• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

One trend I want Android manufacturers to copy

Hadron

Hadron

Spacecorp test pilot
VIP Member
The last Android phone I was mostly comfortable handling was my HTC One (m7) from 2013. Even that could really have done with being a couple of mm narrower if I was going to use a case. The Pixel 2, which is small by current standards, I cannot type on one-handed at any speed because reaching my thumb right across the screen requires holding it too precariously. But that's about as small as current androids of any quality get.

So I was just doing the sums for the iPhone 12 mini: it's 4mm narrower than my old HTC, which is about perfect for me, while the screen is only 1mm narrower (so a size I know I can live with). But there is nothing remotely like this in Android.

So I'm hoping this thing sells well enough to persuade some Android manufacturers to copy the idea. I really don't want to have to choose between platform and ergonomics, especially since I know I can adapt to a different platform, while ergonomics are what they are.
 
I've tried to gradually adapt to larger phones, I honestly have, but it doesn't work for me. I use phones one-handed most of the time, and would by preference do so even more if the ergonomics allowed. I rarely watch videos on them (tablets, laptops and TVs all do that better than any phone), can read smaller screens just fine, so there's very little real advantage to me in a larger phone and definite disadvantages.

I always say that I don't want a phone that's > 70mm wide, but the truth is that I'd prefer one that is significantly less than that. It's just that that hasn't been an option for a few years, while this year Apple are offering it. And while I don't want to get into all of Apple's stupid UI design (having to fill screens from the top, i.e. the hardest place to reach? No system-wide back gesture?) or locked-down BS, the simple fact is that they are now offering something the size I want, and no Android manufacturer is doing that. So I hope that changes before my battery dies completely...
 
checkout the note series especially either the note 9 or 10. they actually have a one handed mode. with a simple gesture you can enter it. plus there are other one handed apps that you can download as well.

i tried going to the s7 edge which had a much narrow and smaller screen then the note series that i had to go back to the note series. i can't deal with smaller screens.
 
No, it really doesn't work for me. If one-handed use was an occasional thing then something to contract the UI into a corner might work. But it isn't: it's my preferred way of working, and it's the overwhelming majority of my usage. So what I need is a phone that's comfortable to hold and use that way, not a workaround for a device that isn't.

In this I'm just the opposite of you: I can't deal with large phones. I don't have a use for one, they are more awkward in the hand and in the pocket, and I simply find them unappealing (which sounds trivial, but for a very personal item which you use so much is actually quite significant). Which is why I hope that some android manufacturers will notice the same thing Apple have.
 
i will say this my note 10+ has put holes in my jeans. now these jeans are not skinny jeans, but loose fit ones. and there are holes where my phone rests in my pocket.

my hopes is that the foldable phones will progress where it can be small but then be huge when you need it. the z fold 2 by samsung is pretty cool, but i want to wait and see what the next gen will be like. might buy it when i'm up for an upgrade.
 
Yeah, I'm aware of the 5 II, and it has many merits. But it's no narrower than my old HTC (and with a glass sandwich design definitely needs a case in addition) and the length is a drawback in the pocket. So it's still not quite what I'm after, though better than most current offerings.

In fact I have considered whether the Pixel 4a or 5 could work without a case, since they have ditched the silly glass backs. If so they may work better for me than the 5 II, even though the Xperia is slightly narrower. But I'd need to actually handle one before I could judge, which I've not had the opportunity to do yet.
 
Last edited:
I have run the full guantlet in phone sizes, at least most of them.

My first being a Motorola Brick, as they were widely known.
I even had an extended capacity battery for that thing.
It has an extendable antenna, and when you flip open the key cover, it is the size of an old 900mhz cordless phone.

Then they got smaller snd smaller, until losing the stupid thing became a daily occurance.

Now, as far as external perimeter size, they are back to where they started.

Now they have 'smartwatches'.
I bet that these will, if they stick around, eventually become the devices for the onehanders out there.

But for those of us with bad eyes and forgetful minds, the larger phones are kind of nice.

Yeah, so they suck in a pocket.
So do keys and change.

Just get a nice case with a beltclip.
 
For me they suck in use, and I can't make my hands larger. Anyway I've no problem with large phones being available, just with nothing else being available.

The usability issue didn't arise with the early 90s phones because (a) you only had a keypad, you weren't reaching right across for little icons, and (b) they were actually much narrower than any current phone: my Nokia 2140 was 56mm wide, which is almost 1.5cm less than the "small" Pixel 5. They may have taken up a lot of pocket space (and I did have a belt clip on my first one's case, though was glad to get away from that), but there was no problem with use - and as all they did was calls and SMS you didn't use them as much anyway (the battery wouldn't take too much active use anyway).
 
Hadron said:
For me they suck in use, and I can't make my hands larger. Anyway I've no problem with large phones being available, just with nothing else being available.

The usability issue didn't arise with the early 90s phones because (a) you only had a keypad, you weren't reaching right across for little icons, and (b) they were actually much narrower than any current phone: my Nokia 2140 was 56mm wide, which is almost 1.5cm less than the "small" Pixel 5. They may have taken up a lot of pocket space (and I did have a belt clip on my first one's case, though was glad to get away from that), but there was no problem with use - and as all they did was calls and SMS you didn't use them as much anyway (the battery wouldn't take too much active use anyway).
Click to expand...

SMS?
You lucky devil!
You had the deluxe version, and a premium plan!

SMS was not even an option on my first cell.

I was lucky enough to be able to make a rudementary rendition of The Ol' Gray Mare come through the speaker from the touch tone sounds!
 
puppykickr said:
SMS?
You lucky devil!
You had the deluxe version, and a premium plan!

SMS was not even an option on my first cell.
Click to expand...
As I recall SMS wasn't available in the US at all when I was first using it. It originated with GSM, and at that time the US networks were switching from AMPS to either CDMA (which got SMS quite a bit later) or D-AMPS (aka "TDMA", where I don't recall when or whether it got it).

But one of those non-technical differences between our sides of the Pond is that having access to SMS only on some tariffs or as a paid extra never caught on here. I suspect that's because some of our networks made the calculation from the start that it was more profitable to have everyone sending messages (at a per-message charge back then) rather than a few people paying extra for the option, and that made the "only available on premium tariffs" model unviable for everyone.
 
Hadron said:
As I recall SMS wasn't available in the US at all when I was first using it. It originated with GSM, and at that time the US networks were switching from AMPS to either CDMA (which got SMS quite a bit later) or D-AMPS (aka "TDMA", where I don't recall when or whether it got it).

But one of those non-technical differences between our sides of the Pond is that having access to SMS only on some tariffs or as a paid extra never caught on here. I suspect that's because some of our networks made the calculation from the start that it was more profitable to have everyone sending messages (at a per-message charge back then) rather than a few people paying extra for the option, and that made the "only available on premium tariffs" model unviable for everyone.
Click to expand...

What I actually meant was that the device itself was not capable of SMS.
Not even a calculator.

Lol, I used AMPS right up until they literally pulled the plug on it.

Because of how it worked out, my cellular company had to provide me with a phone that was compatible with the 'new' digital technology.
Service went to poop for years afterwards.
Analog was so much more powerful from a per device point of view.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom