Pixel 2 = Bezelmania

[EnemiesInTheEnd]

I am sad Pixel 2XL is apparently adopting the 2/1 screen ratio. Why are they following Sammy's lead?

Samsung is the one and only leader in the Android market. As a result it has many fanatically loyal users. (as does Pixel) One piece of evidence is the number who will pre-order the expensive Note 8 without trying one first or waiting to see if there are any common defects or complaints.

The problem is this means a huge number of people will embrace almost any change they make. Curved edges making phone more prone to shattering, distorted edge view when reading, but no technical advantage? "Ooo I've got to get one. The curves are so pretty" . Now many others want one because this is clearly the cool Android to have. Result - now many phones adding curved edges.

Let me ask - suppose LG added them first or even Pixel? Would the entire industry follow? No way. Samsung folks would say they were silly and gimmicky and like the LG failed experiment to modular add ons the curved edges would disappear.

I believe the 2/1 screen ratio is another example. Youtube and tv shows either stretched and distorted or black bars making real usable phone screen smaller? What if HTC did it first? Would it be universally praised? Would Sammy and iPhone follow suit or would it be dismissed as ruining video display while making phone long and skinny?

What if Sammy had invented "Mods" and had camera mods and battery mods etc? Wouldn't it have been the coolest thing ever? I think it would although I hate them.

I've heard Android users referring to those who wait in line for hours to get the newest iPhone as "sheeple" Are we Samsung or Pixel users really much different? Is there any radical change we would reject and move on to LG or HTC or Moto?

They're following Samsung's lead because the 2:1 ratio is the best ratio for a phone with on-screen buttons.

The chances of there being any common defects or major complaints on a Samsung is very low.

The curved edges are ergonomic. They make the phone feel good in the hand.

LG isn't a very innovative company. There isn't much reason for any other company to follow their lead on anything. People may have followed HTC, but they're playing catch up too.

The only good mod implementation is on the Essential phone.

Samsung hasn't done anything that warrants people to reject what they're doing. 2:1 is a significant improvement over 16:9 for a phone with on-screen buttons.

 

[Aquila]

He said SOME people have a problem with bezels, which implies that most don't. That isn't true. There were two common complaints with the Pixel and Pixel XL: that they were overpriced (true) and that they looked outdated on day one because of the bezels (also true).

lol there are way more complaints than that, but both of the ones you just listed are YOUR complaints and they are true in YOUR opinion.

My opinion is that they were both appropriately priced, exactly as intended and that they were the best looking devices of 2016. No glass back + no capacitive buttons goes a long way to thinning out the herd.

There is nothing objectively overpriced about the Pixel or Pixel XL and there is no way to state that it is objectively outdated - especially for 2016 devices, given that the "modern" 2:1 displays didn't start rolling until 2017 on mainstream flagship devices.

That said, there's also nothing objectively "modern" about smaller bezels. The Nexus 6 from 2015 had tiny bezels and retained the 16:9 display, etc. That's just an adjective that people who agree with it being a positive trend are throwing around in order to promote the idea that the trend should continue.

 

[EnemiesInTheEnd]

You're picking nits here. Some people do, implies SOME people don't (not most) if you really need to be technical about it. Anyway, I don't care about bezels, and no one I know cares about them either. SO I guess "some" people don't ....

Most people care about bezels. That is why bezels are going bye bye.

 

[dsignori]

Most people care about bezels. That is why bezels are going bye bye.

By that logic, I guess no one cares about the 3.5mm jack which is going bye bye too. Except "some" do

 

[recDNA]

My point wasn't merely that I hate 2/1. My point is if Samsung jumped off a bridge we would too. I believe they could do virtually anything to the phone and most would love it. Not true for HTC etc.

As far as whether Samsung makes mistakes ask Note 7 owners. I was one. What a hassle.

 

[Aquila]

They're following Samsung's lead because the 2:1 ratio is the best ratio for a phone with on-screen buttons.

There's that absolutism again. 2:1 is the best... then why didn't Samsung do it? They did 2.055555:1. Also, what other aspect ratios have we tested? Has every aspect ratio been evaluated? By what criteria would it be evaluated? What would make it the "best" aspect ratio?

Again, we could have said, "They're following Samsung's lead because it was well received by the press. I also think that 2:1 is the best ratio for a phone with on-screen buttons". Now, the first part would still be incorrect, because the decisions on the iPhone 8, Pixel 2 XL, LG G6, LG V30, etc, etc. for that type of design were already complete prior to the release of the S8, so they're not following in terms of "oh, Samsung did it, let's do it too". But, it is likely Samsung was the first to bring it to the table and there was a general consensus to bring this idea to the market.

And a counter point to the "ergonomic" edges, luckily almost no one is copying that fad, because it's so far been very poorly executed and a lot of users absolutely hate it. From what I've read in the forums, it seems to me that more people would rather have a flat, possibly 16:9 Note 8 than a Note 8 with a removable battery. Given the level of fanaticism we see on removable batteries in the Note crowd, that's significant for this community.

LG isn't a very popular company. They are innovative and they are faster to adopt many standards than Samsung is. They're also much better at writing software. Samsung is terrible at software, which is a big reason that almost all of their flash and pizzazz is centered on hardware. That's why they make gaudy looking devices, rather than muted or subdued designs that focus on user experience. They want you to see a phone and think, "that's a Galaxy". That doesn't make it good or bad, but it's only one of many approaches being taken in the market. Lately LG is jumping on the Samsung design because LG's original designs, something Samsung almost never tries, have basically been flops. LG is trying and failing to make big changes while Samsung is relatively successful at making small, incremental changes to an old idea.

Finally, the last two sentence are also just opinions, but leveled as if they are accepted fact. Adding, "I think" to the beginning of each would reduce the conflict there.

 

[Aquila]

Myth:

Most people care about bezels. That is why bezels are going bye bye.

Relatively speaking to the whole, almost no one cares about bezels. Why are you unable to get past speaking for everyone?

Reality:

YOU care about bezels. A few trolls on Reddit care about bezels. The general public? Most of them (and I can back up my most, while yours is merely hyperbole) could not care less about bezels. It's seriously a non issue.

 

[EnemiesInTheEnd]

lol there are way more complaints than that, but both of the ones you just listed are YOUR complaints and they are true in YOUR opinion.

My opinion is that they were both appropriately priced, exactly as intended and that they were the best looking devices of 2016. No glass back + no capacitive buttons goes a long way to thinning out the herd.

There is nothing objectively overpriced about the Pixel or Pixel XL and there is no way to state that it is objectively outdated - especially for 2016 devices, given that the "modern" 2:1 displays didn't start rolling until 2017 on mainstream flagship devices.

That said, there's also nothing objectively "modern" about smaller bezels. The Nexus 6 from 2015 had tiny bezels and retained the 16:9 display, etc. That's just an adjective that people who agree with it being a positive trend are throwing around in order to promote the idea that the trend should continue.

I listed the two most common complaints. Everyone here knows those were the two major complaints with the Pixels.

Yes, they were overpriced. The Pixel XL was $770 with an outdated, cheap design that HTC basically copied from one of their older phones, a weak audio jack, a very average AMOLED display, an average mono speaker, and basically no features outside of Android. There was nothing to justify it's price point. Like Flossy Carter said, the Pixels got boring after 5 minutes. It should have been $100 cheaper.

The Pixel phones were widely regarded to be ugly. Reviewers all hated the glass back.

Yes, the Pixels looked outdated because it had the biggest bezels of almost any flagship. Yes, smaller bezels are more modern. It is that way for ALL displays. Smaller TV bezels. Smaller laptop bezels. Smaller phone bezels.

 

[EnemiesInTheEnd]

Myth:



Relatively speaking to the whole, almost no one cares about bezels. Why are you unable to get past speaking for everyone?

Reality:

YOU care about bezels. A few trolls on Reddit care about bezels. The general public? Most of them (and I can back up my most, while yours is merely hyperbole) could not care less about bezels. It's seriously a non issue.

Most people do care about bezels. I can back that up with sales figures, user reviews, design trends, etc. People want smaller bezels.

 

[Laura Knotek]

Most people do care about bezels. I can back that up with sales figures, user reviews, design trends, etc. People want smaller bezels.

If that were the case, then nobody would buy iPhones.

 

[Aquila]

Reviewers all hated the glass back.

This statement is false. (easily falsifiable by finding a single reviewer that didn't hate it)

I listed the two most common complaints. Everyone here knows those were the two major complaints with the Pixels.

Both of these statements are false. (they are two complaints, but not the two most common complaints. No possible way the poster here can know what each person (in the thread or the forums or whatever "here" means) thinks the two most common complaints were).

The Pixel phones were widely regarded to be ugly.

Luckily "widely regarded" can mean almost anything, similar to "some" - so I'll give this one a rating of "possibly true, no possible way the person who wrote it can know".

Yes, they were overpriced.

This statement is false. (it's an opinion)

outdated, cheap design that HTC basically copied from one of their older phones, a weak audio jack, a very average AMOLED display, an average mono speaker, and basically no features outside of Android.

Lots in here, mostly false, a couple of vague pieces that could be considered to be true. Let's give it a "mostly false"?

There was nothing to justify it's price point.

This statement is false. (easily falsifiable if a single person happily paid full price)

Like Flossy Carter said, the Pixels got boring after 5 minutes. It should have been $100 cheaper.

I don't know if he said that or not, so I'm going to count this as your first true statement - however his statement about the $100 is either false or just an opinion. Would have to see the exact quote to know if it is a false statement or an opinion.

Yes, the Pixels looked outdated because it had the biggest bezels of almost any flagship.

This statement is false because it contradicts itself. But beyond that, the conclusion of it is an opinion, not a fact and the premise for the conclusion is the contradiction. Any conclusion based on a contradiction is logically incoherent.

Yes, smaller bezels are more modern. It is that way for ALL displays. Smaller TV bezels. Smaller laptop bezels. Smaller phone bezels.

Displays do get smaller bezels and generally get bigger over time. Most displays are not intended to be held and maneuvered in and out of small locations, rotated constantly, etc. So while the logic you're using is incorrect, because it's apples to oranges, I'm going to award this one a "mostly true" because your reasoning up until the point where you change the subject is valid.

So final tally? 6 false statements, 1 true statement, 3 indeterminate. You're running at 10% accuracy here.

 

[Aquila]

Most people do care about bezels. I can back that up with sales figures, user reviews, design trends, etc. People want smaller bezels.

Reviewers are not most people. Most people do not own phones with small bezels. We covered this a couple pages back. You seem to not know what most means. You also seem to not have any idea of what the majority of the smartphone market is comprised of, device wise or consumer wise. The fact is YOU care about them and that some of the sources you believe in care about them. The tech blogs, forums, people shopping at best buy, people you see at work, etc. They all combined account for between 1% and 10% of the market. And of those people, MOST of them do not care, at all. Many of them couldn't tell you what bezels even are.

 

[Aquila]

Example of the sales trend:

2017 will end with between 1.25 and 1.5 billion smartphone sales. Let's ballpark that at 1,375,000,000 (median of the range).

Of those devices, 50 to 80 million of them will have tiny bezels and a 2:1 display. Arguing a fortiori means I heave to give the opposition the highest chances possible, so you get the full 80 million.

80,000,000/1,375,000,000 = 5.82%

Pretty close to 100% of of phones from last year had larger bezels and 16:9 displays. But, arguing a fortiori again, let's say it was the same as this year, or 94.18%.

And final a fortiori assumption, we'll say almost everyone gets a new phone in 2016 or 2017, even though we know that isn't even close to true. Let's say 100%.

So if 100% of people upgrade by the end of the year (Between 1/Jan/16 and 31/Dec/17), then 5.82% will have the devices you're talking about, and 94.18% of the market will not.

Your statement of "most" requires that > 50% of the market be on your side. You're slightly above 10% of that, with the most generous of assumptions being granted. In reality? Probably less than 1% of the market will have the devices you're championing by the end of the year. So when you say "most people" - what you're saying is false. If you say "I" instead, then you're speaking for yourself, and as we previously covered - most people will give you the benefit of the doubt that you actually believe your opinion.

 

[dlalonde]

Reviewers are not most people. Most people do not own phones with small bezels. We covered this a couple pages back. You seem to not know what most means. You also seem to not have any idea of what the majority of the smartphone market is comprised of, device wise or consumer wise. The fact is YOU care about them and that some of the sources you believe in care about them. The tech blogs, forums, people shopping at best buy, people you see at work, etc. They all combined account for between 1% and 10% of the market. And of those people, MOST of them do not care, at all. Many of them couldn't tell you what bezels even are.

I completely agree. The fact that a company would add or remove something on a device doesn't mean it was asked by users nor that it is something they care about. If you watch a lot of online reviews for phones, you can get the feeling that they represent ordinary people but they're actually more representative of enthusiasts. I'm a computer technician and I don't see anyone around me or any of my clients asking for less bezels, AMOLED screens, quicker updates and so on. Most people buy a phone and use it as is... even if the device is outdated and running an older version of Android, if it works and allows them to do the tasks they need, that'll do them. Heck they don't even change the wallpaper or default sounds most of the time.

I get the feeling it's actually the other way around. Companies look for ways to make their products more appealing to users so they come up with things like bigger screens and smaller bezels, great looking AMOLED screens. That becomes things users enjoy and sometimes get used to so much they'll search for that when the time comes to change devices. But very few innovation actually comes from customer demands (apart from water resistance maybe which is, in all honesty, just to protect the devices from being dropped in a toilet).

There's a quote (attributed to Henry Ford even if that can't be verified) that says "If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses." That sums it up I think.

 

[Aquila]

I completely agree. The fact that a company would add or remove something on a device doesn't mean it was asked by users nor that it is something they care about. If you watch a lot of online reviews for phones, you can get the feeling that they represent ordinary people but they're actually more representative of enthusiasts. I'm a computer technician and I don't see anyone around me or any of my clients asking for less bezels, AMOLED screens, quicker updates and so on. Most people buy a phone and use it as is... even if the device is outdated and running an older version of Android, if it works and allows them to do the tasks they need, that'll do them. Heck they don't even change the wallpaper or default sounds most of the time.

I get the feeling it's actually the other way around. Companies look for ways to make their products more appealing to users so they come up with things like bigger screens and smaller bezels, great looking AMOLED screens. That becomes things users enjoy and sometimes get used to so much they'll search for that when the time comes to change devices. But very few innovation actually comes from customer demands (apart from water resistance maybe which is, in all honesty, just to protect the devices from being dropped in a toilet).

There's a quote (attributed to Henry Ford even if that can't be verified) that says "If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses." That sums it up I think.

You're very close to the mark, yes. There are feedback groups with consumers and industry experts, etc and they do get to provide their opinions into what final products may be, however generally it is choose between a and b or it is just suggestions for what people like and don't like about how things work.

 

[EnemiesInTheEnd]

By that logic, I guess no one cares about the 3.5mm jack which is going bye bye too. Except "some" do

The majority of smartphone owners don't use the 3.5mm jack. Only 40% of smartphone owners use their phone for music and some of those 40% will be using Bluetooth earbuds/headsets.

 

[EnemiesInTheEnd]

If that were the case, then nobody would buy iPhones.

If other phones came with iOS, they wouldn't.

 

[Laura Knotek]

If other phones came with iOS, they wouldn't.

Where is your evidence of this?

 

[EnemiesInTheEnd]

Where is your evidence of this?

What do you mean where is my evidence of this? iOS is the reason why people buy iPhones. There is no competition there.

 

[Laura Knotek]

The majority of smartphone owners don't use the 3.5mm jack. Only 40% of smartphone owners use their phone for music and some of those 40% will be using Bluetooth earbuds/headsets.

More than 40% of smartphone users in the USA who were 50+ listened to music on their phones in 2015. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/01/29/us-smartphone-use/ft_16-01-29-smartphones/

Amongst younger users, the vast majority did so.

There is nothing to support decreased use of listening to music on smartphones in 2017.