Are cel (cell?) phones being positioned or have been postioned to become a commodity? Are they commoditized?
I know, not the dictionary definition of the word, but I think the concept might fit
Discrete cell phones are on their way out. We’ll soon have communications links implanted in our bodies.
At which point they will be discreet cell phones.
And at which point WE will be commoditized, whether we are discrete or discreet.
They are definitely a commodity. All do the same things. Some have more bells and whistles, but don’t perform any function that any other cell phone can do.
You buy your smart phone like any other commodity: the one with the lowest cost.
The one with the lowest cost which meets your requirements. Cost alone isn’t a good way to buy.
But they are definitely a commodity now. When we were in Hong Kong our not super expensive hotel lent us one as a standard part of the room - like shampoo.
What are the main differences between the most and least expensive phones?
Phones have plenty of sensors but what kinds of emitters or effectors could they have that could be useful?
Could the phones in an area or in a population combine their sensor data or transmissions in useful ways?
Like, what kind of interesting interactions can just 2 phones have together if they cooperate in some in/direct way?
As more and more of our data is stored in the cloud, the physical devices we use to create and access it become less important. We’re not quite there yet, but I can see a time, soon, where nothing is stored on our devices, at which point they will have become completely disposable and commoditised.
Think about Chromebooks - assuming you’re using them as Google intended, you can throw yours in the trash, sign into a new one, and within moments all your stuff will be right there and available. We’ll get there with phones, too.
Not the sensors and displays/transmitters though. Even if the data and processing are all server-side, there can still be much to gain from an information technology Swiss Army knife.
When I worked at Sun, we had SunRays, thin clients that did exactly this. You didn’t bring a laptop to a conference room, you logged into the machine there and had your session exactly. There was software that let you do this at home. You traveled across the country or the world, logged in, and it was like you never left.
We had these over 15 years ago.
I don’t even have a cell phone. I still have my landline. When I want to go on-line I simply use my iMac at home (or at work during break/lunch).
Yep - the sexy new hotness turns out to be thin client computing. :). Where I work, we do something very similar with Citrix and Wyse “zero client” machines.
One interesting development - which doesn’t seem to have caught on yet - is the concept of plugging your phone into docking station connected to a proper keyboard, mouse and screen. The phone knows when it is plugged into the dock, and emits a proper desktop-style user interface. That has a certain amount of compelling logic to it - a flagship smartphone has plenty of power for most people’s day to day computing tasks. If you’re running iT for a large number of users, giving them a single device which is highly portable when they’re not in the office, but works like a proper computer when they are seems quite appealing. Microsoft played with this with their “Continuum” feature in the now defunct Windows Phone, and Samsung’s “Dex” feature is pretty much the same thing.
I realise this is the polar opposite of the future I confidently predicted a few posts above. 
Thanks, that guy.
Probably most new phones Android support USB OTG (On The Go.) Plug in a cheap, simple adapter and you can use a keyboard and mouse (but not a monitor.)
I think the concept you want is simply “genericized,” because even if everythimg is done in the cloud, it’s still a unitary device that itself can function well or not.
What people are calling ‘phones’ are actually palmtop computers which can emulate a cell phone. These palmtops have the same computing power as desktops, stereo speakers, microphones, cameras, and physical inputs. They are designed primarily as a media portal, with voice communications being far less important. That means the definition as a ‘phone’ is erroneous, because they are not used for talking anymore. Try finding a phone that does not have web access.
Mini phones such as this one are incredibly popular around the world.
They are just a basic phone phone. People like the small size (and this one is large compared to some out there).
Plus you have less worries about pre-installed mal/spy-ware since they don’t have a lot of functionality.
Regarding differences in phones, one of the surprisingly big ones is how much memory they have. Given that 128GB on a SD card or USUB 3.0 stick is cheap, it’s weird how little memory some phones have. And if you want a decent amount of memory they charge an amazing amount extra.
(And no, I will not put my data on a cloud.)
Screen resolution is becoming less of an issue. Battery life and processor speed differences still count but many people don’t pay attention to that.
The “talking to other people” thing is the app I used the least.
I find cheap smart phones to be less functional than the more expensive ones. Screens aren’t as crisp or bright, apps are slower, touch functions aren’t as reaponsive. Serious question . . .is that psychosomatic?