On Thursday, 20 September 2018 at 05:45:52 UTC, Laurent Tréguier
wrote:
On Wednesday, 19 September 2018 at 18:14:47 UTC, Dave Jones
wrote:
Only if the new product meets all the use cases of the old
product. Again this is what you dont understand.
Why did the iPhone, and after that the smartphone industry as a
whole, completely crush the classic cell phones when they have
such a poor battery life? Smartphones don't have everything
previous phones had. The pros simply outweighed the cons.
Longer battery life is a convenience not a requirement.
You don't need a new product to do everything the previous
product did for it to be successful enough to replace it.
I used to be all about being able to replace a phone's battery
manually. With basically any newer smartphone now, you can't
anymore.
You can still buy the old brick phones with longer battery life.
Smartphones have taken over but they havent killed that market
completely.
Just because phones aren't doing everything PC's are doing
doesn't mean they can't overtake their market. All they need is
to have sufficient advantages over them, and even if you don't
think this is the case right now, the average user could very
well disagree.
Just like with removable batteries (which wasn't even a really
technical thing).
It's not about phones overtaking desktops in the market, that's
long past, it's about phones killing the desktop market
completely.
All the advantages in the world are no good if it doesnt do
something you **require** it to do. If I'm doing pro audio
Android is useless, no hardware, not enough processing power, no
DAW apps. Doesn't matter if it has an amazing screen, 3 sims,
year long battery, etc etc..
