transmits audio) over a "normal phone speaker" (Yes or No)?

I'll clarify. A halfway decent Bluetooth speaker system is a significant improvement over any phone speaker. So is a car audio system. The amplifiers are many times more powerful and the speakers are much larger. You can't accomplish either of those improvement in a smart phone so the improvements you can make to the sound a smartphone speaker can make are only minor. It's still a tiny little speaker with a tiny little amp that's feet or yards away from your ear, not inches like with headphones. So no, BoomSound is not a significant improvement. Polishing a turd still leaves you with a turd.

I have doubts that people were demanding higher PPI since the inception of smartphones. How could that be true if very few (if any) displays at the time were in color and had a relatively small screen size, not to mention that ASCII text was displayed most of the time?

So you're saying people still want displays like that? If people didn't want high resolution displays then why did phone makers spend all that money changing from ASCII text displays to what we have now? People weren't specifically saying they wanted more PPI, but that's inferred when they wanted better (i.e. higher resolution) displays.

Smartphone screens also progressed in the same fashion when it comes to the resolution. Looking at the scale of progression with each increase in resolution, I don't see how that's any different from TVs going from SD to HD to UltraHD. Or 480p, 720p, 1080p, to 4K UHD.

TV's totally changed format between SD and HD. 720p wasn't revolutionary, it was just an incremental improvement over 480. However changing from SD to HD was revolutionary.

I'm curious as to what smartphone technology you consider to be revolutionary. Maybe that will help me get a better understanding of the criteria you've established.

This isn't an exhaustive list, but stuff like the app stores, conversational voice recognition and touchscreens are revolutionary. They're a requirement for every smartphone that's at all successful. Slightly better sound from tiny little speakers isn't not going to be a requirement for every phone.