For the last several years, 
have managed to flood the smartphone market with handset after handset. Within weeks of the release of one flagship device, either the same company or a competitor will release a new phone that steals all of the attention from all of the devices before it. Motorola, HTC and Samsung are guilty of this when it comes to smartphones in the US, and we've also witnessed similar trends picking up in the tablet space by Acer and Samsung.
That said, 2012 is shaping up to be a better year for mobile. Heading the pack is HTC, who has made a promise for less phones in the future – quality over quantity. Instead of releasing 30 phones in a 12-month span, they will focus on creating fewer phones with significantly higher quality. According to a report from Digitimes on Monday, Acer will also be jumping on the quality bandwagon.
While I have my doubts about HTC actually making the switch so quickly – their claim is to have one flagship device in the first half of 2012, yet we've already learned of three rumored high-end handsets from them – it could mean many things for the smartphone market, especially if other OEMs follow suit. In theory, what would happen?
Below are a few things we can expect if manufacturers begin to choose quality over quantity:
In recent memory, I can't recall many Android phones that have released without some sort of bug or glitch. For example, several HTC phones have come with audio bugs that make recording video with any audio a hit or miss. And when it comes to software, bugs are commonplace, especially when it comes to custom interfaces like TouchWiz, Motorola Applications Platform and Sense UI.
With a little more care and attention before leaving the workshop and with OEMs in less of a hurry to push out more and more phones, both hardware and software glitches will (hopefully) become less or a problem. I wouldn't expect them to totally disappear; it's impossible to eradicate bugs and glitches completely. But I think it's safe to say they might appear less often. And I don't imagine many will argue with that.
From the very beginning of Android, software updates have been a total mess. We assumed that the Android Update Alliance, which was formed earlier this year, would help push updates along a little quicker and ensure updates for older devices. But now that a major update has hit and every OEM has spoken on the issue, we're beginning to see that the alliance has done little fix the outstanding issues. Devices from just last year, like the Galaxy S and original Galaxy Tab, will not officially see Ice Cream Sandwich, that is, unless Samsung finds it possible in its reevaluation.
The problem has evolved from lethargy on the manufacturers' part to the inability to keep up with updates on all of the devices. It's pretty easy to realize that updating 40 different phones, each to a customized version of software, can cause the workload to start piling up. With fewer phones to update, we can at least hope that updates come quicker and to more phones. Don't hold your breath, though.
Incrementalization has been the way of Android OEMs in 2011. A perfect example is the Motorola's DROID lineup on Verzion Wireless. The DROID X2, DROID 3, DROID BIONIC and DROID RAZR all share extremely similar specifications, and aside from the horizontal sliding, physical QWERTY on the DROID 3, they all look remarkably similar, too. In short, Motorola and Verizon could have gotten away with only releasing two of these, yet they're not stopping at four. Two more are coming – the DROID RAZR Maxx and DROID 4. And it's easy to assume these will only have minor upgrades over the existing models, a better display or slightly faster clock speed on the processor.
Since all of these nearly identical devices have been launching so closely together, OEMs have been stepping on their own toes, creating competition within their own lineups. To make such intermediary devices at least a little appealing, they have been known to give flagships a sore spot. An Achilles' heel, if you will. Take the Sensation 4G as an example. It came with only 768MB RAM and 1GB built-in storage. Four months later, its successor, the Amaze 4G, released with 1GB RAM and 16GB built-in storage. The rest of the differences between the two devices are negligible.
Fewer devices would seemingly put an end to this nonsense. Instead of no increase in RAM, negligible changes in camera technology or a small jump in CPU clock speed (1GHz to 1.2GHz), we will see leaps or large strides (read: not baby steps) in technology.
While most of the side-effects of fewer phones are all benefits, there are some disadvantages to not having so many phones to choose from.
Unfortunately or us, there will be less phones to review. This isn't all negative, as it can be turned into a positive. It's just ... bittersweet. The positive side? Less phones means that individual devices will get more hands-on time, a more in-depth look and more phones can be pitted against competing devices. So instead of an abundance of reviews, there would be more time that we wouldn't normally have to focus on individual aspects of a device. And dogfights galore.
These disadvantages aren't specific to reviewers, though. It also will affect you guys, the consumers. With smaller selections to choose from, your decision making process will certainly become less convoluted. However, the chances of finding the perfect device for you are smaller. With 15 variations of a single device, the odds of at one appealing to you are pretty high. On the other hand, less variations increases the odds of you not finding the device you want. Of course, with phones that "have it all" could also solve that.
Tell me, readers. Aside from an increase in quality, what do you expect from fewer phones? Would you like to see the same device make its way to all major carriers? Faster updates? Sound off in the comments below!
View the original article here
0 Response to "What fewer Android phones could mean for consumers"
Post a Comment