I abhor Apple and exclusively only use Android, but this is some bullshit. Most apps on Andoid tablets are just crude transformations of their original phone apps, while generally on iPad the apps are at least made for the platform. Not to mention iPads are more powerful hardware-wise than any Android tablet ever made. Tablets are a segment where Apple does not lose, the closest competition is probably Microsoft Surface which is just as pricey, if not more.
I hear you, but at the same time, there are so few apps I want to use on a tablet more than I’d prefer to use it on my phone – which is likewise always with me.
Reading comics, watching video, editing photos, drawing, reading meal recipes on the kitchen bench… that’s about the extent of my tablet use. Browsing social media? I’d rather do it on my phone. Productivity, notes, gaming? Even that, I’d rather do on my phone – if not my Macbook, of course.
So it’s been a pretty easy decision for me to stick with Android tablets, especially Samsung, which obviously ties in well with my S23U.
My favorite part was when she specifically stated she did not just like that the tablet has a bigger screen, and then proceeded to explain a whole list of features that only work because it’s a bigger screen lol
As an aside, it reminds me of when I thought my Galaxy Note 2 had a massive display at 5.5 inches. Fast forward to 2023 and I’m kind of wishing my S23 Ultra were a bit larger despite measuring 6.8 inches diagonally.
It’s the differences in the aspect ratio. You cannot compare screen sizes based on the diagonal alone when the aspect ratios are different. A 6.0" 20:9 screen is smaller than a 5.7" 16:9 screen. And in terms of width, the 6.5" 20:9 screen is also less wide than the 5.7" 16:9 screen, which can matter for certain things (like typing).
Also what’s not helping is the curved screen, I find it takes another few mm off in terms of usable screen area, which makes a screen feel smaller than its stated dimensions.
I really like the longer aspect ratios. My current phone with a 6" 18:9 display is just minimally wider than my old 5" 16:9. Same comfort in the hand with more screen.
The only gripe I have with completely edge-less displays is the front facing camera. Small teardrop notches or holepunch cameras make it harder to cover them without it looking bad and/or obstructing part of the statusbar.
While I realize that there are people for whom having a camera aimed at themselves is really important, I have to say that I have virtually never used the self-facing camera on a phone.
Honestly, every videoconference I’ve ever done on a computer for work could have really been done just fine with a audio-only call too.
I’d be pretty comfortable getting a phone that just drops the self-facing camera. Could just use a USB-attached webcam if I ever ran into a very rare situation where I really critically wanted the ability to videoconference on a phone.
Now, okay, that’s not true for everyone. For some people’s uses, having a self-facing camera is legitimately important. But at least for my own uses, I’d rather just have the extra pixels.
I don’t have much use for it either, but every now and then it’s nice to actually see the person you’re talking to. A grandkids-living-abroad type situation, for example.
My work needs it every now and then, and due to the nature of it (I’m not office-bound all the time), being able to have it on the phone is useful. I’d rather have a front-facing camera than not.
I do have a Galaxy tablet that seems huge to me and I was amazed to find it has better sound and video quality than my TV lol
Me too. I got the S23U and wouldn’t mind having more horizontal real estate.
that’s a long ass article just saying “I like big screens”
I prefer my phone because it fits in my pocket, thanks.
Sounds like somebody just needs bigger pockets.
I kind of am in the “large phone” camp too, but one point I’d bring up: present-day women’s fashion tends to not be as friendly to large pockets. If someone is female and doesn’t want to use a handbag for their phone, small size may be a big deal. It’s something I try to be sensitive of when I see someone complaining about large phones. If you’re a guy, getting clothing with large pockets is easy. If you’re a girl, it’s a larger constraint.
I’ve seen a lot of women in tight jeans with small pockets and the majority of a large phone hanging out the top of the pocket.
I remember reading that having storage that went beneath skirts, with a slit to access it, used to historically be really common, but the 20th century shift in fashion towards more body-fitting dresses and then pants kind of killed that.
googles
Yeah.
Do you find it frustrating that dresses and skirts hardly ever have pockets?
Even pants and jackets for women often don’t have pockets you can actually put things in.
Clothes with pockets are a relatively new phenomenon, National Galley of Victoria textile and fashions curator Paola Di Trocchio said.
“In the 17th century women and men actually had external pockets,” she told ABC Radio Melbourne’s Hilary Harper.
While women who worked would wear these pockets on the outside of their clothing for ease of access, others wore the pockets under their skirts.
The large skirts in fashion at the time meant people could hide a lot in their pockets.
By this time men’s clothes often included sewn-in pockets, because although women had begun to go out in public more “it was the men, typically, who handled money”.
Women would often carry their items in a tiny bag, called a reticule, which eventually grew to a sensible size and became the modern handbag.
As for the future, Ms Di Trocchio said there’s hope for pocket-lovers, with pockets potentially becoming larger and more common.
“Because we’ve got smartphones … either our handbags or our pockets probably, design-wise, will respond because that’s what humans are asking for, that’s what they’re desiring.”
Yeah, I absolutely meant that as a joke. I also advocate for a return to a wider variety of smaller flagships for people who prefer them.
… said nobody ever.
While I realize that there are people for whom having a camera aimed at themselves is really important, I have to say that I have virtually never used the self-facing camera on a phone.
Honestly, every videoconference I’ve ever done on a computer for woek could have really been done just fine with a audio-only call too.
I’d be pretty comfortable getting a phone that just drops the self-facing camera. Could just use a USB-attached webcam if I ever ran into a very rare situation where I really critically wanted the ability to videoconference on a phone.
Now, okay, that’s not true for everyone. For some people’s uses, having a self-facing camera is legitimately important. But at least for my own uses, I’d rather just have the extra pixels.
Only tablet I ever bought was a nexus 7 back in the day when phones were smaller. I don’t think I’d buy a tablet ever again. For reading fiction I still prefer e ink stuff like kindle. For everyday phone is fine now. And well for everything else a laptop does it’s work. My tablet has been lying around for years without being used. The form factor doesn’t seem very conducive to me for anything. Also watching movies is simply easier on a laptop cuz I don’t have to think about holding up or balancing the screen.
I have an Android tablet that I mostly use for reading text or watching movies sometimes. I do wind up using my laptop more.
I suspect that a laptop+phone might cover a lot of what she’s talking about better than a tablet.
It took Google more than a decade to dedicate some development resources to larger screens
A laptop will generally beat a tablet on screen size.
I’d still love to see the full desktop Chrome experience on tablets — rendering, extensions, search engines, and all that
Well, there’s an easy way to get the desktop Chrome experience.
Multi-window support has been a staple feature of Android’s history
Also hard to compete with a desktop on.
Landscape mode: Near useless on phones, a default on tablets
Also true of laptops.
