"BCS" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]... > Hello Nick, > >>>> In and of itself, maybe. But thinness typically necessitates other >>>> design compromises, all for a "benefit" that is, as you say, petty. >>>> >>> What compromises? What is it missing that could be there if it were >>> thicker? >>> >> Compromises that often need to be made for ultra-thin devices: >> >> - Low storage space due to lack of room for hard drive. > > http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=32+gb+micro+sd&x=0&y=0 >
Ugh, don't even get me started on MicroSD. Ordinary SD is already too small if you ask me, although I still put up with it anyway. Now MicroSD, well I can't say anything about it without raising my blood pressure... Besides: http://www.microcenter.com/search/search_results.phtml?N=4294966955+4294953566&sht=Any&prt=NewProduct&; >> - Reduced variety of i/o ports. > > In this day and age, you would be hard pressed to suggest a cell phone > needs more than a 1 maybe 2 USB ports. > I consider there to be a big difference between a cell phone and a smart phone. A cell phone is for making calls, and for those, I agree with you. But a smartphone is a PDA that also makes cell calls, and that changes things. Plus, I was kind of talking both smartphone and iPad-style stuff. >> - Reduced or eliminated potential for expandability. > > Aside from a memeory card, name one things you've ever known someone else > to want to add to a phone? > - Headphone jack - Audio line-input - User's choice of portable Keyboard - TV Out (for picture/video-viewing, and there's a million different kinds of TV-Out these days) - GPS - Back before built-in cameras became common, I could have said "camera". All just off the top of my head, there's probably others.
