AnonD-909757, 07 Sep 2020This isn't about companies, but Smartphone companies, another market where there is a lot... moreWhat you are suggesting already failed. Look at project ara.just out of curiosity what phone and a car are you using currently?
Nick Tagataka, 07 Sep 2020Point 1), 2):
"Number of requests are anyway way less importantly regarder than equal nu... moreThis isn't about companies, but Smartphone companies, another market where there is a lot of potential diversity is cars, and it is a market that do in fact have variety, between the different power range, designs, vehicle types, various options etc.
Not just "my" requests, everybody's requests, I am not for my personal diversity, I am for everyone being able to find what he like/want, that's not an analogy, that's a fact right here.
If at every suggestions you have peoples complaining at said suggestions, in some cases for valid reasons, but many times for absolutely no valid reason other than personal satisfaction at contradicting someone else or bashing a tech the complainer himself doesn't want/use...
How in such messed up environment you can tell appart which user requests are good or not without investing way too many times into analyzing each complains in every proposals ?
Why would it require anything ?
Literally anyone can take appart its phone and remove the front camera and still have a perfectly working device.
No, it wouldn't, it is about streamlining the driver distribution process, not the phone manufacturing, even with a different panel, well, you simply add to the existing device's drivers the different panel drivers, and voila.
The brand who would start doing it would at first invest a lot of money in R&D for doing this, but then for every new device it would be a lot of saved money.
That would actually force the industry to work toward a PC like almost plug and play type of native support for an universal components standards over which the drivers would allow to use those hardware/peripherals at their optimal performances, only limited by brands drivers and softwares, in turn, each user could literally swap internal components like cameras if they fit inside the phone and just download the driver package, similarly, for any specific Android, such as LineageOS or SailfishOS we wouldn't need to wait for a version made for this specific phone, but rather have a general version with drivers to handle the hardware.
Imagine if each PC brands not only had to make their own Windows version each adapted for the devices, but that every models they release also required its own, it would be a nightmare and a quite stupid implementation, yet, it is what we've got on Smartphones...
And I am sure Google is to blame for that as they could EASILY make a standard where each devices just need : Core Android + Drivers + Software (like the brand's camera/AI, etc softwares) + optionally brand's custom Android launcher, theme, features and additional menues.
That's almost what Huawei did before the USA ruined everything :
And where, any device could run on any combinaison of those, everyone would be winning, except maybe Google who would have less control over people's phones.
For Apple it make sense to have that kind of system as they create their own devices and don't release many of them, but for Android it is totally not adapted.
That's why we need another OS, open source, certainly not coming from the USA or China, and made for every brands to use, if it can retroengineering Android's app virtual OS/machine making it compatible with them, and therefor at launch have a virtually huge application store, it would be a big thing and many peoples would enjoy it.
AnonD-909757, 05 Sep 2020Here is how you are totally wrong :
1) The Smartphone industry DOES NOT CARE what users wan... morePoint 1), 2):
"Number of requests are anyway way less importantly regarder than equal number of complains" "making it quite hard to look at every requests"
You get them right. Companies are going after profit and it's a waste of time & money for them to listen to every single niche requests from relatively small groups of people. They also take complains more seriously since the way they handle them would also affect their public reputation.
3). Your wall of text with full of comma splices is making it really hard for me to see your true intention, but I'm assuming that you're trying say it's my and other people's fault that manufacturers are not listening to your request? Sorry but what kind of analogy is that?
"it is a highly popular request, yet it is not a thing"
Sony used to do it until they released Xperia 1 - all of their prior flagships apart from XZ2 Premium had a single camera because Sony probably thought multi-camera arrays were lacking in quality and a single "good" camera would suffice average consumers. Then they realised that it was clearly not working.
"Literally any brand can easily make a small production run on any of their existing model without front camera as a sub-variant, it would cost nothing (actually cost less) and satisfy many users"
It would cost them more because that would require them to redesign the internals of the device drastically, and possibly use different display panel as well if the "original" variant carried notched screen.
If manufacturers were bothered to go through all of those hassles of redesigning the internals and advertising two almost identical products with and without a selfie camera, they would most likely first add camera indicator light that turns on whenever the selfie camera is active. That would makes much more sense and is something I wholeheartedly think should exist.
Mas Sakti, 06 Sep 2020The Mi 10 Ultra is currently sold only in China, and because of that, it lacks Google Play Sto... moreYour wrong I've got mi10 ultra it comes with Google services out the box you literally just download playstore of the built in mi store and that's it
Anonymous, 05 Sep 2020Dude, buy a popup selfie phone and chill! First, who are you to tell me what to do, to buy or to even prefer ?
Second, there is a reason why I talk about no front camera over pop ups.
Pop ups are great, sadly their implementation is clearly perfectible, but because of all the totally false myths, despite being debunked and proven wrong by time, it had a lower popularity than it should have had, which is why there isn't much improvement.
Also, because of the rarity of 3D facial recognition, which was directly caused by the shrinking down of the notch and the apparition of the punch hole, both because the notch was not adapted at all to Android (where the status bad serve as both notifications and status icons, which require as much free space as possible) and was poorly copied from Apple (who had made the best densely packed possible while Android phone makers only copied the appearance and not the function), whose implementation, despite looking ugly, is on a technical standpoint really well archived.
The mix of those two things made pop up with facial recognition really rare, actually except slider phones, it only happened once with the Oppo Find X, which isn't even a proper pop up anyway, but rather a slider/ pop up hybrid.
Now there is an issue on modern phone using way too small resolution depth sensors, the typical dot matrix used on structured light type LiDAR is good for industrial use, like mapping the depth data of an area, and can be somewhat useful for AR, but it is not adapted to photography which would require a high resolution depth map, there is only one type of ToF that can do that, it is the Flash LiDAR, which use a single LED or single Laser which is "unfocused" to cover a wide area, and is either pulsed or modulated, this, coupled with a high resolution camera doesn't require any additional computing power other than the sensor's integrated analog to digital converted and the signal rectifying part, and it doesn't require costly or complex multi laser/dot setup, it is a simple monochrome sensor, otherwise identical to a regular camera, and that can easily be put to 12Mp or more resolution, and that would actually be really useful for photography.
What it have to do with no front camera ?
Well, without front camera, which normalize insecure and limited 2D, camera based facial recognition, no front camera would quickly take advantage of the main ToF sensor on the back of the phone, leading to it being used for three different main purposes :
*3D Facial recognition.
*Depth map for feeding the AI algorithms that enhance pictures.
*Soon coming, many AR applications.
Which will participate to making it way better as there would be more justifications, allowing for a sensor much more capable, in turn allowing things that were not possible before, like extremely powerful and accurate 3D facial recognition, deep and unnoticeable auto retouching on pictures, and seamless integration of AR content down to tiny details in the environment.
And since a high resolution depth map would allow low computing performance picture processing and natural, also low computing AR integration, only facial recognition would have a massive amount of data to compute, quickly leading to the need for a dedicated chip, which, if well implemented, would allow for storing biometry data away from the OS, which would already be a massive step toward privacy respecting practices, but would also greatly enhance all other security methods, which will also result in a secure boot loader, meaning the phone will gain the ability to require biometry (or in case of any issues with that, a special complex QR code that serve as backup) or passwords to protect access to any lower functions, including by plugin the phone via USB, meaning no formatting if not allowed to, also meaning that the phone would have no value for thiefs as you can't use it regardless what you try.
Those are only few of the advantages that would directly or indirectly be possible by making devices without front camera.
So, no, I won't just take a pop up selfie camera phone while I could have actually better and which could drastically improve smartphones.
I finally got to see ZTE Axon 20 under screen camera. They slightly dim about an 1/4" on the top part of the display to help hide it. On certain lighter colors, the less dense pixel area is somewhat noticeable, but is so small you can live with it. The selfie samples look passable, but far from great. Not bad for a Gen 1 device. I think the Gen 3 Xiaomi solution on 2021 will be better.
AnonD-923722, 05 Sep 2020But will it work without GMS? It has Google framework and you Can install Google store. . After that you got a perfect, usable phone. All this take 10 minutes.
So are they gonna mass produce it? Is this mi 10 ultra with under display cam tech is a global version of the mi10 ultrA with punch hole
AnonD-955101, 06 Sep 2020The reality is that nodoby cares what is your opinion or mine. Especially the phone manufactur... moreThere is a certain level at which we can consider things stupid, they, way further away from reason, there is you.
YOUR opinion indeed no one care about it, you only say "WoNt HaPpEn BeCaUsE i SaId So", while I gave explanations, reasons and justifications in general, solutions, implementation possibilities and more.
Oh yeah, sorry, I forget that nor the GSM nor the data work if you don't have a front camera, no one ever write SMS nor simple calls anymore, everyone is forced to do video calls, and surely only smartphones can do video calls, the smallest display available on any consumer device that can communicate make it perfect for doing that.
So much so that feature phones without front camera aren't at all a thing and those 4 released this year are obviously not existing because "no one would want them" :
And surely, as you pointed out, for fun, emergency or any other usecases from calls to text messages, without a front camera, surely it can't even work.
You don't know shit about majority needs and opinions, you are just making up facts that you THINK are the case, you haven't run or even seen any survey, I DID showed one proving that a non négligeable percentage of users actually agree with me, hell there is even more peoples accepting no front camera than desperately wanting on in this very comment section, which isn't the subject, meaning no cheating by attracting only the targeted peoples, CLEARLY showing a tendency.
Yeah, because no company ever did such things, we don't have phones with gimbals camera (Vivo X50 Pro), slider phones (Mi Mix 3), pop up (Poco F2 Pro), flip up (Asus Zenfone 7), foldable phones (Galaxy Z Flip), dual display phones (Nubia Z20), the other dual display type (LG V60 ThinQ), even weird rotating thingy (LG Wing), rugged phones (Ulefone Armor 7), fricking bomb proof with integrated talkie walkie (Nomu T18), phones with thermal camera (Cat S61 Pro).
Nor company exist SPECIALLY for making privacy related phones like the PinePhone or the Librem 5, because, privacy is such a non important matter, why would anyone do that ?
Why would Mark Zuckerberg and MOST DAMN SECURITY EXPERTS cover their front camera, and why would those phones exist ?
You can't even read properly, I NEVER SAID we contributed to invent the pop up, I literally said that because of our actions, stopping stupid harmful rumors about the pop up that degraded his notoriety, and showing that we still care about it, new devices with the pop up are still released.
But yeah, sure, again, being based on facts is clearly not something you can understand, what I call reality is what I observe, what FACTS tell me, like polls, other peoples matching opinion, real life events, while YOU are only saying what YOU CONSIDER being the truth, but I am the one requiring a reality check.
Like pretending that privacy intrusion is not a thing or not important (I don't even know) which FACTS prove otherwise, there isn't a fricking single week without a news about a new scandal of a big company having illegally accessed user data, there are many real world exemples of peoples having gotten in trouble because of that, a simple CHECK of those, which are REALITY would prove you.
Reality check is mainly checking facts, I, not only said, but linked you facts, not from some shady websites with crappy webdesign and reptilian theory thing, about experts talking about the subjects and articles from reputable websites or quoting experts.
But surely you know better than the fricking UN privacy chief what is or isn't dangerous :
AnonD-909757, 05 Sep 2020Okay, lets check, who need help :
A : The guy who only reported FACTS that are easy to chec... moreThe reality is that nodoby cares what is your opinion or mine. Especially the phone manufacturers.
Maybe a couple of people.
My mother is in Macedonia, my sister in Norway, brother in law in Switzerland.
I live in Germany, many friends from many countries,
Constantly in touch with the people i care for, work, fun or for emergency there is no purpose using a phone without ffc.
majority of the consumers have the same opinion and needs.
You really think some oem is willing to gamble making a phone without selfie camera just because some small group of users are unrealistically obsessed with brands spying on them?
And thinking that your essay comments contributed to the invention of the pop up cameras is nothing more than delusional dreaming.
Bro you realy need a reality check.
Stop it, get some help😂
Anonymous, 05 Sep 2020You can install Google Playstore from the Xiaomi Appstore, what are you talking about?The Mi 10 Ultra is currently sold only in China, and because of that, it lacks Google Play Store and Services out of the box. But it is a Google-certified phone, so it is very easy to get both installed. Just search Settings for Play Services and enable them. Then go to the Mi Store and install Play Store. Simple as that.
Anonymous, 05 Sep 2020Stupid as it might sounds, I would pay extra for not having selfie camera.No it don't sound stupid at all.
I would do the same, not because of spy shit, this i really don't care at all, but because i never use this at all.
I never do selfies, never have mettings (zoom) on my phones, i use my laptop for this or my tablet.
And i never have video calls... wtf.
So yes, please give me a big display phone without this ego camera 👌🏻👌🏻👌🏻
AnonD-955101, 05 Sep 2020Fella you need some help.
Okay, lets check, who need help :
A : The guy who only reported FACTS that are easy to check, carried expert's advises and showed evidences.
B : The guy who refuse to believe FACTS because his own vision of the world doesn't match them and who oppose the idea that someone else could have a chance at having the type of device he want.
Surely the guy "A" is the one needing help, how stupid must he be to consider reality and facts as what really happen, unlike guy "B" who wisely consider his own opinion is more relevant than the reality.
JayrBars, 05 Sep 2020Now you have the nubia.
About what you want, may be in the future.
If you say you dont hav... moreThe Nubia Z20 is not the only one nor the first, though I am still waiting for a Z30.
A second display on the back isn't necessarily the most practical/beloved compensation, many would prefer just no front camera without anything to make up for it.
And no, this is NOT about being a minority, that's like the 3.5mm Jack which was removed actually because a huge amount of peoples use it, the point was that, Apple fans are loyal enough to stay even with this important feature being removed, but their potential loss would be way surpassed by all the peoples forced to buy their wireless solutions, if the Jack was not that widely used, they wouldn't have any reasons to remove it in the first place, this was to force those who would keep using wired audio equipment and therefor not buy the additional and overly expensive (and probably highly inflated price with a huge margin to be made) wireless things.
Clearly disproving that number or demande have anything to do with what is actually available in the Smartphone industry, if tomorrow an iPhone 12 with no front camera, 3D facial recognition on the back and a bluetooth camera was to be released, everyone would praise it and it wouldn't encounter much more opposition than the notch or the removal of the Jack, and other brands would follow, the front camera is actually a single marketing decision away from being removed, regardless how many people like or want it.
A HUGE minority want that, and almost everybody would accept it anyway.
Companies don't know it better because they simply don't care about it, as I said, the reason being that by pure egocentrism, everytime a user make a suggestion, there need to be idiots complaining and fighting it, even if it have nothing to do with them.
By the way, I purposefully, this time, talked about SOME phones with no front camera, and I got the same reaction as when I said that we should remove it from ALL phones, clearly proving that just the slight supposition that a device matching the tastes of other but not the complainer's tastes could potentially exist, is enough for them to go mad against it or at least react arrogantly and disrespectfully.
Which is exactly why user opinion and tastes aren't taken into account, because they have more important things to do than sorting out who oppose the idea because it is legitimately a bad idea that we really don't want, or if it is the stupidity of peoples just making them oppose something for the sake of disagreeing.
cheapsk8, 05 Sep 2020It hasn't been mentioned here but last year Vivo introduced the Apex 2019 concept phone t... moreYes, though this phone have some flaws/missing things.
Which is what I wanted to show off in my fictional concept phone :
First, the side capacitive thing should have been displays, and I am not talking about those waterfall shits, but real dedicated displays, so not only icons for the press features could have been displayed there, but also many additional informations can be displayed too, an extended version of the notifications bar, and possibly many other things.
Secondly, the magnetic port is a nice touch, but it isn't properly implemented, a good USB-Magnetic connector on the bottom that work with an adapter would have been better, even as a prototype, showcasing extended compatibility, same for the Jack.
Thirdly, the fingerprint scanner should have been ultrasonic, though at this time monsters like the 3D Sonic Max and its impressive scalability potential were not done/known and only Samsung with the S10 would introduce the first ultrasonic FPS on a smartphone years after, and its initial implementation was really bad, which gave it an unjustified bad reputation, but between the "tap to read", improved security, fulldisplay scalability possibility, privacy over optical ones, multiple fingers and other advantages.
Also, something like my design where the protruding borders (resulting from the display being slightly inside the body rather than flush on the surface) serve as a rugged solution and the phone doesn't need case would protecting efficiently the main and side displays, which in the case of their pressure sensitive capacitive side could be useful as a case would be clashing with such design and for real world mass production it would have ran into scratching issues on the sides.
Otherwise, this is a true glance at the possible future, and it was awesome without front camera, sadly it is not for sell.
AnonD-909757, 05 Sep 2020This isn't stupid, there are as many reasons to want one than to not want one, this is ju... moreNow you have the nubia.
About what you want, may be in the future.
If you say you dont have many alternatives, thats because not so many people (minority) want what you want, at least for now. And the companies know it better than you do.