It’s time to bring back the dumb phone(theverge.com)
theverge.com
It’s time to bring back the dumb phone
http://www.theverge.com/2017/1/31/14450710/bring-back-the-dumb-phone
47 comments
This is how I use my smartphones! My iPhone 5S lasts around 4 days with that kind of usage. Whenever I need the occasional email, photo or GPS app, I know it's there..
This is how I use my phone. And when it came time to buy a new phone, I wasn't justified in buying an iPhone that I wouldn't use, so I got a cheap Nexus from Google Fi.
I hear about people freaking out about the current state of things but I'm feeling just dandy. It actually kind of feels like an episode of the twilight zone.
I hear about people freaking out about the current state of things but I'm feeling just dandy. It actually kind of feels like an episode of the twilight zone.
That's how I use my phone, for the most part.
It still stresses me out, though, because glass keyboards just suck. I miss my Blackberry.
It still stresses me out, though, because glass keyboards just suck. I miss my Blackberry.
Exactly how i use it for last two years :P
> Think back to those old school Nokias with mechanical flips and switches that felt so satisfying to just open and close.
This speaks to something I find myself missing more and more: tactile user interfaces.
Think of an old flip phone. It starts ringing. How do you answer the call? You snap the phone open. How do you hang up? Snap it closed.
That is a really beautifully usable interface! It's made up entirely of actions you can do with your eyes closed. Those actions are big and broad, not subtle at all, so they don't require much of your attention. They map directly to our intuitive understanding of how things work (open = in use, closed = not in use). You can teach them to someone without using a single word.
Now we've replaced that (and everything else) with a new interface: tapping at a smooth sheet of glass. And that interface has none of the appealing qualities the old flip phone did: it's fiddly and fussy, you have to give it your full attention to avoid hitting the wrong button, it requires learning a bunch of new metaphors, and so forth. Technologically it's much more advanced, but none of that technology actually goes towards making the user's life easier.
We replaced a pickup truck with a moon rocket. The moon rocket may be a marvel, but which would you rather use to haul your groceries home?
This speaks to something I find myself missing more and more: tactile user interfaces.
Think of an old flip phone. It starts ringing. How do you answer the call? You snap the phone open. How do you hang up? Snap it closed.
That is a really beautifully usable interface! It's made up entirely of actions you can do with your eyes closed. Those actions are big and broad, not subtle at all, so they don't require much of your attention. They map directly to our intuitive understanding of how things work (open = in use, closed = not in use). You can teach them to someone without using a single word.
Now we've replaced that (and everything else) with a new interface: tapping at a smooth sheet of glass. And that interface has none of the appealing qualities the old flip phone did: it's fiddly and fussy, you have to give it your full attention to avoid hitting the wrong button, it requires learning a bunch of new metaphors, and so forth. Technologically it's much more advanced, but none of that technology actually goes towards making the user's life easier.
We replaced a pickup truck with a moon rocket. The moon rocket may be a marvel, but which would you rather use to haul your groceries home?
Take a look at the old Star Trek (TOS) shows. Bunch of blinking lights and buttons. Seems idiotic, facile.
But why wouldn't the goal of controlling a starship be best put into physical buttons with lighted indicators? The physicality of the interface limits the complexity of the system. The physical movements of interacting with the interface is something that can be taught, observed, and coached. One look at a bridge full of panels could tell an experienced eye the entire state of the system, including what people were currently working on. These are all seismically important improvements over the same bridge with 15 officers staring at their smart phone.
The old 60s TV set designers got it right, though probably by accident. :)
I really believe with modern interface design we've went down a bit of a rat hole here.
But why wouldn't the goal of controlling a starship be best put into physical buttons with lighted indicators? The physicality of the interface limits the complexity of the system. The physical movements of interacting with the interface is something that can be taught, observed, and coached. One look at a bridge full of panels could tell an experienced eye the entire state of the system, including what people were currently working on. These are all seismically important improvements over the same bridge with 15 officers staring at their smart phone.
The old 60s TV set designers got it right, though probably by accident. :)
I really believe with modern interface design we've went down a bit of a rat hole here.
One of the best phones I ever had was the Samsung SCH-i760 [1]. It had Windows Mobile with a touch screen and a stylus that expanded out of the side, but also had a physical number pad and a slide out keyboard. All the benefits of a smartphone, but you could also answer, hang up, and dial without looking at it. I'd buy an Android phone in that form factor in a heartbeat.
[1] http://www.phonearena.com/phones/Samsung-SCH-i760_id1897
[1] http://www.phonearena.com/phones/Samsung-SCH-i760_id1897
I had similar feelings about my Palm Pre, though they missed a trick on that one by not letting you pick up and disconnect from calls by sliding the keyboard open and closed. That seemed like such a natural extension of the flip-phone paradigm that I was amazed they didn't go for it.
I really really miss the Blackberry keyboard, but not a lot of other things about BB. :(
Why not just have the self control to not use the phone 24/7 .... edit: turning off notifications helps a long way with this, other than text message or phone calls
For most people, effective "self control" is really placing yourself in situations that don't tempt you, or don't make it easy for you to slip up. [Effective, long-term] Self control happens _before_ the situation, not during.
I love me some chocolate chip cookies, and if there are any in the house I might ignore them when I'm rested, or full, or energized. But at some point I'm going to be tired and hungry and feeling lazy, and those cookies will begin to disappear.
Set up your environment to help you make good decisions.
I love me some chocolate chip cookies, and if there are any in the house I might ignore them when I'm rested, or full, or energized. But at some point I'm going to be tired and hungry and feeling lazy, and those cookies will begin to disappear.
Set up your environment to help you make good decisions.
It may also help to set a lengthy screen-unlock password, might break that 'urge'.
> Why not just have the self control to not use the phone 24/7
I completely agree that turning of notifications is incredibly valuable, and I do this myself. That being said, it's not that easy for many people who are tied to email or Slack or anything else.
If self control were as simple as throwing a switch, we'd all be Olympian heroes of might and mind, and apps/smart phones are just another example of a "utility" that preys on human weaknesses.
I completely agree that turning of notifications is incredibly valuable, and I do this myself. That being said, it's not that easy for many people who are tied to email or Slack or anything else.
If self control were as simple as throwing a switch, we'd all be Olympian heroes of might and mind, and apps/smart phones are just another example of a "utility" that preys on human weaknesses.
It's crazy how addictive our media has become.
Because hacking your attention works. It's like saying "I'm not susceptible to cigarettes so all that anti-smoking stuff is unnecessary."
I know I'm not alone here in occasionally considering going back to a non-smartphone.
But then I think...
What if I notice a wild looking tree on a routine walk and would like a picture? Now I have to carry a camera with me.
I get an urge to listen to a podcast about the history of the Korean War, or how the Federal Reserve works. Now I need an iPod too.
In the sake of being minimal and less distracted, I have to carry around additional devices, even if its for activities that aren't necessarily mindless and attention robbing.
But then I think...
What if I notice a wild looking tree on a routine walk and would like a picture? Now I have to carry a camera with me.
I get an urge to listen to a podcast about the history of the Korean War, or how the Federal Reserve works. Now I need an iPod too.
In the sake of being minimal and less distracted, I have to carry around additional devices, even if its for activities that aren't necessarily mindless and attention robbing.
> ... and would like a picture ... get an urge to listen to a podcast about the history ... In the sake of being minimal and less distracted.
That sound like you are distracted pretty often.
That sound like you are distracted pretty often.
I think the point is not being a slave to your impulses in general, and not just to the mindless ones.
One thing I still like about dumb phones is how rugged they are. I have an old Nokia (circa 2004) in a drawer at home that feels like I could drop it from twice my height without it suffering significant damage. I can't say the same about any smartphone, when I can drop one from hip-height and its cover, battery, and body slide on the ground all in different directions.
Been using a dumb phone for 5 years since giving up my iphone 3. Never looked back. My wife has a smart phone which is great for Yelp, maps and other modern necessities.
Honestly a dumb phone + data hotspot would be ideal for me. I could see this pairing well with wearables that provide the interface instead of traditional phone screens.
Agreed. Chips are cheap. My attention is not. Instead of cramming more and more chips into a device that does everything, the easy win here is owning multiple devices that do one thing and only one thing. Then physically carrying whatever thing I need to do.
What we're seeing in tech is that multi-purpose devices aren't being built because consumers have some dire need for a tiny thing that has super powers, no matter what the ads say. They're being built because it provides one target and a walled garden to deploy addictive content to in order to make money. Tactically it's a great deal for the consumer, but strategically and over the long-run this is not in the interests of the consumer at all. It's in the interests of the industry.
What we're seeing in tech is that multi-purpose devices aren't being built because consumers have some dire need for a tiny thing that has super powers, no matter what the ads say. They're being built because it provides one target and a walled garden to deploy addictive content to in order to make money. Tactically it's a great deal for the consumer, but strategically and over the long-run this is not in the interests of the consumer at all. It's in the interests of the industry.
Smartphones work because you do one thing at a time. Adding a basic camera for example leverages the existing storage, battery, processor, screen, case, etc.
Agreed. They also provide a common platform for multiple accessories to be used to create engaging interaction.
Again, chips are cheap. If I want to take a picture I'll pick up a camera. If I really, really need to make myself look like a clown while I record a video to a social feed, I'll use a smartphone.
Guess which of those is more productive. (In general and over the entire population. Of course there are dozens of examples of these same ingredients being used in a productive manner, but even then, after a proof-of-concept, if it really has economic value I think I'd rather separate it from all of that other stuff)
Again, chips are cheap. If I want to take a picture I'll pick up a camera. If I really, really need to make myself look like a clown while I record a video to a social feed, I'll use a smartphone.
Guess which of those is more productive. (In general and over the entire population. Of course there are dozens of examples of these same ingredients being used in a productive manner, but even then, after a proof-of-concept, if it really has economic value I think I'd rather separate it from all of that other stuff)
There is a lot of utility with a basic camera. Taking a picture of a poster/whiteboard/whatever for example let's you capture that information without much effort or fear of writing the wrong thing down. I started doing this with my old flip phone with a terrible camera.
Further, the form factor for a ultra tiny phone does not really work out. A cellphones the size of a pencil is easy to build, but they would be far less user friendly when making phone calls.
Finally, you can get a smartphone for 60$ with all this stuff so I don't see the advantage to skipping it as you want something around that size anyway.
Further, the form factor for a ultra tiny phone does not really work out. A cellphones the size of a pencil is easy to build, but they would be far less user friendly when making phone calls.
Finally, you can get a smartphone for 60$ with all this stuff so I don't see the advantage to skipping it as you want something around that size anyway.
[deleted]
That's not a win!
A win is having a decent quality camera, audio player and mapping device in one slim and light unit in my pocket, rather than having to make a mental effort to remember which one I need when, and have more pockets, charge more devices etc etc
A win is having a decent quality camera, audio player and mapping device in one slim and light unit in my pocket, rather than having to make a mental effort to remember which one I need when, and have more pockets, charge more devices etc etc
Just switched to a dumb phone a couple of weeks ago. The only online stuff I do now is from a laptop.
At first I felt some Internet withdrawal symptoms, but those are dissipating rapidly. I'm hoping to get to a state of existence by spring where the only time I go online is when I absolutely must (for email or to pay certain paperless bills, for example).
I am already feeling much calmer and more focused. I do not feel as though I am missing out on anything. Family and friends can still reach me with a phone call or an SMS text (no multimedia on this phone!).
I highly recommend it for anyone who is feeling the urge to unclutter their mind.
At first I felt some Internet withdrawal symptoms, but those are dissipating rapidly. I'm hoping to get to a state of existence by spring where the only time I go online is when I absolutely must (for email or to pay certain paperless bills, for example).
I am already feeling much calmer and more focused. I do not feel as though I am missing out on anything. Family and friends can still reach me with a phone call or an SMS text (no multimedia on this phone!).
I highly recommend it for anyone who is feeling the urge to unclutter their mind.
Reading all those comments how a life without a phone isn't possible makes me feel real old.
Hey, here's a radical idea; leave your phone at home alltogether.
I really like the look of the MP01 by Punkt:
https://www.punkt.ch/en/products/mp01-mobile-phone/
There are two features that would be very hard for me to give up though: maps and streaming music.
Unfortunately I have a feeling that "must haves" are different enough from person to person to make a semi-smart phone impossible.
https://www.punkt.ch/en/products/mp01-mobile-phone/
There are two features that would be very hard for me to give up though: maps and streaming music.
Unfortunately I have a feeling that "must haves" are different enough from person to person to make a semi-smart phone impossible.
> Unfortunately I have a feeling that "must haves" are different enough from person to person to make a semi-smart phone impossible.
Indeed, my "must haves" are pretty different -- I can live without maps (I can get around NYC pretty easily without looking at a map) and I don't even use streaming music as it is (I wouldn't mind carrying around an MP3 player). Hell, I could even go without a camera and it'd be fine.
What I'd want, though, is Facebook Messenger in addition to text messaging. Too much of my communication is based around it to have to go back to text messaging.
Also, as much as I hate to admit it, apps like Venmo really do make my life easier, and apps like Tinder seem to have become tragic necessities for 20-somethings in the modern world...
Indeed, my "must haves" are pretty different -- I can live without maps (I can get around NYC pretty easily without looking at a map) and I don't even use streaming music as it is (I wouldn't mind carrying around an MP3 player). Hell, I could even go without a camera and it'd be fine.
What I'd want, though, is Facebook Messenger in addition to text messaging. Too much of my communication is based around it to have to go back to text messaging.
Also, as much as I hate to admit it, apps like Venmo really do make my life easier, and apps like Tinder seem to have become tragic necessities for 20-somethings in the modern world...
I actually have similar need for a secondary phone. but Whatsapp instead of Facebook messenger.
Edit: As a matter of fact, I have been wondering why we still have old SMS and not something like SMS 2.0 messenger worldwide.
Not sure if Multiple Numbers is a thing in US or EU. My guess is that most company are sane / clever enough to have a mobile number for their Employees. But here in Asia, it is common to have more then one mobile numbers, 1 for Work and 1 for Personal. ( Hence the Dual Sim phone popularity in China )
And it should be as slim as possible. It should be Appliance like Dump Phone and iPod instead of Smartphone or iPod touch.
Edit: As a matter of fact, I have been wondering why we still have old SMS and not something like SMS 2.0 messenger worldwide.
Not sure if Multiple Numbers is a thing in US or EU. My guess is that most company are sane / clever enough to have a mobile number for their Employees. But here in Asia, it is common to have more then one mobile numbers, 1 for Work and 1 for Personal. ( Hence the Dual Sim phone popularity in China )
And it should be as slim as possible. It should be Appliance like Dump Phone and iPod instead of Smartphone or iPod touch.
€295 is ridiculous for that thing.
It doesn't support Unicode. It's too dumb.
I wish phone makers and network operators would advance the state of the art with audio quality on voice calls. Now that phone calls are data and rarely leave IP networks, it seems like a good time to work on higher fidelity voice calls.
Here's why not: Everyone has a different features sweet spot and smartphone with a few apps can cover almost all of those cases.
No fixed-function phone will gain enough market share to compete.
No fixed-function phone will gain enough market share to compete.
want a 4g dumbphone with tethering and maybe qwerty.
Anyone else remember using Twitter over SMS?
Does that still work?
Does that still work?
[deleted]
Dumb phones still have baseband processors, which are closely held carrier and oem proprietary. You can't audit them yet they're wide open to hacks, holes, backdoors and other malice.
The customer loses as usual.
The customer loses as usual.
A dumb phone is a privacy nightmare. Use a smartphone with important and privacy-minded apps only, and ditch the social stuff. Use a laptop or desktop for Twitter and the like. That's what works for me (and my phone's battery).
Are you sure it's working for you? How much control do you have over the phone and texting parts of your smartphone?
That wasn't the subject. The point is that deleting everything but the bare necessities kills the "time waster" opportunities, while being still much more useful (and privacy-minded) than a dumb phone.
Voila, a device with as many notifications as a dumb phone but the capability of being a gps, music player and camera. You'll be calmer and happier.