Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: An4ximandros on November 02, 2013, 04:56:07 am
-
http://gaminrealm.com/2013/08/22/xbox360-xbox-one-81-features-locked-away-without-xbox-live-gold/
http://playeressence.com/xbox-live-gold-has-81-features-locked-behind-it-for-xbox-one/
Well please, take all the free stuff I can get in your previous console and on the competition and make me pay as well as making me pay for access to the ability to pay for the not-free stuff.
-
lol, console peasants.
-
There are probably way too many people (the majority of their fanbase and all the computer illiterates as well as the moms and dads who get it for little Jimmy after he whines for 3 months straight) that will just pay for it without a second thought for this to be a bad move for MS.
The people who would get mad enough about this to not buy an XBOne/Live are likely the minority or the people who were not even in the market for a console anyways.
-
There are probably way too many people (the majority of their fanbase and all the computer illiterates as well as the moms and dads who get it for little Jimmy after he whines for 3 months straight) that will just pay for it without a second thought for this to be a bad move for MS.
The people who would get mad enough about this to not buy an XBOne/Live are likely the minority or the people who were not even in the market for a console anyways.
You think so? The idea of gamers - including console gamers - as 12 year old kids who rely on their parent incomes is massively outdated these days. The average age for a gamer is 32 in Australia, only very slightly younger that the average of the entire population (http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/games/blogs/screenplay/new-statistics-reveal-the-face-of-australian-gaming-20120802-23g49.html). In other words, while it skews young, the gamer demographic is almost representative of the community as a whole. And remember, the average member of the community might not be as computer literate as the average PC Gamer is, but they are at least somewhat aware of the significance of lifetime cost vs up front cost - it might not be something that is generally thought about in games or consoles (at least, not as much as, for example, houses or cars) but the concept is there, and I think it does a bit of a disservice to people to just assume that it isn't.
And don't forget, almost nobody buys anything worth more than a few bucks without looking up reviews for it online first. If people are choosing between the XBox and the PS4, they're going to look up reviews, and - especially if they're looking at generic electronics sites as opposed to gaming specific ones - reviewers are going to mention any ongoing costs. This really could hurt Microsoft, if Sony are clever enough to exploit it.
-
There are probably way too many people (the majority of their fanbase and all the computer illiterates as well as the moms and dads who get it for little Jimmy after he whines for 3 months straight) that will just pay for it without a second thought for this to be a bad move for MS.
The people who would get mad enough about this to not buy an XBOne/Live are likely the minority or the people who were not even in the market for a console anyways.
You think so? The idea of gamers - including console gamers - as 12 year old kids who rely on their parent incomes is massively outdated these days. The average age for a gamer is 32 in Australia, only very slightly younger that the average of the entire population (http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/games/blogs/screenplay/new-statistics-reveal-the-face-of-australian-gaming-20120802-23g49.html). In other words, while it skews young, the gamer demographic is almost representative of the community as a whole. And remember, the average member of the community might not be as computer literate as the average PC Gamer is, but they are at least somewhat aware of the significance of lifetime cost vs up front cost - it might not be something that is generally thought about in games or consoles (at least, not as much as, for example, houses or cars) but the concept is there, and I think it does a bit of a disservice to people to just assume that it isn't.
And don't forget, almost nobody buys anything worth more than a few bucks without looking up reviews for it online first. If people are choosing between the XBox and the PS4, they're going to look up reviews, and - especially if they're looking at generic electronics sites as opposed to gaming specific ones - reviewers are going to mention any ongoing costs. This really could hurt Microsoft, if Sony are clever enough to exploit it.
The "kid gamer" was really just one example, but not what I would base my argument on.
I think you overestimate the amount of people who are willing to research what they buy.
Don't take me wrong ... I do research stuff heavily as well, but always had the impression that I am definitely not the majority.
And generally speaking... the more money people have the worse it gets. (I.e. especially people in their 30s + with a regular income and "fun" money to spend.)
When talking about the mass market, the informed consumer is a myth.
If anything, it's all about hype and advertising to get into peoples homes ... but hardly about factual articles.
-
I don't see how the XBOX ONE could possibly make you choose it over the PS4.
Simple fact is, something is going to have to make you choose, and the PS4 is simply superior right across the board. It even costs less.
-
Lately Sony have been all too eager to take potshots at MS over their stupid decisions. Unless for some reason they're dumb enough to try to follow them on this one, they must be a queue a mile long behind the gun sights.
54. Pizza Hut – Yup, you need a Gold Subscription to order pizza. PREMIUM SERVICE.
Oh, they've got to be ****ing kidding.
-
Making people pay might actually be really good strategy in the long term. They've probably already lost most of the pre-launch customers who were on the fence due to their higher price/inferior hardware/smaller number of exclusive titles, but for those who are already committed it's a great psychological trap because people assign a higher value to something if they paid for it. They might well also play more as a result (to get their moneys worth), leading to further game sales.
-
Naturally, such a process will eliminate everyone who isn't stupid, thus further pruning the customer demographic. ;7
-
Considering a game console is pretty much a pure luxury investment to begin with, I don't really see a problem with Microsoft using a paywall to increase their customers' level of satisfaction, especially not while there are alternatives that offer a similar experience without the fee. It should certainly be made clear to those customers what they are and aren't getting when they buy the box, though.
-
I'd move this to the gaming forum if it weren't for the fact it appears that even MS doesn't think the XBox One is primarily a games console. :p
-
TV..... TV..... TV......
more on topic - this SHOULD be a bad move for MS, but consumers as a whole have shown time and time again that they're too stupid for this to turn out badly for MS. They are used to hate being slung at them on the internet, and it has never stopped them before.
-
Unfortunately this is far too big a project to turn into another Zune.
-
TV..... TV..... TV......
I had thought about posting that video earlier.
It must be done now.
All you have to do is type "TV TV TV" into Youtube and it's the top video. :lol:
I can't get my head around why anyone would buy it. If you ask them why they chose it, what possible reason could they have? Outside of people who just buy all of the consoles.
-
People do assign a lot of value to their accounts, "achievements" (ha!), and the general feeling of continuity and wellbeing that comes from loyalty to a brand, so I'd guess Microsoft is just focusing on retaining a big chunk of their existing install base (evident from all the America-specific marketing) rather than broadening their appeal and then extracting the maximum profit out of that base. It's possible that this will be their last real console so I can't guess what their broader strategy is.
-
It could also be that Microsoft is going after the non-hardcore gamer who doesn't particularly care about issues we care about, much like Nintendo did with the Wii and Gamecube when Microsoft and Sony were still duking it out on console-power.
EDIT: That doesn't necessarily make an Xbox One a good purchase for any of us, but at least there's a reason behind it. Personally, I've resolved myself to getting a PS4 when I can. Probably as a Christmas gift to myself. Thank you, employee discount at Target.
-
$500 is double what the Wii launched at, so I have my doubts whether the casual market will bite, especially since they haven't been trying to position it with the type of family friendly marketing that helped ship so many Wiis. They're definitely betting the farm on Kinect though, so I have no idea. The whole thing feels like the work of committees that were appointed by committees. Xbox live subscriptions clearly make them tons of money though, so they might end up making greater profits than Sony even if PS4 outsells Xbone by a wide margin.
-
The Xbox One is also much more of a multimedia center than the Wii ever was. It's clearly designed to replace PCs, other gaming consoles, home phones, and a good deal of other home electronics.
-
Home phones still exist?
-
They do. Mine is great for calling various people when I'm at home; the connections go to my parents' phone bill, not mine. :) Though TBH, I toned it down after they noticed a significant increase in costly home-to-mobile calls. :) Though aside from that (and an occasional home-to-home call to my grandmother, they come cheap), it's indeed rather useless.
-
Home phones still exist?
Everyone has one, don't they? At least in my World they do. Everyone I know has a home phone number, with one exception. This is in England. It's much cheaper than calls on a mobile.
-
Home phones still exist?
Yup.
They come in handy during power outages / cellular spikes.
-
Home phones still exist?
/me looks at his home phone, sitting within grabbing distance.
Yyyup.
-
I think that whole little conversation illustrates perfectly how some of us are so, dare I say it, out of touch with the modern consumer. We're effectively on the cutting edge, compared to your layman consumer of electronic entertainment, and I'm certain that skews our viewpoints significantly.
-
Yeah, definitely. Just as one example, I'm still using what has to be a 7-year-old dumb phone, because I have no interest in or need for a smartphone. Just about anything I could do on one could be done far better on my (also ancient) PC. But I'm obviously in the small minority on this when compared to the general public.
-
Yeah, definitely. Just as one example, I'm still using what has to be a 7-year-old dumb phone, because I have no interest in or need for a smartphone. Just about anything I could do on one could be done far better on my (also ancient) PC. But I'm obviously in the small minority on this when compared to the general public.
Yeah, I definitely don't think we're representative of the "average" consumer.
****, I don't even have a cell phone. Got rid of mine a few months ago. Don't miss it.
-
because I have no interest in or need for a smartphone.
Ditto. My phone is a phone. That is all I want it to be so that is all it is.
-
Here in Finland landline phones at homes are pretty much extinct. Even at workplaces landline phones are becoming rare, except in cases where your job is to either call or receive calls in your cubicle. Like service desk, call center or phone marketer.
Didn't check this for a fact, but I think I read somewhere that landline phones now cost more than mobiles in Finland.
-
Of course that anything you can do on a smartphone you can do on a pc. Doh.
That's like saying one has no need for a car because the lorry you have on your garage does the same ****.
Can you carry your pc in your pocket though? Can you skim twitter whenever and wherever you are with just a touch on a screen rather than having to turn on your pc and wait several minutes till you get to open your browser at home?
-
Of course that anything you can do on a smartphone you can do on a pc. Doh.
That's like saying one has no need for a car because the lorry you have on your garage does the same ****.
Can you carry your pc in your pocket though? Can you skim twitter whenever and wherever you are with just a touch on a screen rather than having to turn on your pc and wait several minutes till you get to open your browser at home?
I don't know about Mongoose, but I don't do Twitter. :)
I much prefer to carry a good book around with me when I'm out.
-
I don't know about Mongoose, but I don't do Twitter. :)
I much prefer to carry a good book around with me when I'm out.
I do twitter. And I also like to carry a few good books around with me. Good thing my smartphone can handle both.
-
I'm not gonna get one. :)
BTW, I'm going out soon, and The Ghost Brigades is coming with me. :)
-
Of course that anything you can do on a smartphone you can do on a pc. Doh.
That's like saying one has no need for a car because the lorry you have on your garage does the same ****.
Can you carry your pc in your pocket though? Can you skim twitter whenever and wherever you are with just a touch on a screen rather than having to turn on your pc and wait several minutes till you get to open your browser at home?
I'm not addicted to social media so I don't have to be able to skim twitter or facebook or whatever whenever I feel the urge coming. Also, my PC has a SSD, I can open my browser within the minute after hitting the power button.
In short, my phone is ****ing ancient and it does everything I need it to. If I go anywhere I take my laptop with me, because I can actually type things worth a damn to fill my time with. Not so on a 'smart'phone.
(what was this topic about again?)
-
I'm talking about convenience, of course you had to bring some kind of psychological mud into the equation, the "urge". Whatever.
-
Yay for "dumbphones" and house phones! :lol:
-
You really have to love the neo-luddism this thread is bringing out.
-
Home phones still exist?
Yup.
They come in handy during power outages / cellular spikes.
That doesn't always work. During a power outage at my house our cordless phone won't work, but our old corded housephone and rotary phone still works.
-
The funny thing is that our grandparent's generation would all laugh hysterically at the notion of a guy "just" having a dumb phone in his pocket as some kind of evidence of being "not urgy" or "addicted" to social gathering.
-
Yeah, definitely. Just as one example, I'm still using what has to be a 7-year-old dumb phone, because I have no interest in or need for a smartphone. Just about anything I could do on one could be done far better on my (also ancient) PC. But I'm obviously in the small minority on this when compared to the general public.
This is easily the worst argument to not get a smartphone I've ever seen. For this to be even somewhat credible you'd need to literally never leave your home. If you did, you'd need to tell me that smartphones are not worth the money. Yes, they're expensive, and it's totally legit to not want to get one because you don't think you'd get your money's worth out of it. But telling me that smartphones are unnecessary because you have your PC? Total bull****. You're not going to carry your computer to the grocery store so you can look up a replacement when they don't have tamarind paste, and you're probably not going to pull out your laptop for that either (this is all assuming you can find wifi, or have some sort of expensive cellular dataplan for your PC anyway, obviously). And for the people who prefer to carry around physical books, you're not going to lug around a 20 volume encyclopedia on the bus or keep it in your trunk so you can look something up on a whim (forgetting the fact that when you leave home you're almost never doing nothing but sitting in your car or on the bus).
-
So aggressive! Such poor reading comprehension! Better read Mongoose's post again before you go on a rampage about things he didnt say.
I'm talking about convenience, of course you had to bring some kind of psychological mud into the equation, the "urge". Whatever.
Oh yes, 'of course'.
Whatever.
-
I have considered grabbing an Android phone a couple times over the past few years just because they are so ubiquitous, but smart phone penetration is over 95% among people I actually hang out with IRL so there are very few circumstances where it would make sense for me to have one of my own. Maybe if the rates they charge for data become less ludicrous and someone releases one with decent game controls.
-
Good grief, I feel old, when I was in my teens, you had to find a phone box if you wanted to call anyone. We still managed to function through all that hardship ;)
From my perspective, a Smartphone is just a phone with a load of stuff I never use bolted onto it, but then my age gives me an excuse somewhat :D
-
Yeah, definitely. Just as one example, I'm still using what has to be a 7-year-old dumb phone, because I have no interest in or need for a smartphone. Just about anything I could do on one could be done far better on my (also ancient) PC. But I'm obviously in the small minority on this when compared to the general public.
This is easily the worst argument to not get a smartphone I've ever seen. For this to be even somewhat credible you'd need to literally never leave your home. If you did, you'd need to tell me that smartphones are not worth the money. Yes, they're expensive, and it's totally legit to not want to get one because you don't think you'd get your money's worth out of it. But telling me that smartphones are unnecessary because you have your PC? Total bull****. You're not going to carry your computer to the grocery store so you can look up a replacement when they don't have tamarind paste, and you're probably not going to pull out your laptop for that either (this is all assuming you can find wifi, or have some sort of expensive cellular dataplan for your PC anyway, obviously). And for the people who prefer to carry around physical books, you're not going to lug around a 20 volume encyclopedia on the bus or keep it in your trunk so you can look something up on a whim (forgetting the fact that when you leave home you're almost never doing nothing but sitting in your car or on the bus).
Nah, you missed their point. Their point is "why do you want to go to the internet when you are in the grocery store? You are SOOOOO urgy and addicted to this stuff I'm so awesome and superior, I can wait till I get home! You losers!"
And then they come in with their dumb phones as an example on how they aren't urgy and addicted to social stuff. It's hilariously ridiculous.
-
To be honest, if that were the argument being made here, and I'm not certain it is, the simple fact we are having it on a forum for a computer game that is over a decade old would be the ultimate combo-breaker anyway :)
-
The funny thing is that our grandparent's generation would all laugh hysterically at the notion of a guy "just" having a dumb phone in his pocket as some kind of evidence of being "not urgy" or "addicted" to social gathering.
I don't have a smartphone because I can't afford a mobile data plan that costs almost as much as my home internet connection. I don't think I use my phone enough to justify it being my most expensive bill (aside from rent).
All the same, it's never a good idea to bring up "our grandparents' generation" when it comes to discussing the merits of new technology. If I could afford one, I'd definitely have a smartphone just for those times when it actually would come in handy.
-
I think it's amusing how apparently at least more than one person in this thread has taken personal offense to the fact that people still don't use smartphones.
-
I think it's amusing how apparently at least more than one person in this thread has taken personal offense to the fact that people still don't use smartphones.
I find it more disturbing than amusing. It makes you wonder if there's some kind of subliminal influence at work.
-
High tech nightmare!
-
Nah, you missed their point. Their point is "why do you want to go to the internet when you are in the grocery store? You are SOOOOO urgy and addicted to this stuff I'm so awesome and superior, I can wait till I get home! You losers!"
And then they come in with their dumb phones as an example on how they aren't urgy and addicted to social stuff. It's hilariously ridiculous.
Luis, I really think you have taken this the wrong way. All this is about is people making choices to suit their own needs and desires, which are different in different people, pointing out that one person's World does not necessarily rotate on the same axis as another person's.
I think Spoon was just saying because he's not all over social media, he doesn't need a smartphone, not trying to say others who are are bad because of it. If you enjoy social media, good for you. But I have no interest in it. I was watching the people with their smartphones when I was out today. On the bus back the girl sat next to me was on Facebook with hers. But I have no interest in Facebook.
To be honest, if that were the argument being made here, and I'm not certain it is, the simple fact we are having it on a forum for a computer game that is over a decade old would be the ultimate combo-breaker anyway :)
Oh yes, I had been wondering if there would be a chance to work that in here somehow. :D
I think it's amusing how apparently at least more than one person in this thread has taken personal offense to the fact that people still don't use smartphones.
I find it more disturbing than amusing. It makes you wonder if there's some kind of subliminal influence at work.
What disturbs me is when people take offence at other people making life choices that do not harm anyone. I find it incomprehensible. I will never look down on someone no matter what they are doing, if it does not harm anyone. Live and let live.
-
I will never look down on someone no matter what they are doing, if it does not harm anyone. [...]
Challenge accepted! :P
-
Nah, you missed their point. Their point is "why do you want to go to the internet when you are in the grocery store? You are SOOOOO urgy and addicted to this stuff I'm so awesome and superior, I can wait till I get home! You losers!"
And then they come in with their dumb phones as an example on how they aren't urgy and addicted to social stuff. It's hilariously ridiculous.
Just as one example, I'm still using what has to be a 7-year-old dumb phone, because I have no interest in or need for a smartphone. Just about anything I could do on one could be done far better on my (also ancient) PC.
My interpreteation of Mongoose's post probably was too glib. What is he saying, if not that the reason he has no interest in smartphones is the fact that his PC does everything that it can do better?
edit: I'm not offended because I have a hardon for smartphones (I don't even have one), I'm offended because the reasoning that I'm apparently imagining here fallaciously implies the obsolescence of every specialty computing device.
-
Yeah, it didn't come across to me as "I'm better than you because you're a pathetic addict and I'm not," just a "I would not use the primary features of a smartphone so having one would be a waste of money."
-
Perhaps it's something akin to me, I can take care of anything I might use the smartphone for at home. I am happy to use the time sat on the bus or waiting somewhere in a chair with my nose in a good book. I don't ever think to myself Now if I had a smartphone right now, I could do X! I simply do not want or need one.
-
I think the real issue here is many have misinterpreted personal statements as global generalizations. Mongoose was saying 'for me personally a smartphone is obsolete,' not 'smartphones are entirely obsolete I don't see why people fool themselves into buying them.'
-
Mongoose wasn't the one bringing up addiction and urge for those ev1l social apps as reasons for having smartphones, and I agree that what he said is mostly fair for himself.
-
I think the real issue here is many have misinterpreted personal statements as global generalizations. Mongoose was saying 'for me personally a smartphone is obsolete,' not 'smartphones are entirely obsolete I don't see why people fool themselves into buying them.'
Exactly.
Mongoose wasn't the one bringing up addiction and urge for those ev1l social apps as reasons for having smartphones, and I agree that what he said is mostly fair for himself.
You seem really mad about this.
Are you often told by people that you are addicted to social media? Is that why you snap at this?
-
Exactly. I'm not saying anything at all about other people using smartphones, just that I personally have little to no use for one. Case in point:
Of course that anything you can do on a smartphone you can do on a pc. Doh.
That's like saying one has no need for a car because the lorry you have on your garage does the same ****.
Can you carry your pc in your pocket though? Can you skim twitter whenever and wherever you are with just a touch on a screen rather than having to turn on your pc and wait several minutes till you get to open your browser at home?
I unequivocally loathe Twitter, and while I do use Facebook, I can't think of any reason why I'd feel so urgent of a need to post that I'd do it on the go. I'm fine with waiting until I get home to post a status update or read what people are doing. Lord knows I spend enough time on my PC during my average day, so I have plenty of opportunities to do so.
This is easily the worst argument to not get a smartphone I've ever seen. For this to be even somewhat credible you'd need to literally never leave your home. If you did, you'd need to tell me that smartphones are not worth the money. Yes, they're expensive, and it's totally legit to not want to get one because you don't think you'd get your money's worth out of it. But telling me that smartphones are unnecessary because you have your PC? Total bull****. You're not going to carry your computer to the grocery store so you can look up a replacement when they don't have tamarind paste, and you're probably not going to pull out your laptop for that either (this is all assuming you can find wifi, or have some sort of expensive cellular dataplan for your PC anyway, obviously). And for the people who prefer to carry around physical books, you're not going to lug around a 20 volume encyclopedia on the bus or keep it in your trunk so you can look something up on a whim (forgetting the fact that when you leave home you're almost never doing nothing but sitting in your car or on the bus).
Quite honestly, I don't leave my home all that many times during my average week. I'm only working part-time right now, and that work is done via PC, so I'm always here to look up info. When I do go out, I'm almost always the one driving, so the only thing I can do then is listen to music, which I have covered via radio or MP3 player. I can't think of any time when I've needed to double-check some piece of esoteric info while out and about...I generally don't go shopping without having a clear idea of what I'm buying first, and I'm not exactly enough of a chef to require the sorts of things that a grocery store could possibly run out of. :p
The one universal statement I will make about smartphones is that I find touchscreens to be a pretty godawful user interface option, particularly at such small screen sizes, unless one is using a stylus. And I'd like to see the mobile browser that could handle having a few dozen forum tabs open at once. :p
-
Mongoose wasn't the one bringing up addiction and urge for those ev1l social apps as reasons for having smartphones, and I agree that what he said is mostly fair for himself.
You seem really mad about this.
Are you often told by people that you are addicted to social media? Is that why you snap at this?
What are you smoking? Judging by our posts Luis Dias is as cool as a cucumber; I'm the mad one here. This should be totally obvious.
Quite honestly, I don't leave my home all that many times during my average week. I'm only working part-time right now, and that work is done via PC, so I'm always here to look up info. When I do go out, I'm almost always the one driving, so the only thing I can do then is listen to music, which I have covered via radio or MP3 player. I can't think of any time when I've needed to double-check some piece of esoteric info while out and about...I generally don't go shopping without having a clear idea of what I'm buying first, and I'm not exactly enough of a chef to require the sorts of things that a grocery store could possibly run out of. :p
This totally reasonable. When I read your post it seemed like you were saying things more generally than you meant. Never being in a position to use a smartphone when you couldn't use a PC says nothing for people who do find themselves in that situation, of course.
-
Does this post:
Nah, you missed their point. Their point is "why do you want to go to the internet when you are in the grocery store? You are SOOOOO urgy and addicted to this stuff I'm so awesome and superior, I can wait till I get home! You losers!"
And then they come in with their dumb phones as an example on how they aren't urgy and addicted to social stuff. It's hilariously ridiculous.
Seem like it was made in all 'coolness' to you? Cause if it is, I gotta ask what are you smoking. Cause it reads as 'slightly upset' to me.
But yeah, that fact that you are mad aswell was very obvious, though. Cool down, bro.
Exactly. I'm not saying anything at all about other people using smartphones, just that I personally have little to no use for one. Case in point:
I unequivocally loathe Twitter, and while I do use Facebook, I can't think of any reason why I'd feel so urgent of a need to post that I'd do it on the go. I'm fine with waiting until I get home to post a status update or read what people are doing. Lord knows I spend enough time on my PC during my average day, so I have plenty of opportunities to do so.
Quite honestly, I don't leave my home all that many times during my average week. I'm only working part-time right now, and that work is done via PC, so I'm always here to look up info. When I do go out, I'm almost always the one driving, so the only thing I can do then is listen to music, which I have covered via radio or MP3 player. I can't think of any time when I've needed to double-check some piece of esoteric info while out and about...I generally don't go shopping without having a clear idea of what I'm buying first, and I'm not exactly enough of a chef to require the sorts of things that a grocery store could possibly run out of. :p
The one universal statement I will make about smartphones is that I find touchscreens to be a pretty godawful user interface option, particularly at such small screen sizes, unless one is using a stylus. And I'd like to see the mobile browser that could handle having a few dozen forum tabs open at once. :p
This pretty much mimics my take on the subject (Though I dont use facebook either)
-
Spoon, I'd really appreciate it if you could drop the insistence that Luis is mad. It contributes exactly zero to the discussion.
-
Oh uhm, I'm sorry? I don't really get why I'm being singled out here, but I'll go get my coat then.
-
How's about the lot of you calm the **** down. :p
I can understand why cost might be factor in not making it worth getting a smartphone, but given that we're all people who play games and use the internet, I'd find it pretty hard to believe that if given a smartphone for free with a free data plan, people would just use it as a dumb phone.
-
I think I'd come pretty close. I think I'd only really maybe use the camera and occasionally look up locations and phone numbers and the like when I'm out and about. Hell I avoid texting whenever possible on my dumb phone as it is.
-
I can understand why cost might be factor in not making it worth getting a smartphone, but given that we're all people who play games and use the internet, I'd find it pretty hard to believe that if given a smartphone for free with a free data plan, people would just use it as a dumb phone.
I'd be surprised if either Spoon or Mongoose were arguing anything to the contrary. If I got a smartphone it would cost me between five and seven hundred dollars for two years of operation (varying with fancy-ness of phone), and that's only the cost of the phone plus the data when it's bought in conjunction with my family's plan. Which brings us back to this:
Yes, they're expensive, and it's totally legit to not want to get one because you don't think you'd get your money's worth out of it.
Personally, I've been tempted to get a smartphone for the past six months or so. All but one of my courses this semester rely on group work and we use facebook groups, github, and piazza to keep track of our work and communicate with each other. Meeting in person or staying at home isn't realistic when we all have to juggle work and classes, and I'd find having some way to check up on things when I'm not actually in a position to get work done supremely useful, not to mention the general utility of internet in my pocket.
Obviously, I'm at a loss to give any reasons, other than novelty, why Mongoose would be willing to spend the money on a smartphone if he would only end up using the data features on rare occasions. No doubt he would be glad to have it on those occasions, but it just wouldn't be worth the money.
-
It might be worth noting that there are significant differences in prices of phones and cellular/data plans in different countries. Not to mention sum of one's paycheck varies even more so. Simply put, some people are at much better position to afford smartphones than others. As such, "worth the money" is inherently dependent on location of the person in question.
-
Well let me put it this way: if someone dropped a permanently-free Android phone in my pocket, no strings attached, of course I'd find some uses for it. Certainly the camera, as Klaustrophobia said, and having on-the-go directions on the rare times I need them would be handy (though Google Maps screwed me over last time I used it, so maybe not). But honestly, the main thing I think I'd use it for is trying out those relatively-few mobile games that get really good press, so in the end it'd just be mostly a 3DS alternative. :p
-
I think I'd come pretty close. I think I'd only really maybe use the camera and occasionally look up locations and phone numbers and the like when I'm out and about. Hell I avoid texting whenever possible on my dumb phone as it is.
To be honest, I suspect you'd find you used it a lot more than you expected once you had one. I certainly never expected to end up wanting a top of the range smartphone 5 years ago when I didn't even own a mobile phone.
-
Hell, I'd be lost without my smartphone now! It's my camera, MP3 player, Sat-Nav, on-the-go games console. It's also my WIFI router as I have an all you can eat data plan and use the phone to broadcast a WIFI signal. I can access the internet, my email and all my social networking sites on the go too. It can also be my personal organiser and I am still finding uses for it.
-
Out of curiosity, do carriers still sell dumb phones? I don't remember seeing any for sale in a long time...
-
Out of curiosity, do carriers still sell dumb phones? I don't remember seeing any for sale in a long time...
Yeah, The Carphone Warehouse loaned my wife a brand new dumb Nokia phone when her Galaxy s2 needed repairs, they do seem to still sell them for those who want a phone to just be a phone.
-
You seem really mad about this.
Are you often told by people that you are addicted to social media? Is that why you snap at this?
I usually snap when people get snarky like you do, not because they say "I'm addicted", etc. I couldn't care less about inane obvious ignorant thoughts.
There's also a bit of a chutzpah for someone telling others they are addicted into social stuff "but not me I just have a dumb phone constantly in my pocket".
Consider for a moment the hilarity of being told one's addicted into social apps by someone who says they use facebook, when I don't even use any of those things except for twitter (which I use mainly to get interesting news or links in one-liners anyway).
Out of curiosity, do carriers still sell dumb phones? I don't remember seeing any for sale in a long time...
Ironically "Nokia" will remain a brand mostly for dumb phones. Everything else will go directly to Microsoft, for instance.
-
How's about the lot of you calm the **** down. :p
I can understand why cost might be factor in not making it worth getting a smartphone, but given that we're all people who play games and use the internet, I'd find it pretty hard to believe that if given a smartphone for free with a free data plan, people would just use it as a dumb phone.
I would. I might use it's features once in a blue moon.
EDIT: Actually, I would just sell it, pocket the money, and keep my current phone.
-
I would. I might use it's features once in a blue moon.
EDIT: Actually, I would just sell it, pocket the money, and keep my current phone.
People say this sort of thing when they've never had one before. Once you have the functionality, you'll use it, and once you get used to using it, you'll wonder how you got by without it.
You don't seem to understand that that exact process happens to millions of people every year. You might think you're a unique little butterfly and that it wouldn't happen to you, but in the situation Kara described, I can 99.995% guarantee you that you wouldn't be. :p
-
I would. I might use it's features once in a blue moon.
EDIT: Actually, I would just sell it, pocket the money, and keep my current phone.
People say this sort of thing when they've never had one before. Once you have the functionality, you'll use it, and once you get used to using it, you'll wonder how you got by without it.
You don't seem to understand that that exact process happens to millions of people every year. You might think you're a unique little butterfly and that it wouldn't happen to you, but in the situation Kara described, I can 99.995% guarantee you that you wouldn't be. :p
I disagree.
You're missing the point. I don't want or need the features on offer. Having them isn't going to change that.
-
I disagree.
You're missing the point. I don't want or need the features on offer. Having them isn't going to change that.
Okay, fine, whatever you say. I suspect your opinion will change in the next few years though.
-
"Ah computers darn things those r for basement geeks. I can do all my work in ma typewritar. I have no need for those new fads."
"Ah typewriters darn things these days thy people make. I can do all ma work with ma pen and paper."
"Ah pens! Darn fads! Can't they see how ridiculous they are?"
-
Seriously, there are good arguments, and there's accusing people of being Luddites....
People here aren't saying they think the technology is worthless or evil or dangerous, simply that they feel they would have no use for it when attached to a phone. Whether you agree with that concept or not, it doesn't make them afraid or ignorant of that technology.
-
Seriously, there are good arguments, and there's accusing people of being Luddites....
People here aren't saying they think the technology is worthless or evil or dangerous, simply that they feel they would have no use for it when attached to a phone. Whether you agree with that concept or not, it doesn't make them afraid or ignorant of that technology.
Thank you.
-
I usually snap when people get snarky like you do, not because they say "I'm addicted", etc. I couldn't care less about inane obvious ignorant thoughts.
There's also a bit of a chutzpah for someone telling others they are addicted into social stuff "but not me I just have a dumb phone constantly in my pocket".
Consider for a moment the hilarity of being told one's addicted into social apps by someone who says they use facebook, when I don't even use any of those things except for twitter (which I use mainly to get interesting news or links in one-liners anyway).
You usually just snap at people from most of the posts ive read from you, so I'm not suprised to see you do it here too!
You also seem to be reading snarkyness where there is none. I don't see why you've been taking any of these posts in this thread so personally. People are just sayin' that they don't use smartphones and/or social media and that if they had a smartphone, they probably wouldn't use 10% of the features that one has. Nobody here has been going on about how having a old dumb phone is some kind of lifestyle statement against technology or anything. That's just you going on rants.
Seriously, there are good arguments, and there's accusing people of being Luddites....
People here aren't saying they think the technology is worthless or evil or dangerous, simply that they feel they would have no use for it when attached to a phone. Whether you agree with that concept or not, it doesn't make them afraid or ignorant of that technology.
Exactly.
The amount of anger/disbelieve this seems to get is downright puzzling.
-
"Ah computers darn things those r for basement geeks. I can do all my work in ma typewritar. I have no need for those new fads."
"Ah typewriters darn things these days thy people make. I can do all ma work with ma pen and paper."
"Ah pens! Darn fads! Can't they see how ridiculous they are?"
Luis, you can't go complaining about Spoon (especially when he's said that what you thought he was saying is wrong, and I thought so too before, and I believe him now) then drop something like this in the thread. I don't know if you're merely trying to be funny or having a pop, but I see no smiley here. And if you are having a pop, this is the same kind of thing you are accusing Spoon of and getting aggravated about.
Can't you just accept that some people want different things and are not afraid of technology but simply don't have a use for this specific piece of technology? Technological advancements excite me, nothing could be further from the truth in my case.
-
I don't see why you've been taking any of these posts in this thread so personally.
You seem really mad about this.
Are you often told by people that you are addicted to social media? Is that why you snap at this?
Stop making personal attacks and he'll stop taking them personally.
-
It's not a personal attack.
I don't see why you've been taking any of these posts in this thread so personally.
He says he doesn't understand why he is getting mad.
You seem really mad about this.
Are you often told by people that you are addicted to social media? Is that why you snap at this?
He wants to understand.
-
Well it sure as hell looks like personal attacks to me. This discussion about who is and is not mad is over.
-
This is dumb.
Asking someone why is he is snapping/getting mad is a personal attack now? I see Luis (among others) having a really ****ty attitude about what other people think about smart phones and I simply don't get it. How about letting everyone have their own opinion about these sort of things without getting your panties in a bunch over it?
I'm out, I see GD is still as ****ty as it has ever been before. Too much reading into things that aren't being said, so you can get angry over it and too much anger over opinions in general.
-
This thread has been a fascinating and educational read on why Microsoft sucks.
-
If this turns into an all out tech war, I'm afraid the smartphone people have far larger and more numerous projectiles at this point, so uh...
Posted from my iPhone 4G
-
I don't think it's so much a technical dick-waving contest as a reminder that different people use technology in different ways.
For example, I have a camera on my phone, occasionally I take photographs with it, but mostly I use my digital camera because it is better suited to the kind of photography I do, for example, those into astro-photography might find using the pad difficult for the actual photography (though they may find use in a Star-chart app). The same for music, it has to be remembered that most music apps on smartphones etc are of extremely limited use when it comes to music production, it's better to have a suite of programs running on a more powerful system if you are heavily into it.
That doesn't mean the phone or its apps are bad things, they are still useful tools, but it's just they don't match the way I use technology. Maybe if I myself was into Astro-photography then, as I said earlier, something like a Star-chart app would be useful, but I'm not, so it isn't, that's all it is.
-
Well I guess that when Lorric manages to become sociably more reasonable than I've been I guess I owe an apology.
-
Well I guess that when Lorric manages to become sociably more reasonable than I've been I guess I owe an apology.
Please don't be doing that with the sideswipe at me. You yourself once said I am very nice.
But hopefully this means this issue is resolved now. :nod:
-
sideswipe at me.
Retracted. Received pm from Luis, it was not meant as a sideswipe.
-
Seriously, there are good arguments, and there's accusing people of being Luddites....
People here aren't saying they think the technology is worthless or evil or dangerous, simply that they feel they would have no use for it when attached to a phone. Whether you agree with that concept or not, it doesn't make them afraid or ignorant of that technology.
The thing is though that I'm seeing a lot of people on this thread saying that they'd have no use for a smartphone when they have no experience of owning a smartphone. There is a huge difference between the argument that the convenience of owning a smartphone isn't worth the money and the argument that a smartphone wouldn't be at all convenient. We've been hearing an awful lot of the latter argument from people who then make statements which contradict it.
-
Seriously, there are good arguments, and there's accusing people of being Luddites....
People here aren't saying they think the technology is worthless or evil or dangerous, simply that they feel they would have no use for it when attached to a phone. Whether you agree with that concept or not, it doesn't make them afraid or ignorant of that technology.
The thing is though that I'm seeing a lot of people on this thread saying that they'd have no use for a smartphone when they have no experience of owning a smartphone. There is a huge difference between the argument that the convenience of owning a smartphone isn't worth the money and the argument that a smartphone wouldn't be at all convenient. We've been hearing an awful lot of the latter argument from people who then make statements which contradict it.
I do use a Android phones for 4 years but don't really have a use for them.
Same for Android tablets. Bought into the hype and was all excited about it, but the longer I used, the more the realization sunk in that it really is the worst device to be doing what needs to be doing or what I want to be doing at any given time. There is always a device that performs better for pretty much everything to the point where you start to question why you do task X with the stupid smartphone this time ...
So, Yes there is an "App for everything" ... the problem is .... literally all of these Apps are utter garbage/limited/stunted/crippled/crap when compared to the real solutions that already exist on other systems.
So that's what a smartphone is for me: Some kind of jack of all trades device that could "in theory" do almost everything, but in practice, gets used for pretty much nothing now because after the newness/coolness wears off the only thing that remains is the certainty that for pretty much any task (or entertainment) there is a device/setup that is worlds better at that task than a smartphone is.
So there you have it: I've been owning and using smartphones for 4 years and had an android tablet for over 1 year... but the only thing I got from it is the realization of how useless or at least "below par" those devices really are.
(Now own a (larger) tablet/laptop hybrid with a full OS which is actually useful for getting stuff done.)
Bottomline: After 4 years of smartphone use there are really only 2-3 tasks where the smartphone is my "preferred device": Phone calls, navigation and Alarm clock while travelling. That's it.
And yes, sometimes while on the move I use it to quickly look stuff up on the internet ... but anytime I have to use it for that, I do resent it because of how awkward even that is (in comparison) on such a device.
... and that's not for a lack of trying other stuff.... I tried to do pretty much everything with it as I started... it's just that after being so excited of how cool it is to do "X" on a smartphone, I got more and more annoyed, then disgusted, ... as I started to realize how crappy the phone really is for pretty much anything you do and that the only reason I would do stuff on the new phone is well ... because it was "new" and "cool". ... but as you can guess ... that phase didn't last too long. ;)
-
No real use? Let's see... I find my smartphone very useful for browsing the net in places where there's no space for laptop. You can also stand while browsing, which is hard to do with a laptop and an extremely convenient feature. Also, if you own a car mount, you can use it as GPS. This can be very useful if you travel by car a lot (or just have zero sense of direction, like my mom :)) or even just don't like carrying map around. I own one of the smallest smartphones on the market (and probably the smallest you can get with a physical keyboard), so it's infinitely more compact than a paper map could ever hope to be. Aside from that, I often use it as a flashlight. The camera isn't really great, but it works well enough, and if you need to take a quick snapshot of something, it's awesome. Also, thanks to the physical QWERTY keyboard, it's also convenient as a notepad for writing down stuff without the need for neither a pen, a piece of paper or a hard surface to write on. Comes with a calendar and a reminder system, too. And there's probably an app that would allow it to work as a graphic calculator, hopefully saving me quite a bit of money. Finally, it works as an alarm clock. And a music player, which is great on long bus trips. Oh, and before I forget. It can be used as a regular phone and does this job quite well.
Yes, there are dedicated devices for all this, and they do the job better in most cases, but my smartphone fits it all into a single device I can carry in my trouser pocket (or even a waistcoat pocket. That thing really is tiny). Perhaps other, larger phones are less convenient, but the case still stands unless you're not wearing a jacket. It replaces a lot of stuff that would otherwise I'd have to carry in my briefcase/jacket pockets. While it's no substitute for a proper laptop, there are places where I wouldn't be able to get a laptop out of my briefcase, nevermind open it.
I can agree about a tablet, though. The entire reason why smartphone is so great is that it can be really dinky. In my case, it's only slightly wider and about 1.5 as thick as a regular phone. Others are larger, but still small. Tablet is as big as a netbook (so no pocket carry unless you're wearing cammies, and even than, it's a bad idea), while not really being able to do anything a good smartphone or a laptop can.
-
Dragon, I ll agree that a smartphone is useful in situations where any other device is completely impractical.... I guess for me such situations are simply too rare.
... I can't really think of all but a very few tasks I would do on the smartphone when I do have a dedicated device available.
As said above, phonecalls, navigation and alarm clock ... maybe MP3 player if you really don't care about music quality ... but that's about it.
Internet use, also as said above, is just awkward on a phone (imho) the moment you try to get anything done that goes beyond looking up small/tiny amounts of information.
Yeah I'll use the phone if I really don't have access to anything else and it really really can't wait ... but it's awkward/often impractical even then.
More to the point, the moment you try to do anything a little bit complicated with it, like getting work done or playing a game ... the whole user experience just falls apart in comparison to any dedicated solutions.
And tablets are just as bad as phones in that regard imho. - to the point where you'd rather not do stuff at all, but wait for when you do have one of those dedicated devices available again.
-
My issue with using smartphones as mp3 players is that you need to compete for stoarge space with everything else on the device. 32gb smartphones are expensive as it is, and I don't want to use my precious cellular data streaming music when I already have a good dedicated mp3 player.
-
My issue with using smartphones as mp3 players is that you need to compete for stoarge space with everything else on the device. 32gb smartphones are expensive as it is, and I don't want to use my precious cellular data streaming music when I already have a good dedicated mp3 player.
Which is where smartphones that take MicroSD cards is helpful :)
-
My mp3 player also takes a microsd card, which is full. I can't fit all of my music on my mp3 player as it is. :p
-
ipod classic. 120 gb hard drive. this thing better not ever break, because i don't ever want to have to buy a more expensive flash one that has a tiny fraction of the storage.
-
... I can't really think of all but a very few tasks I would do on the smartphone when I do have a dedicated device available.
I don't think anyone here is saying that a smartphone is better than a dedicated device. The point in having a smartphone is for the second half of your sentence. Unless you want to cart around all those dedicated devices, most of us feel that it's better to have a jack of all trades than to have nothing at all. What I find amusing is the instance by some that they'd rather have nothing, even though we're on a forum populated mainly by techies.
Let me ask you a simple question though. If someone stole your phone tomorrow, would you go out and buy another smartphone or a dumb phone (Assuming money wasn't an issue)?
It's also worth bearing in mind that different smartphones give you a completely different experience. I spent about 30 minutes using a top of the line Samsung to type and I was about ready to smash the thing even though I'd then have to pay for it. :p My Blackberry on the other hand gives me a lovely typing experience and unless I actually tell people I'm using it, I doubt many people can tell whether I'm using it or my PC when I post on here.
Despite what various fanboys will tell you, there is no best smartphone or smartphone OS. Everybody has different needs and desires. I remember years before I bought my first mobile phone saying that I'd love to have a BlackBerry cause I wanted a device that could do all the things it could do with the exception of making phone calls and sending text messages. Fast forward 5 years and those two features are still used much less than anything else.
-
Let me ask you a simple question though. If someone stole your phone tomorrow, would you go out and buy another smartphone or a dumb phone (Assuming money wasn't an issue)?
I can't speak for anyone else, but for me this is most of the issue. Smart phones are monumentally expensive compared to dumb phones. I got my most recent phone earlier this year for a grand total of $36.99 including the upgrade fee of $36. You just simply cannot get a smart phone for that cheap.
-
Oh I understand that. I don't think anyone is arguing that a smartphone is a must have purchase or that it is an expense everyone has to pay. My argument is mainly that if you had a smartphone you'd find a lot more uses for it than you might realise. That the argument you can do everything it can do with other machines is deeply flawed because you don't always have those machines with you.
A suitable analogy is buying a PC. What would you say to someone who said "I have a typewriter. I've never needed a PC cause if I bought one I'd only use it for typing on." Would you agree with that view? Or would you suspect that once this person owned a PC they'd find a hell of a lot more uses for it. Especially if they had the sort of personality that made you think they'd love to use the internet, play computer games, etc.
We're on a forum for people who play computer games and use the internet. That's why I find it quite amusing when people tell me they have no use for a smartphone. I can understand people saying it's not worth the expense, but people saying they have no use for one sounds a lot like self-delusion in many cases.
There's a certain air of "I don't use a smartphone cause I'm better than that." which certain people like to project (I'm not saying anyone on the thread is doing that). As Luis pointed out, that's quite a silly argument to make if you own a mobile phone at all.
-
Honestly the reason I use the Internet so much is one of the things that I feel like goes against smartphones for me. As many work-arounds as there are, at the end of the day there are two choices with mobile Internet: either you get a stripped-down mobile page, or you have a full page that you have to constantly zoom and maneuver around. And while that's more than adequate for the odd quick look-up of info, it'd be sheer torture for the sort of prolonged forum browsing that represents the majority of my Internet usage.
-
You're not really supposed to be using a smartphone for that.
I use my phone for HLP when I'm going to be away from my main PC for a few hours and I want to check if there are any discussions that require my attention. Used in that way, it's very useful. But I'd never suggest it would be a good replacement for using my PC. Have you never been out the house and wanted to check on something on HLP? Especially when you're standing in a queue or something equally boring?
-
I use my smartphone for text messages (which I do a lot more than I did with my dumbphone thanks to ease of typing), music, Skype, and IRC when I'm stuck away from my PC.
-
So, now that the discussion about smartphones has gotten thoroughly away from the initial topic:
How is what Microsoft is doing with the Xbox One any different than what major phone companies and Apple have done with the mobile phone?
-
How is what Microsoft is doing with the Xbox One any different than what major phone companies and Apple have done with the mobile phone?
Two wrongs don't make a right.
Apple - and some other major phone companies - deserve nothing but contempt and derision for their business practices. Ditto for MS in this case.
-
Business practices, yes. No argument there. I personally detest Apple to the core of my being.
But that's also not exactly the point. The concept of Apps and smartphones and whatnot isn't a bad or evil business practice.
-
As someone who has bought a Acer Z2 liquid duo (with a fitting sim-only plan)...
I only use it for Whatsapp
-
On the other hand, Apple has recently announced they are giving their iWork apps for free for anyone buying their iDevices, etc.
So as one evil company is trying to get you to buy them their hardware by giving you extra tools, etc., the other is doing the exact opposite path.
It doesn't surprise me, given that the XBox is apparently a hole without end of unprofitability, while iDevices put Apple where they are.
-
You're not really supposed to be using a smartphone for that.
I use my phone for HLP when I'm going to be away from my main PC for a few hours and I want to check if there are any discussions that require my attention. Used in that way, it's very useful. But I'd never suggest it would be a good replacement for using my PC. Have you never been out the house and wanted to check on something on HLP? Especially when you're standing in a queue or something equally boring?
Me, I've never felt the need to do anything like that when out, I said it earlier in the thread. I also prefer to do such things in the peace of my own home. Same for conversations over the phone, I much prefer to be at home, I would never initiate a social conversation outside. Only something that needs to be done at that point would I do outside.
When out, I'm focused on the reason I'm out. When in a queue, I tend to go inside myself and reflect on things, or try to make plans for the day if I haven't already, or think about things I need or want to do. Or sometimes I simply let my mind rest, as the wheels are always turning on one thing or another up there. I drive myself hard mentally, so sometimes it's nice just to relax, and that's easiest when I'm put into a position that I'm forced to wait and do nothing, as I absolutely hate wasted time.
-
Yes I can see that for people that want to be forced to have that quiet time smartphones would be a real problem.
-
Also, it would be very rare just thinking about it that I would even be in a position to use one in a queue. Either I wouldn't be waiting long enough, or I wouldn't have a free hand.
-
I use it all the time in queues. So many applications.... just yesterday I had to go at night to a pharmacy. Here, only one in each place is open at night. Each pharmacy gives you the directions to the one that is open. Instead though I just click an app I have that gives me the list of the nearest pharmacies that are open and if I don't know where they are it gives me their location in maps.
Or I just look at twitter for some cool news and articles.
Or I have direct access to google drive docs with all the information I need whenever I come to any bureaucratic thing to solve.
Or I have direct access to an agenda that I can also access in my pc.
Or I can access my office pc with teamviewer and see if my latest renders are being produced correctly or not. Wherever I am.
Or I can access my bank account as if it were an ATM. I can even directly pay any service on the spot if they provide me with their NIB.
Or I can just see some youtube video someone found it interesting to share w/ me. Anywhere.
... and all that with a crappy cheap smartphone that has next to zero memory and constantly complaining it's too obsolete and without resources to pull off anything more. It did cost only 100$ w/out any contract.
-
And that's exactly why you should own one. If you're going to make good use of it like that, not because it's the latest thing. I'd do nothing or almost nothing with it.