I think the average person wouldn't run into a meaningful problem without a case, maybe a light scratch or two somewhere if they looked closely, it's just the idea they might need a case that leads them to use one. This is probably even more true of screen protectors - which add on to this because they scratch much easier than a phone screen would, making people think "wow, it's a good thing I used a screen protector!" even if it wouldn't have been a problem for them.
Because of the above, I don't think there is anything (reasonable) smartphone manufacturers could do to make people feel like they shouldn't add one just in "case".
I never understood screen protectors. In 15 years I have never used a screen protector on any smartphone, and have also never had any scratches on the screen either.
On average, I keep the same phone for 3-4 years (current phone is an iPhone 11, coming up on 6 years old).
I use a screen protector to prevent wear to the oleophobic coating, which had noticeably degraded on my previous iPhone. I know you can also buy treatments to replace the coating on the screen itself, but I don't know how good they are, and the screen protector is easier to replace if eventually needed.
(I walk a good deal and also bike with the phone in my pocket, so it's possible my phone gets above average wear in this department.)
It’s easy to understand, when the phone accidentally drops on concrete from >1m of height there is a great chance of shattering the glass. It happens to millions of person, myself included, no matter the care it’s an accident that can cost 300$ to repair. 10$ the screen protector is worth it.
I guess you’re lucky !
I was only talking about screen protectors, not cases. I've always used some sort of case, primarily around the edges of the phone, to protect against drops. But never one that also put something over the screen.
You are really lucky. I broke several screens and my wife also (on 2nd day of iPhone 6s it fell into concrete). Since then I’ve never been without a screen protector and I break it at least 3 times a year. Maybe the screen wouldn’t have broke and the SP did ? I won’t take the risk given the price of the SP vs the pain of changing a screen.
The last time I tried to go naked the 13 pro max fell from my pocket because there is zero grip and I had a dent on the border
The lowest alternative, 13 Pro Max had double the sale volume (at 1.5x the cost), while the VAST majority chose the 6.1" models instead, how does that support the argument the desire for a >5.5" phone is from a vocal minority? The articles themselves directly state the sales of small models are poor, it's not the other way around no matter how you spin the charts.
The markets for smaller phones and the larger Pro Max models look like they’re roughly in the same order of magnitude. It doesn’t look like a negligible demand that is not worth serving.
FOSS mobile hardware vendors already have a hard enough niche to target, "people who say they want small phones" is just fuel to the already burning fire for them. Each niche they add does not add the user base together, it multiplies the userbase percentages.
I agree it won't be awful by any means, but it's relatively meaningless to directly compare DPIs of screens which have different typical viewing distances.
If it were just that "higher number sells better" reasoning then it wouldn't make sense the density increases had a pretty hard stop after ~2014. Same with why 8k TV hype died down but 4k TV became mainstream - it's about the genuine limit for a typical person at typical TV viewing distance unless they have an absolutely massive TV.
I always thought Samsung had a clever approach with a toggle to just render at the lower resolution if you wanted the lower rendering load. Then you still only need to develop 1 cutting edge screen with all of the latest improvements but it will please both use cases well as the cost overhead of shipping models 2 separate screens would.
> why 8k TV hype died down but 4k TV became mainstream
People also stop getting eight kids the generation after child mortality plummets. The experience I had until 1080p on computer screens (not 6 inch phones) is that it added sharpness in video reproduction. I can't tell you why people then went for 4k, besides speculating it's the same phenomenon. We've also got a 4k TV simply because there was no additional cost for the featureset we were looking for anyway, and it was the biggest TV we've ever had so it didn't sound weird to have more pixels in it, but indeed, now that I own it, I can say there was no point and I'll not upgrade to a higher pixel density if there were to be a price difference or other downside (like how power draw would show up on the energy label)
Regarding the Samsung rendering thing, is that on TVs specifically? Because I don't think I've noticed that on my Samsung phones, where the impact ought to be more noticeable than for a wall-powered device
That's not the read I got from Andrew's comment, or the situation. If the poster doesn't feel knowledgeable/able enough to collaborate in the community discussions (like the issue links, which don't require contributing code) then doing individual blog posts instead is only going to give even worse results for everyone.
Blog posts are collaboration (1). I did get the sense that Andrew doesn't see it that way. (And for this post in particular, and writegate in general, I have been discussing it on the discord channel. I know that isn't an official channel).
My reasons for not engaging more directly doesn't have anything to do with my confidence / knowledge. They are personal. The linked issues, which I was aware of, are only tangentially related. And even if they specifically addressed my concerns, I don't see how writing about it is anything but useful.
But I also got the sense that more direct collaboration is welcome and could be appreciated.
(1) - I'm the author of The Little MongoDB Book, The Little Redis Book, The Little Go Book, etc... I've always felt that the appeal of my writing is that I'm an average programmer. I run into the same problems, and struggle to understand the same things that many programmers do. When I write, I'm able to write from that perspective.
No matter how inclusive a community you have, there'll always be some opinions and perspectives which get drowned out. It can be intimidating to say "I don't understand", or "it's too complicated" or, god forbid, "I think this is a bad design"; especially when the experts are saying the opposite. I'm old enough that I see looking the fool as both a learning and mentoring experience. If saying "io.Reader is too complicated" saves someone else the embarrassment of saying it, or the shame of feeling it, or gives them a reference to express their own thoughts, I'm a happy blogger.
I don't even like Zig but I read your blog for the low level technical aspects. I agree completely that blog posts are collaborative. I read all kinds of blogs that talk about how computers work. I can't say if it brings value to the Zig people, but it certainly brings value to me regardless!
Author is posting honest and respectful critique of Zig features on their blog. That is a valid way of collaborating in the community discussion. The project github isn't the only place where discussion is allowed to take place.
The claim isn't you should shut down your blog and only talk on GitHub to be engaged with the community. Zig has tons of communities https://github.com/ziglang/zig/wiki/Community and, of course, blogs also play a part in the overall community too. Picking a single engagement option is probably always a poor choice, but that option being your personal blog alone would be one of the poorest. That's where the feeling of lack of collaborating with the community is coming from, not that they specifically don't engage in GitHub alone.
Make blog posts, it's great!, but if you don't think you're the expert then they'll go a lot farther for everyone if you put 5% of the work of doing so into engaging with the community about it for additional insights first. That's a fair note to make, though I agree the ending could be less passive aggressive about those who don't want to engage with the community.
FWIW as someone with only a pinky toe in the Zig community, it's quite engaging and interesting to see a blog post like this. It makes me want to learn more, and reminds me that there's a wide tent here (that might even include me!), not just a tight-knit "inside" group.
> Kinda wish the author would attempt to collaborate rather than write stuff like this [...] but, whatever, it’s their blog so they can do what they want.
...feels like passive aggression. In particular the "stuff like this" (like what?) and "but, whatever" felt very unnecessary and the whole "I wish he'd collaborate on my terms" is IMO uncalled for.
Yeah, I could see it being better without that portion of the final sentence. At the same time, I think opening "What a terrible way to take constructive feedback" is at least equally as grating a way to engage about it - but at the end of the day we're all humans, not saints, and it seems clear to me both comments are well intentioned and decently put as a whole. Same as me, I'm sure if I look back at these comments in 3 days there will be parts I would have changed, but overall I'd probably thing they were decent instead of terrible.
I'm glad you made the note about that part though, I agree with it and we can always do better.
Meh, I have the impression the blog author really hates Zig's new Writer (fair, I disagree, but fair), but his criticism in this example is in my eyes slightly questionable -- it is a bug in the implementation and not a conceptual issue. He then uses quite some loaded phrasing like "I must be too dumb to understand this" and "I can't be really too dumb can I?" which I think ruin the discussion (as do the titles. He failed to convince me, for instance, that the new Writer was inherently unsafe by design). It feels like a "Look I told you!!! You run into bugs like this!!!" which is not helpful for a feature/refactor that was already advertised as complex and not fully implemented or verified.
Disclaimer: I'm a zig fanboy and do all my hobby stuff in it
HEIF is just the usual container for AVIF encoded data, similar to how AV1 encoded data might commonly be in an MP4 or MKV container. HEIF might easily get conflated with HEIC, which is Apple's implementation of HEIF specifically for HEVC encoded data. Too many damn "HE"s, if you ask me.
If you run "strings" you should see "av01Image" pretty early on in the HEIF header, which is what signals it's really an AVIF file. Tools like "file" may possibly not be updated to look for that yet, so could just report the container alone.
Huh, my image viewer claimed it's HEIC specifically. My camera also seems to conflate HEIC and HEIF in the settings. It provides HEIF as a format option, when I guess it should be specifying which codec is actually being used. I had no idea HEIF isn't tied to just HEIC though.
Because I didn't feel like parsing the HEIF to check it's actually AVIF. I'm pretty sure browsers aren't that bothered about the file extension or MIME type for images.
I have a hard time believing it's about the complexity of having a toggle button to switch to "one time purchase" during checkout. The ability to make such a selection is the option which enables the product to be accessible to more users, not the other way around.
I think you'd be hard pressed to get most people to agree to that strict of a definition where Norway wouldn't be considered a democracy. It's easy to pick at things like "someone has immunity in court" as unequal, but that kind of thing is typically considered compatible with a democracy. Same with grants, titles, ceremonial roles, etc - so long as the voters choices about such things aren't being suppressed it's pretty solidly in the "democracy" camp - which isn't mutually exclusive with having a decorative king.
I'm not sure what the reference to "democracy is for peace" is about, unless you count Nazi occupation and rule as the same government or something.
I'm not sure which particular passage you're referring to, but keep in mind that page is basically a puff piece about the kings ceremonial roles. He does not actually control the government, act as the leader of the military, etc in the same way his title is "king" but any non-ceremonial rights belong to the elected prime minister. If he tried to name someone else as prime minister during the transition it wouldn't actually mean anything as it's a ceremony. Etc, unless you feel there is a specific passage which the role is not ceremonial, but it's difficult to explain how the whole thing is in response to a single link and no context.
Because of the above, I don't think there is anything (reasonable) smartphone manufacturers could do to make people feel like they shouldn't add one just in "case".
reply