Consumers just aren’t that interested in a product that’s visibly cheaper and worse than what everyone else is carrying. And that is what a smaller phone signals.
Phones are a status purchase; they all do basically the same things, but most people gravitate towards higher end phones because they offer all the fancy features. Flagship phones are all large, so that’s what you see in the marketing. Just like you’ll never see a car company put its cheapest base model on a car catalog cover.
A smaller phone tends to cut corners; it’s not just smaller, but also functionally worse. While the price might be appealing, the potential customer also knows that using said phone will mean a worse experience, and might even get them ridiculed because they got ‘the cheap one’.
So we can absolutely go back to small phones - we just don’t want to. Smaller, cheaper, worse products just don’t appeal to a status-conscious buyer. If phone manufacturers offered the same specs at different sizes, that might change. But any savvy tech buyer knows a smaller phone is worse than the bigger one.
Back in the pre-smartphone days, size was a thing companies could compete on since customers wanted small, light, distinctive designs in premium materials. Like the Motorola Razr V3. These days, that just doesn’t work.
That’s because it’s stupidly downgraded and aimed at people upgrading from the 11. It’s a no-one phone, there just to make people think, “well, the 15 is just $100 more, let’s buy that instead”. It would be a remarkable phone, if it were $200 cheaper. But Apple just can’t let an opportunity to scalp consumers go. Only Apple charges so much for a 60 Hz screen.
Yes. The 16e released only 2 days ago and it is an entry level version of the iPhone 16. And you are right, it is not that cheaper then the full-size version.
Consumers just aren’t that interested in a product that’s visibly cheaper and worse than what everyone else is carrying. And that is what a smaller phone signals.
A smaller phone is less comfortable to view things on. Most people are using their phone as their main device. Its not just a “status” thing.
Correct, as the article points out. Sites aren’t made with smaller screens in mind, and 62-68 percent of web traffic is made with phones.
Phones are not JUST a status thing, but having a better one is certainly more appealing to consumers, rather than a device that they and others know is purposefully gimped.
Consumers just aren’t that interested in a product that’s visibly cheaper and worse than what everyone else is carrying. And that is what a smaller phone signals.
Phones are a status purchase; they all do basically the same things, but most people gravitate towards higher end phones because they offer all the fancy features. Flagship phones are all large, so that’s what you see in the marketing. Just like you’ll never see a car company put its cheapest base model on a car catalog cover.
A smaller phone tends to cut corners; it’s not just smaller, but also functionally worse. While the price might be appealing, the potential customer also knows that using said phone will mean a worse experience, and might even get them ridiculed because they got ‘the cheap one’.
So we can absolutely go back to small phones - we just don’t want to. Smaller, cheaper, worse products just don’t appeal to a status-conscious buyer. If phone manufacturers offered the same specs at different sizes, that might change. But any savvy tech buyer knows a smaller phone is worse than the bigger one.
Back in the pre-smartphone days, size was a thing companies could compete on since customers wanted small, light, distinctive designs in premium materials. Like the Motorola Razr V3. These days, that just doesn’t work.
Bullshit, at least with the people I know. Literally nobody I know is interested in how much my phone cost me.
At least on the iPhone side the 12 and 13 mini were full flagships in a smaller form factor. I just wish we could go back to that
There is always the iPhone SE 3 with 4.7 inch display or the iPhone 16e with 6.1 inch display.
I had never heard of the 16e and checked their site, it will only allow comparison up to the 11, a phon from 2019. And its expensive.
That’s because it’s stupidly downgraded and aimed at people upgrading from the 11. It’s a no-one phone, there just to make people think, “well, the 15 is just $100 more, let’s buy that instead”. It would be a remarkable phone, if it were $200 cheaper. But Apple just can’t let an opportunity to scalp consumers go. Only Apple charges so much for a 60 Hz screen.
Yes. The 16e released only 2 days ago and it is an entry level version of the iPhone 16. And you are right, it is not that cheaper then the full-size version.
Its an entry iphone, I wouldnt say 16 given it shares very little with it.
I see what you mean
I will say, when a company tries sometimes they can make small work really well:
There are opportunities to make small desirable. But I know people like their big trucks, I’m sure people like their big phones too.
A smaller phone is less comfortable to view things on. Most people are using their phone as their main device. Its not just a “status” thing.
Correct, as the article points out. Sites aren’t made with smaller screens in mind, and 62-68 percent of web traffic is made with phones.
Phones are not JUST a status thing, but having a better one is certainly more appealing to consumers, rather than a device that they and others know is purposefully gimped.