[HN Gopher] Piezoelectrics enable displays to provide both audio...
___________________________________________________________________
Piezoelectrics enable displays to provide both audio and touch
feedback
Author : Brajeshwar
Score : 142 points
Date : 2024-02-12 12:10 UTC (10 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (spectrum.ieee.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (spectrum.ieee.org)
| guardian5x wrote:
| So, does this still work for touchscreens, and how does it sound
| when you touch the screen while playing music?
| zaroth wrote:
| Excellent question!
|
| How _does_ it work when you're touching the screen? Obviously
| that will distort the sound by some amount...
| maximus-decimus wrote:
| Sounds like that would also make it harder to be accurate if
| your input device is vibrating.
| pbmonster wrote:
| The harder the vibrating plane, the lower the actual
| distortion.
|
| Putting a light finger on a nylon string (or a classic
| speaker membrane) makes a huge difference, a thick steel
| contrabass string doesn't really change its frequency until
| you quite forcefully push it into the fingerboard.
|
| I expect you'd have to push hard into the vibrating gorilla
| glass of a smartphone screen to influence the sound audibly.
| wkjagt wrote:
| I guess the bigger impact is when gaming, which is when there
| is sound, and you're touching the screen.
| AbuAssar wrote:
| Xiaomi Mi Mix (2016) used a Piezoelectric Speaker through the
| screen for audio calling
| gtirloni wrote:
| From what I'm able to find, it was through vibrating the metal
| frame, not the screen, and it was removed in later revisions.
| kurthr wrote:
| It was the screen, but the piezo strain was applied at the
| mounting to the frame. They really aren't separate. I believe
| I worked on this design (though not directly on the piezo)
| and it was a pain. The easiest way to have a nice solid phone
| that doesn't rattle or come apart is to laminate it together.
| You can't do that, if the front surface needs to move
| relative to the back.
|
| You need a large area (~10cm diameter) moving a reasonable
| distance (~100s um) to make a speaker work at acceptable
| volumes in the kHz frequency range.
| CrypticShift wrote:
| So last month [1] a screen "became" a camera [1], and now
| speakers. Nice.
|
| [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38881981
| Kuinox wrote:
| Speakers also usually means microphones.
| scotty79 wrote:
| At some point phones will really just become a slab of very
| complicated glass like in SF movies.
| actionfromafar wrote:
| Silicon is almost glass, so now just need some way to make the
| battery glass, too!
| weikju wrote:
| then all we need is to figure out what to do with these slabs
| of high-tech glass beyond serving ads
| scotty79 wrote:
| Ads are the ultimate goal for everything. The only way to
| avoid it is to nationalize advertising industry and ban
| private advert businesses. We did something bit similar
| with gambling. Why all those ads when single directory of
| products and services maintained from taxes could suffice
| for informing the consumers?
| twen_ty wrote:
| So IEEE is now allowing click bait articles from commercial
| vendors?
| gtirloni wrote:
| What's clickbait about this article? I thought it was very
| informative and didn't bait me into anything.
| alok-g wrote:
| The surprise for me was that the the article is authored by
| someone at Synaptics, not by someone at IEEE Spectrum.
| Perhaps this is common and it's just me who did not know.
| nickspacek wrote:
| Here is an example video I found from the author's of the
| article, Synaptics:
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyTAcVjJsd0
|
| I wondered what would happen if you were touching the screen, but
| it doesn't seem to interfere with the audio too much.
| klabb3 wrote:
| Interesting. The camera man says you can feel the vibration on
| the screen.
|
| Whether that's terrible annoying or completely fine is hard to
| say. Some things you get used to..
| elric wrote:
| Which I suppose means they will also become microphones?
| ben_w wrote:
| Sure, but the same can be said of the accelerometer and the
| camera -- the question is "how good is it at this task?" rather
| than "can it be used for this task?"
| RugnirViking wrote:
| if you could extract a best-guess from each one of these bad
| options and paired it up with some sensor fusion and signal
| processing you could probably improve the accuracy of
| whatever microphone is in there already and maybe even get
| some directional sound localisation going. Could be a fun
| research project
| visarga wrote:
| wifi sensing is also interesting, wonder what would come out
| of all of them together
| grandma_tea wrote:
| Certainly not a good one.
| iefbr14 wrote:
| Depends where you stick them on. I am using them in my diy
| raingauges and one of my first prototypes had a too thin
| surface (where the raindrops fall on) causing a light
| rainshower on my graph when someone was talking within a
| metre or 2.
| refulgentis wrote:
| You're using microphones in DIY rain gauges? Interesting,
| what does it add?
| rollcat wrote:
| Piezoelectric pickups are often used with stringed
| instruments, including classic/acoustic guitars, violas,
| cellos, etc. and sometimes also as one of the options in
| electric guitars (usually in addition to a couple of single
| or humbucker pickups). Their defining characteristic being a
| very "flat" response curve (second only to optical pickups,
| and much cheaper), they're appreciated in classical music,
| where accurate timbre reproduction is favored over giving an
| instrument "more color".
|
| What are the defining factors that would make such a
| microphone solution sub-optimal?
| pjc50 wrote:
| The phone already has a microphone. The speaker is very
| unlikely to be coupled to a digital microphone input.
| maximus-decimus wrote:
| Can't all speakers be used as a poor man's microphone?
| pjc50 wrote:
| In a technical sense, yes, but you need to think about
| what's on the other side: there will be a piezo driver
| amplifier, which may be driven directly from a digital
| output such as I2S audio from the phone ASIC.
|
| Without some sort of preamp-ADC combination wired to the
| speaker, there's no way for software on the phone to use it
| as a microphone.
| thiago_fm wrote:
| Really interesting. I wonder if this can also be used for cars
| and other appliances.
| wt__ wrote:
| TLDR/advertorial halfway through: "But we at Synaptics think that
| we've met those challenges."
| matt_s wrote:
| Awesome if they find/build some accessibility features for folks
| that need it. But I'm anticipating it will end up being louder
| speakerphone calls we unwillingly will have to listen to in
| public spaces.
| loloquwowndueo wrote:
| Argh yeah people who use their phone on speakerphone mode all
| the time drive me up the wall.
| alias_neo wrote:
| I mind those people ever so slightly less than people who
| have their normal ear piece so loud that you can hear the
| other side of their conversation so loudly and clearly that
| it's as if they were on speaker phone.
|
| Does nobody else instinctively turn the volume down to the
| lowest comfortable level for themselves to hear the other
| person when they answer a call?
| mpaco wrote:
| > Replacing traditional speakers with piezoelectric transducers
| will allow devices to be much thinner.
|
| I appreciate the fact that this technology could make mobile
| devices more durable because it has less moving parts, but I
| don't feel going any thinner than what's currently available is
| desirable from an ergonomics perspective. I just don't feel as
| comfortable holding a phone that's 7mm thick, or less.
|
| And I certainly don't think it's worth the risk of it folding in
| my pocket.
| QuadmasterXLII wrote:
| I think you've hit the nail on the head with "folding in my
| pocket." My understanding is that the current push for thinness
| is about getting a folding phone into that 7mm optimum
| Izkata wrote:
| My wallet is about 25mm thick. If a folding phone is going to
| reduce its width/length, I think I'd want the folded
| thickness to be around the same as my wallet so I can stack
| them in my pocket without one slipping past the other.
|
| This is how I used to carry my flip-phones, which were around
| that thickness which closed.
| hshsnisnsi wrote:
| Making phones thinner, and hence more expensive is in some way
| pointless. Almost everyone gets a $20 plastic case and adds
| about 3-5mm to the thickness anyway. Wouldn't it be cheaper to
| just manufacture bulkier phones with more features like ports
| and which are sturdier so you don't need a case?
| notamy wrote:
| > Almost everyone gets a $20 plastic case and adds about
| 3-5mm to the thickness anyway.
|
| It's not necessarily just about protection, it's also about
| personalisation of the exterior beyond what the manufacturer
| provides.
| phh wrote:
| No worries there. Despite all the incredible technologies
| evolution we've got, smartphones are getting wider and thinner
| every year, to pack more and more.
|
| I think thinnest smartphones era was around 2014-2016 when thin
| was touted as a feature. But then thin feature phones were hype
| in 2004, so maybe there is a 10 years cycle of going back to
| thin.
| addicted wrote:
| The possibility of it being thinner simply means you can
| maintain the current size and increase battery size.
|
| I think phones are obviously too thin already as evidenced by
| the thick covers covering nearly every one of them.
| junaru wrote:
| Or you could make them even thinner and accelerate sales of
| new devices as you inevitably bend them and its cheaper to
| just buy a new one.
| mulletbum wrote:
| This makes it sound like companies like Apple and Samsung
| are not trying to increase battery life, which is
| absolutely untrue.
| Tagbert wrote:
| For me the reason for the covers is not to prevent bending (a
| problem with too thin devices) but to prevent scrapes and
| cracks when the phone falls.
| enobrev wrote:
| Agreed. Although I took the cover off my old Samsung (s10e)
| about 18 months ago in the hopes for an excuse to replace
| it. I've dropped it and banged it on things and other such
| random potential damage so many times and there's barely a
| dent or scratch anywhere.
|
| I'm impressed and annoyed. That said, I have very much
| enjoyed not having a cover. It feels so much better in the
| pocket and in the hand
| PawgerZ wrote:
| It always surprises me how seemingly indestructible and
| simultaneously fragile phones are.
|
| I've broken two phones in my life; both of them had on
| robust cases. The first time, I knocked my phone off of
| my desk at work. It fell three feet to the carpet and
| shattered the screen. The second time, I missed my pocket
| and dropped the phone 2-3 feet. Completely shattered the
| back glass and sent a hairline crack through the screen.
|
| I've dropped my phones so many other times, in much worse
| ways (sometimes with no case), yet in these two instances
| they break. I'm almost at the point of not using cases,
| but I know my anecdotal experiences don't reflect
| reality.
| Izkata wrote:
| For me it is to prevent bending and because the material on
| the back of my phone bothers my skin.
|
| When I did my last upgrade the box was damaged and the
| phone bent at about a 20 degree angle. Made me a bit
| nervous about how sturdy they actually are.
| devsda wrote:
| > The possibility of it being thinner simply means you can
| maintain the current size and increase battery size
|
| May be but I think they will utilize the space for more
| sensors and optical camera equipment.
|
| Compared to early 2010s the current average smartphone
| battery capacity is 3-4x higher.
|
| Do we know how much of that is due to increase in average
| battery volume vs increase in energy density?
| spookie wrote:
| From an empirical assessment, volume has gotten bigger.
| Part of it stems from the devices getting bigger as well.
| However, I would wager energy density hasn't improved as
| much as the increase in volume, given that devices got
| bigger first.
|
| I think this can also be corroborated by the fact that
| there are less and less small smartphones options. And
| while there are some, they're plagued by poor battery
| performance. See latest iPhone SE.
|
| There's indeed, by this logic, reason to believe less space
| taken by other components lead to better battery life by
| the sheer volume available as a result.
| samstave wrote:
| Ive had every iPhone since launch upto the 8s+
|
| I have dropped and broken so many fn iphones - once, I had
| just picked up a new phone and went to dinner where the
| restaraunt had concrete floors... I had that phone for ~6
| hours.
|
| I dropped it and broke it because I hate cases, and the
| iphone is so damned slippery.
|
| I berated Jony Ive (I sent him an email) and told him that
| the lack of a lanyard bracket was BS. (This was also when I
| was flying a lot to asia, and so many phones had lanyard
| brackets...
|
| I think Ive gone through ~25 phones? I have a stack of
| several right here: https://i.imgur.com/QvODonY.jpeg - plus
| the one I took the pic with...
|
| I think I have several more strewn about my tech graveyard...
|
| What sucks is that I have called phone repair places what to
| do with them all, and they say they are all worthless.
|
| "Throw them out"
|
| I just feel bad for all those kids in China who died at the
| assembly line to make these worthless products requiring
| suicide nets. (Thats not a joke, that is really fn sad that
| people at Flextronics (who use to build a bunch of stuff for
| Lockheed as well) just killed themselves.)
|
| (Oh and I had a MBP that was under recall for battery fires,
| CATCH fire in my bed when I was asleep...
|
| It was also an AirBNB and I woke upto my MBP on fire.
|
| Apple held it for two months, then even though the machine
| was under recall for fire, refused to replace it telling me I
| had the option to buy a new machine at full price.
|
| They claimed that a moisture sensor went off so warranty (and
| recall) void.
|
| it took them TWO months to make that statement and try to get
| me to buy a new machine.
| lex-lightning wrote:
| you are specifically the person who should get a case. Or
| wipe your hands or something? This is an absurdly high rate
| of breaking phones. no one here has any incantations or
| runes that will safeguard you from physics
| audunw wrote:
| The covers is the very reason they need to be thin. Seems
| circular perhaps. But you really don't want the bare
| metal/glass to be the thing taking a hit when you drop your
| phone. And lots of people like to personalise their phones
| with those covers.
|
| So having phone+cover being the ideal size is realistically
| what will be best for most people.
|
| That may leave the bare phone a bit on the thin side, but
| that's a necessary trade-off.
|
| You can also combine phone and wallet and still have it be a
| nice and reasonable thickness.
| toastal wrote:
| Shaving so low was the excuse for removing the beloved 3.5 mm
| headphone jack ubiquitous most portable electronic devices. I'd
| rather folks had room for good headphones than a screen-sized
| speaker.
| graphe wrote:
| I hated it at first but having wireless headphones is
| awesome. I haven't missed my wired headphones at all since I
| got galaxy buds+ with 11hr per use. I tried the newer better
| sounding buds 2, the low battery life is atrocious (4hr).
|
| You can always use a BT repeater for headphones too, I went
| that route at first along with dongles and gave up. I miss it
| but I moved on, reluctantly.
| mulletbum wrote:
| People like to complain, that is why this is still a
| complaint.
|
| There is only one situation where wired is needed: Charging
| and Listening at the same time.
|
| Otherwise, people can still use wired headphones all they
| want, especially now with USB C headphones. Even charging
| and listening at the same time can just be done with a
| splitter.
|
| The premise is just a talking point because people want to
| use AUX. Well I still want to use VGA, doesn't mean they
| should be putting them on video cards.
| wkat4242 wrote:
| The thing is that Jack headphones are so ubiquitous. When
| you forget your plugs or the battery is dead you can just
| grab a wired set for 3 bucks.
|
| Forgetting doesn't help with adaptors which aren't really
| standardized, especially the passive ones. And the active
| ones are expensive..
|
| My work phone still has a jack plug. I don't use it much
| but the times I do use it I'm really in need of it
| because I don't have anything else to use.
| graphe wrote:
| I often use my Bluetooth headphones when my phone is
| charging, often in the next room. ;)
| nirvdrum wrote:
| Off the top of my head, here are some reasons people
| still want a headphone jack:
|
| * Invested in quality audio equipment that they'd like
| like to continue using without a crappy dongle
| * Bluetooth dongles don't have the same level of
| integration that EarPods do, for instance (e.g., button
| presses don't work the same way) * Lightning or
| USB-C headphone adapters are easy to lose track of
| * Lightning or USB-C headphone adapters are awkward
| sticking out of your phone and risk breaking the port
|
| * Dislike the environmental impact of trashing perfectly
| fine equipment
|
| * Dislike like the environmental impact of moving to a
| model of disposable equipment with non-replaceable
| batteries
|
| * Tired of the inconvenience of dropping wireless ear
| phones and not being able to find them (e.g., this
| happens frequently on flights1)
|
| * Weary of dealing with Bluetooth issues (e.g., my AirPod
| Pros randomly disconnect from my iPhone with regularity
| and I have to click multiple things to switch from my
| phone to my work laptop)
|
| It's fine if these don't apply to you, but they're a
| little more substantive than the Luddite hand-wringing
| you suggest.. And for them the trade-off to get a
| slightly slimmer phone wasn't worth it. That's not to say
| there aren't advantages to wireless headphones, but
| supporting one doesn't mean having to preclude the other.
|
| 1 -- https://www.reddit.com/r/mildlyinteresting/comments/
| 16uuyse/...
| ozzmotik wrote:
| another reason, namely the reason that I specifically do
| not use wireless headphones:
|
| due to the nature of wireless communications, real time
| audio is effectively impossible and as such there is
| almost always some amount of noticeable latency when
| performing tasks that rely on real time audio (eg music
| production). a little of latency is okay sometimes but
| the amount that wireless devices introduce is typically
| on the offer of maybe 100-200ms and when you're trying to
| play a section or some such it makes it damn near
| impossible to hit a note on the mark you're aiming for.
| wongarsu wrote:
| The thing is, you were already able to use wireless
| headphones on phones with a 3.5mm jack. Removing it didn't
| add new capabilities, it only removed a feature many people
| liked in a thinly veiled ploy to get everyone to buy
| Airpods. Sure Airpods are great, but my wired headphones
| were great too, and in many ways better.
| graphe wrote:
| We're having 2 different conversations.
|
| I'm talking about adapting to new phones, you're talking
| about why headphone jacks are good.
| bheadmaster wrote:
| You're not having 2 different conversations, he's raising
| a perfectly good point.
|
| Your argument is "new thing is good".
|
| His argument is "new thing existed before old thing was
| removed, so removing old thing didn't make new thing
| _better_ ".
| The_Colonel wrote:
| Headphone jack represents an opportunity cost - including
| it means you can't use the volume for e. g. baterry,
| camera or simply nothing (making the phone smaller).
| user_7832 wrote:
| I don't think that's happened in practice. If anything in
| recent times the smallest phones are getting bigger, and
| truly small phones (like the iPhone minis) no longer
| exist.
| The_Colonel wrote:
| So you think that the space which was previously occupied
| by headphone jack is now a hole of empty space within the
| phone?
|
| I don't believe that, either the space is used for
| something else, or the phone is in some way made smaller.
| kiba wrote:
| I have hearing aids. They double as my earphones. Why
| would I want plug in headphones?
|
| Granted, this is a weird edgecase.
| user_7832 wrote:
| It doesn't apply to you, but it applies to 99% of
| earphone/headphone users.
| sandworm101 wrote:
| >> having wireless headphones is awesome. I haven't missed
| my wired headphones at all since I got galaxy buds+ with
| 11hr per use.
|
| No. Wireless buds are evil. They get lost. They loose
| battery life over time, usually asymmetrically. And then
| there is the horror of "pairing" Bluetooth devices without
| a proper interface, holding buttons down and such. I love
| my Sony over-ear noise cancelling headphones, but when away
| from my desk I opt for wired devices every time.
| scarface_74 wrote:
| Horror of pairing? You mean you don't just open your
| case, click a button on one of your devices and it's not
| automatically paired to all of your devices connected to
| your login?
| sandworm101 wrote:
| "automatically paired" = waiting a random 5/10/15 seconds
| before all three devices agree to talk to each other.
| Then one of the three gets angry at the other two and I
| end up listening to music in my left ear as the little
| girl in my right ear says "pairing" and "disconnected"
| every few seconds.
| scarface_74 wrote:
| That's why I have AirPods (expensive) and Beats Flex
| (disposable $69). Those aren't issues I deal with between
| my iPhone, iPad, Mac, AppleTV and Apple Watch...
| jayknight wrote:
| My problems with bluetooth pairing tends to be with
| bluetooth speakers and cars. Cranking up the car and all
| of a sudden being on the phone with whoever my wife (in
| the house) is on a call with is pretty weird.
| scarface_74 wrote:
| Yeah Thad's definitely a thing. Reason #3462 I won't buy
| a car that doesn't support CarPlay
| HideousKojima wrote:
| Also my car prioritizes connecting to my phone even
| though my wife is usually the "DJ" on a drive. And
| disconnecting my phone after we've already started
| driving means my wife has to get my phone out of my
| pocket/lap and turn off Bluetooth since the car offers no
| simple way to do so other than outright unpairing my
| phone.
| graphe wrote:
| You sound emotional. Wired headphones are sometimes
| cheaper and may sound better. They are not immune to
| loss, asymmetry, or horrors such as pulling your phone
| when it's snagged and causing your phone to drop.
| ToucanLoucan wrote:
| Honestly I would've agreed with you wholeheartedly at the
| time they took away the jack, but several years on, I'm
| good with it. I've owned both the original AirPods and
| the original PowerBeats and now have a Sony WX headset
| for when I don't need buds. I've lost one... I left it on
| the hood of my car, unfortunately, my own damn fault and
| I was able to get a replacement ordered from Apple. Apart
| from that, never lost em, and in the odd event I forget
| to charge them, putting the powerbeats at least on a USB
| lead for about 5 minutes will get me roughly 70% charge
| into both beats, even if the case is dead, which is
| enough for several hours of playback time.
|
| I thought I would miss it, but I genuinely just don't
| give a shit about the lack of audio jack.
| htrp wrote:
| > I tried the newer better sounding buds 2, the low battery
| life is atrocious.
|
| Or you could have wired that last as long as your phone
| battery does.
| justsomehnguy wrote:
| It's always amusing to hear 'but now when I was deprived of
| 3.5 I'm happy with a wireless headphones!'.
|
| I used a wireless headphones when some of HN visitors
| didn't even exists, I have a plenty of experience with
| them. No, I'm not happy with wireless headphones, partially
| because my old-style wired headphones works always. Not
| just 'always, though sometimes I need to re-pair them, or
| find the charging case for a super-mega-fast-charge for 10
| minutes, or find the left one despite I swear I placed them
| both in the case' but _always_.
| krisoft wrote:
| If we are entertaining each others with stories I can
| tell you about the pains of untangling wired headphones
| or the fact that all my headphones failed due to a
| "contact" issue the jack developed. Or the number of
| times my headphones got yanked because I was walking with
| them on and the cables got entangled in something.
|
| Or how with wired headphones one needs to remove to be
| able to step away from the computer, while with a
| wireless one I can keep listening anywhere around my
| home.
| justsomehnguy wrote:
| > about the pains of untangling wired headphones
|
| First world problems. Also they still can work, so in a
| pinch you can just insert them tangled.
|
| > all my headphones failed due to a "contact" issue the
| jack developed
|
| If _all_ your headphones are susceptible for this then it
| looks like the problem is not in the headphones.
|
| > Or the number of times my headphones got yanked because
| I was walking with them on and the cables got entangled
| in something.
|
| Yep, they are wired.
|
| > one needs to remove to be able to step away from the
| computer
|
| Yes, they are wired. Are you annoyed what you need to
| stand up to step away from computer?
|
| Wired headphones has some disadvantages _compared to
| wireless ones_ , but the problem lies again in what Apple
| said 'fuck you consumers you will eat it and ask for
| more', consumers ate it and asked for more and idiots
| followed the suit, too.
|
| You know, BT (if we are talking only about _phones_ )
| headphones are an old thing, 20 years if we count only BT
| EDR. All^W Most of those years anyone _could choose the
| tech they like more_. But now Apple fanbois and you tell
| me what I need to ditch my wire headphones, because
| wireless are working better _for you_. No, it doesn 't
| work better for me. More so, I tried it multiple times
| and I can surely tell what it's not not just as an
| opinion, but backed by _my_ actual experience.
|
| And I love what I can forget my headphones for a month
| and they would still work _even if I forgot to charge
| them the last time I used them, lol_.
|
| NB: the last year I smashed my phone up to the broken
| screen, first time in my life (Ericsson A1018 doesn't
| count, it was only a battery cover clip). I smashed it
| not because it was laying on the table while I stepped
| away with my headphones already inserted both in the
| phone and my ears, but because I was quite drunk (or more
| like drunk AF) and didn't noticed that. Is this a table
| problem or my phone problem (hey, only 1+ meter high!) or
| it's my problem? While it wouldn't happen with a wireless
| ones, the common sense says it's not the headphones'
| fault.
| 2024throwaway wrote:
| > First world problems.
|
| In a thread about modern cellphone technology is
| _hilarious_.
| krisoft wrote:
| > First world problems.
|
| Second actually. But not sure how cold war allegiances
| have anything to do with the topic in question.
|
| > Yes, they are wired.
|
| That is the point. If we treat the downsides of one
| technology as given and baseline then of course the other
| technology will look deficient compared to it. But if we
| look at the pros and cons of both technologies we might
| see why people prefer one to the other.
|
| > Apple said 'fuck you consumers you will eat it and ask
| for more', consumers ate it and asked for more and idiots
| followed the suit, too.
|
| Not really classy calling people idiots. Especially when
| you are just chatting with someone who is taking the
| point of view you are calling idiotic.
|
| > you tell me what I need to ditch my wire headphones,
|
| Done no such a thing. You do whatever you want to and I'm
| wishing you the best with it. I'm merely explaining why I
| prefer my wireless headphones. You know, just comparing
| notes on existence among fellow travellers.
|
| > I love what I can forget my headphones for a month and
| they would still work even if I forgot to charge them the
| last time I used them, lol.
|
| I will give you that. That is a bummer. I walked today to
| the shop an wanted to listen to my DnD podcast and my
| headphone announced that it is running low on battery. I
| was worried it will cut out on me and I will have to wait
| before I can learn how the intrepid heroes deal with the
| nightmare king. Luckily it kept working for the walk. But
| yeah that is a bummer.
| user_7832 wrote:
| While wireless headphones do have some convenience, it's
| not necessary to lose a 3.5mm jack to use them
| BriggyDwiggs42 wrote:
| My car is from 2013 so its bluetooth doesn't work, which
| has caused hours and hours of annoyance over time as the
| phone dies on long trips or the fragile dongle breaks. I
| would much prefer to have the option when i purchase the
| phone rather than having apple's vague, utterly useless
| futurism shoved down my throat.
| stetrain wrote:
| I believe Apple said it was more about using that space for
| other uses, not making the device thinner.
|
| Almost every iPhone since then has gotten thicker with a
| larger battery.
| interpol_p wrote:
| I have been using an iPhone 14 Pro. It's thick, I think I got
| used to it?
|
| Recently someone handed me an old Samsung Galaxy S7 to use for
| testing. It was a revelation: I wanted and dearly missed having
| a phone that thin. I really hope someone pushes for thinness
| again. I miss the iPhone 6 (Edit: a big part of this might be
| down to the weight, the squared off edges, and the enormous
| camera bump)
|
| Same thing with laptops. I updated from a MacBook Air M1 to a
| MacBook Pro 14". The 14" is fast enough to justify its bulk --
| but barely. Every time I pick up the Air it feels effortlessly
| portable, when I grab the MacBook Pro it just does not feel
| thin and light enough
| Synaesthesia wrote:
| That's why I like the non-pro iPhones, they're significantly
| lighter. I believe Apple fixed that with the Titanium 15 pro
| though.
|
| And yes the Galaxy S21-24 are impressively light too.
| gmuslera wrote:
| The trend of using them instead of the credit card may speak of
| some sort of convergence beyond functionality.
|
| And they are already foldable, so in your pocket they may count
| as 2x its unfolded thickness.
| mrbigbob wrote:
| i agree that there is no need to make devices thinner but i
| think that companies themselves have finally realized that they
| cant make devices really any thinner without some serious
| compromises in thermals, battery life, or both
|
| i personally wouldn't mind shoving even more battery in the
| area where the speaker is or adding more heat sink especially
| on the higher end ones
| EGreg wrote:
| Why not? Let's make phones you can't actually see, so they can
| be wearable. Why hold them? The screen and sound can be simply
| projected into your eyes. It can be personalized for you as an
| immersive experience.
| russfink wrote:
| Just get one tatooed on your arm.
| hardlianotion wrote:
| I'd love to watch an upgrade in progress.
| causi wrote:
| I miss phones with curved backs. Thinner on the sides than in
| the middle, I mean. They were so much more comfortable to hold
| than today's square slabs.
|
| https://www.tmonews.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/htc10side...
| hinkley wrote:
| I think I still may have a scar on the top of my foot from the
| time I got a pressure cut from dropping the old tapered-edge
| iPad on my foot. Landed corner first.
|
| Thin metal, as Elon Musk is about to discover with the
| Cybertruck, is basically a dull knife.
| twism wrote:
| reminds me of the best pixel to date. Pixel 5
| mihaaly wrote:
| Feels like solving marginal 'issues' that noone is having.
|
| "The sound is supposed to be coming from the image that our eyes
| see on the screen, but our ears know it's coming from somewhere
| else." => Not something bothers most of us (also untrue) in
| current (and even historic) screen and stereo systems - with the
| support of surround and other spatial technology started in
| movies. We have a Sony TV where the screen is the speaker and the
| spatial immersion gain is unnoticable compared to good stereo
| speakers, while the sound quality is noticeably lower. In a
| mobile with narrow angle of view... even less significant.
|
| "[current technology] are still big enough to limit how thin our
| mobile devices can get" => then we put thick camera in it that
| ruins thinness. Which is fragile enough already and requires
| followup 'inventions' sometimes (think about the iPhone 6 mishap,
| becoming the first foldable screen phone : ) ).
|
| Having the vibration of sound crossed with tactile feedback?
| Sounds confusing like the idea of a transparent TV.
|
| I know, I know, it is not about real needs but about pretentious
| additions to charge more money than necessary fooling customers
| with pompus needlessness that shouldn't be taken seriously, yet,
| I am still a bit grumpy when they try, repeatedly.
| kurthr wrote:
| Yeah, I'm a bit disillusioned having watched this technology
| for years. Piezoelectric speakers (and even voice coil driven
| larger displays) have been around in laptops since the mid
| 2000s. That's 20 years. I think the Sony Acoustic Surface
| you're talking about was based on voice coils when it was
| introduced in 2017, but I wasn't involved in it. It could be
| piezo now... certainly 50-60in surface would make larger
| displacements (lower frequency at higher volume) competitive
| with regular speakers possible.
|
| There are a lot of challenges with piezos in terms of cost,
| limited motion, and voltage (usually higher than 100V) that are
| difficult to make up for with thickness. Their performance
| (linearity) also seems to suffer quite a bit for any
| significant driving range. Generally, the bending moment
| (direct displacement is usually limited to a few % which is
| micrometers) is most useful for larger and thinner surfaces
| since deflection is nominally length^3/thick^3 or worse with
| strain.
|
| The haptics are just as challenging (and you often don't want
| to hear them!) for similar reasons and usually can't be
| localized. Touch position sensing is possible but tends to be
| very sensitive to mounting, wear, and dirt. There are really
| cool technologies developed, but there's a reason you don't see
| many in mass production even after 20 years. You have to have a
| VERY reliable and useful feature to get integrated into UI and
| the OS.
| sandworm101 wrote:
| >> This perceptual dissonance limits our ability to immerse
| ourselves in the experience.
|
| As opposed to the perceptual dissonance of seeing a person inside
| a small rectangle we can hold in our hands? Or the strangeness of
| hearing an entire orchestra while sitting on a bus? The fact that
| sound emanates from a slightly unnatural place or direction isn't
| a problem worth addressing, despite the fact that fixing it might
| make phones 1mm thinner.
|
| How about this: Give me a phone with a proper usb port, a couple
| sim cards, an SD slot, a replaceable battery and a headphone
| jack. I couldn't possibly care any less about making it any
| thinner. It's going into a protective case anyway.
| fkyoureadthedoc wrote:
| > Give me a phone with a proper usb port, a couple sim cards,
| an SD slot, a replaceable battery and a headphone jack. I
| couldn't possibly care any less about making it any thinner.
| It's going into a protective case anyway.
|
| Almost nobody wants this phone. Sure you'll get cheered on by
| some small group of people that wouldn't actually buy this
| phone either, but it just wouldn't sell well enough to justify
| its existence. There's probably already a phone with most of
| these features.
| matly wrote:
| You'd be surprised about the amount of people wanting this
| kind of smartphone. The success of Framework, who are doing
| something similar in the Laptop world, could be a robust
| indicator for the demand. Especially the replaceable battery
| is something we really should get back to IMHO.
| scarface_74 wrote:
| The "success" of Framework? By what metric are you defining
| success?
| dns_snek wrote:
| They employ 45 people and demand for their products is
| outpacing supply. Assuming they're at least breaking
| even, that's success.
| The_Colonel wrote:
| It's a success in this niche space. Just like there are
| niche smartphones providing all those features.
| dns_snek wrote:
| Could you please name these smartphones that run a modern
| version of Android, have modern hardware, and various
| niche features?
| The_Colonel wrote:
| Samsung XCover 6 Pro, Fairphone 5.
| graemep wrote:
| > Almost nobody wants this phone.
|
| Evidence?
|
| > Sure you'll get cheered on by some small group of people
| that wouldn't actually buy this phone either
|
| So all the people who say they want a phone like that are
| lying?
| krisoft wrote:
| > So all the people who say they want a phone like that are
| lying?
|
| They are not lying. Just there aren't enough of them to
| make such a phone worth producing.
| acdha wrote:
| Those features describe the average Android phone on the
| market until the mid-2010s. If there was popular demand,
| you'd expect the models which continued to have things like
| headphone jacks to sell well enough that someone would keep
| making them, but that just hasn't been the case.
|
| This suggests that however genuine the desire is, it's just
| not widely shared enough to actually constitute a viable
| market - somewhere below the level of, say, manual
| transmissions on cars.
| graemep wrote:
| Or it demonstrates a lack of competition in the market
| which allows a handful of big manufacturers, who have
| similar incentives to cut costs, to make the same
| decision to cut costs - lots of small reductions lead to
| a relatively big total increase in margins. In terms of
| wh.at actually gets marketed to most consumers choice is
| quite limited
|
| I do have a phone that is about two years old that has a
| headphone jack.
|
| Replaceable batteries and lack of SD card slots is
| essential deliberately shortening the life of phones to
| get people to upgrade sooner.
| fkyoureadthedoc wrote:
| Batteries are replaceable, just not by you. Do some
| people replace their phone when the battery sucks? Sure,
| maybe. But then that phone probably gets refurbished for
| someone else to buy.
|
| The main use of user replaceable batteries for me was
| always when my phone only lasted a few hours so I had to
| swap another one. My Samsung Blackjack with 3G would die
| in like an hour if I was actively using the 3g connection
| lol. G1 and HTC Evo also didn't last a whole shift at
| work.
| acdha wrote:
| The market didn't change instantly, and if we're to
| believe there is significant demand one of the many
| models which did not switch first would have sold better.
|
| > Replaceable batteries and lack of SD card slots is
| essential deliberately shortening the life of phones to
| get people to upgrade sooner.
|
| Phone batteries are replaceable, but most people do not
| want to do it themselves so they go to the mall and pay
| someone else $50 - it's still much cheaper than a new
| phone. The flip side, of course, is that sealed phones
| are far more durable so instead of the over-simplified
| narrative about planned obsolescence we have a more
| nuanced trade off where something adds desirable traits
| (smaller, cheaper, waterproof, more durable) at the
| expense of a feature few buyers used. I wouldn't fault
| you for being on the other side of that decision but I
| just don't think there are that many people who look for
| that when phone shopping. An iPhone easily lasts 5 years
| and is probably getting replaced for something like a
| broken screen, not a battery.
|
| SD cards are similar: yes, the extra storage is nice if
| you don't use cloud storage but most people do, and those
| people avoid the data loss which many SD card users have
| been hit by and have smaller, more durable phones in
| exchange. Again, I think both preferences are reasonable
| but one of them is a niche.
| fkyoureadthedoc wrote:
| > So all the people who say they want a phone like that are
| lying?
|
| There's phones with dual usb ports already, do they own
| one? If not, then it's not as important a feature as they
| are implying. And that goes for pretty much everything on
| the list.
|
| > Evidence?
|
| Asus ROG phone sales numbers? The fact that people keep
| complaining phones don't have whatever feature instead of
| just buying one?
| sandworm101 wrote:
| Well, someone wants these features enough that many will soon
| be mandatory.
|
| USB port = Mandated in the EU by end of 2024. Replaceable
| battery = Mandated in EU by 2027. Dual sim cards = common in
| the global south. Headphone jack = wanted by everyone not a
| youtube influencer.
|
| Compromise: I'll accept TWO USB-C ports in exchange for the
| headphone jack. Usb to 3.5mm adapter wires cost maybe 6$ on
| amazon.
| aceazzameen wrote:
| My next phone will be an imported EU phone. I won't even
| care if it doesn't connect to cell towers (it will though).
| rrdharan wrote:
| I'm not a YouTube influencer and I don't want a headphone
| jack. I haven't used wired headphones in five years.
| neoberg wrote:
| Other features you mentioned maybe but no one cares about
| the headphone jack anymore. I don't remember most people
| using it a lot even before it started to disappear.
| sandworm101 wrote:
| I have bought maybe ten usb-to-3.5mm adapters in recent
| years. I keep giving them away. Last time I went on a
| work trip (military) I gave away two sets of cheap wired
| headphones+adapters to kids whose bluetooth headsets had
| stopped working during long plane/bus rides. (19yo = kid)
|
| I'm not kidding when I say I recently saw someone on a
| plane using a wireless charging station. They had wrapped
| tape around the phone to hold it on the charger.
| Progress!
| Kon-Peki wrote:
| Have you found good adapters (or ones to avoid)?
|
| I've been using the same $9 Apple one for 3+ years at
| this point. There have been times when I've pulled it out
| of my bag and saved the day. Young people are amazed that
| it just works (microphone and all), Mac or Windows,
| computer or tablet. Ain't progress wonderful?
| TeMPOraL wrote:
| Key part of GP's comment:
|
| > _It 's going into a protective case anyway._
|
| With that in mind, it seems it's not really _customers_ that
| want ever thinner, ever more sealed and port-free phones. The
| _very first purchase_ they make after buying a new phone
| already defeats the purported benefits of those design
| choices.
|
| I maintain this market is supplier-driven, and customer
| preferences have near-zero bearing on how phones look like
| today.
| krisoft wrote:
| > The very first purchase they make after buying a new
| phone already defeats the purported benefits of those
| design choices.
|
| While protective cases make the phones marginally thicker
| they don't make them less water proof. Which is in my
| opinion the purpose of making phones sealed and as port-
| free as possible.
|
| And even with the protective case my current phone is much
| thinner than any phone I had with a user replaceable
| battery.
| The_Colonel wrote:
| That may be a justification, but IMHO not the actual
| reason. It's about cost cutting, improving reliability,
| making space for more marketable features like camera and
| battery.
|
| BTW, Samsung Galaxy S5 had all those features, even
| replaceable battery and was still waterproof.
| nonrandomstring wrote:
| The question of "what people want" is fascinating.
|
| Like forever, some of the smartest people around admitted
| that they did not know. They created the entire field of
| market research. Today I think that is dead. In the past
| decade we moved to an entirely different model of force-fed
| consumerism, which is driven, as you say, entirely by the
| supply side. Oddly the near communist era uniformity we see
| goes against our stated beliefs in data-driven, targeted
| markets.
|
| A whole other layer is how we increasingly project our own
| desires onto others and assume they must be crazy not to
| want the exact same thing as ourselves. Where does that
| come from? Here on HN I get tired of hearing these very
| strident, cock-sure remarks about "what people want is...".
| Let's just admit we don't have much idea about what other
| people want. There's nowt as queer as folk. And some of the
| most interesting markets may in fact be marginal. Smaller
| markets do not mean unprofitable ones.
| fkyoureadthedoc wrote:
| > With that in mind, it seems it's not really customers
| that want ever thinner, ever more sealed and port-free
| phones.
|
| I definitely do, to some extent. More sealed is good, I
| don't want water and dust inside my phone. The thinner the
| phone the thicker and more protective the case you can
| apply before it gets too thick. Or you could stick a
| battery in the case, or a USB hub, SD reader, etc. What
| stops this case from existing right now?
| globular-toast wrote:
| Sony has somehow made it work (except the replaceable
| battery). I think the only thing they've got rid of recently
| is the notification LED.
|
| It doesn't help when a very large number of phone users only
| care about one thing: it being an Apple phone. They will lap
| up anything Apple gives them every single time. It doesn't
| matter what the features are.
| acdha wrote:
| > It doesn't matter what the features are.
|
| What is more likely: that millions of people spend money on
| something they use constantly without caring whether it's
| actually good, or that your emotional attachment to Android
| has caused you not to reconsider whether your tastes are in
| fact universally shared?
|
| Any time you see billions of dollars changing hands for
| years in a competitive market but don't understand why, the
| answer is always to learn more about it.
| krisoft wrote:
| > They will lap up anything Apple gives them every single
| time. It doesn't matter what the features are.
|
| Or, Apple actually makes well made good phones which people
| find desirable?
|
| I understand it is popular to talk trash about them, but
| maybe their popularity is not all just a product of
| misguided masses?
| fkyoureadthedoc wrote:
| > Sony has somehow made it work
|
| And yet every post about phones there's people acting like
| no phones that meet their requirements exist. They
| definitely exist. I think what they really intend to say is
| "Why doesn't Samsung put these exact features I want on the
| Galaxy S Whatever"
| brnaftr361 wrote:
| I think there are actually a lot of demands that are
| unserviced in the phone market. There really isn't a way for
| the consumer to signal this, though. In lieu of consumers I
| think companies tend to listen to influencers and
| journalists. I got that impression from watching the
| evolution of the Xperia Compact which solicited a lot of hate
| from journalists for its appearances and the misalignment
| from the norms. Hate to which Sony in many aspects decided to
| bend a knee to, much to my chagrin.
|
| I will say however, that I expect the biggest confounder is
| the expense to tool and maintain a niche phone makes it less
| feasible given the limited demand. It nonetheless does exist,
| and I hope that such costs can be reduced so the market can
| diversify its offerings and I can have another XZ1c
| experience.
| scarface_74 wrote:
| The Homermobile of phones?
|
| https://simpsons.fandom.com/wiki/The_Homer
|
| Do you also want a phone with a hardware keyboard and a
| dedicated push to talk button?
| NBJack wrote:
| PTT would be great with WhatsApp messages.
|
| I would love having a hardware keyboard again personally,
| especially when I need fire up a SSH session to fix
| something. The inaccuracies of touch keyboards are a real
| pain sometimes.
| scarface_74 wrote:
| I mean the newest iPhones have a programmable button on the
| side that will let you run a shortcut to launch any app you
| want to among other things...
| jvansc wrote:
| There's still room for my HAM radio, right?
| sandworm101 wrote:
| Foldable screens, extra mini screens on the back of phones,
| wireless charging, little vibrators to simulate pushing
| physical keys, multiple cameras, accelerometers that track
| calories burned ... the modern cellphone is already well past
| The Homer.
| justsomehnguy wrote:
| Motorola G-series. Not all of these, but still.
| sofixa wrote:
| > Give me a phone with a proper usb port, a couple sim cards,
| an SD slot, a replaceable battery and a headphone jack
|
| without the proper usb port ("only" type C), LG had a number of
| phones ticking all those boxes (while being good phones, good
| cameras, good screens, the whole thing). They sold so poorly LG
| left the market.
| gchamonlive wrote:
| That is a post-hoc fallacy, implying LG sold poorly because
| it stuck with these design choices. Even if you didn't mean
| that, the way you built your paragraph, describing the design
| choices and then saying LG sold poorly and left the market
| draws exactly this kind of causation.
|
| https://www.techradar.com/news/why-lg-is-leaving-the-
| mobile-...
|
| https://www.forbes.com/sites/siladityaray/2021/04/05/after-y.
| ..
|
| These two articles indicate only that LG was struggling in
| the market and decided to focus elsewhere.
| swores wrote:
| They provided two true statements, they didn't link them
| causally even if they could have done more to make sure
| people didn't assume that they were implying causation (or
| maybe they were implying that they think it's likely).
| antiframe wrote:
| If I say "I hadn't done any of my homework in Calculus. I
| failed the class." Most readers would assume that the
| homework statement is related to the failure statement.
| Even if the real reason was the homework was with zero
| points and I failed the final exam because I left after
| five minutes to chase my future wife down before she flew
| home. That's the thing with language, it's not formal
| logic and readers make all sorts of inferences based on
| order and content of statements. That's what makes for
| good writing and reading between the lines.
|
| I don't know what the poster meant, but drawing a
| conclusion that there is some correlation due to
| statement choice is normal.
| sofixa wrote:
| > That is a post-hoc fallacy, implying LG sold poorly
| because it stuck with these design choices
|
| No, clearly saying that LG tried all the OP was asking, but
| there wasn't enough of a market for it, so OP is obviously
| in the non-sufficiently profitable minority.
| gchamonlive wrote:
| Smartphone market is much more complex than just ticking
| feature boxes. There is brand value perception, post-
| sales support and warranty, ecosystem, OS customisations,
| device exchange programs and other marketing strategies.
|
| There might still be market for users looking for modular
| phones. Fairphone comes to mind in this aspect.
|
| LG failing to provide a product for this specific market
| niche isn't enough of evidence to support the claim that
| the market itself doesn't exist, only that LG couldn't or
| had no interest in maintaining it.
| haswell wrote:
| > _As opposed to the perceptual dissonance of seeing a person
| inside a small rectangle we can hold in our hands?..._
|
| I don't think it makes to frame this as "opposed" to any of the
| other factors you're mentioning. This is setting up a false
| dichotomy.
|
| Having experienced "Spatial Audio", there is a clear benefit to
| a sound system that more closely mimics the expectations of our
| brain's auditory processing. More than just the sound itself,
| there's a certain kind of "presence" or "thereness" that you
| can experience as a viewer that isn't possible with traditional
| speakers, and it can transform certain kinds of content. The
| person (or whatever you're watching) is indeed still shown on a
| piece of glass, but the experience of that can be improved
| significantly. If a speaker-in-the-screen can achieve something
| similar, that's compelling.
|
| I don't see the relevance of the bus scenario, where externally
| broadcast audio is never the right choice.
|
| The phone you describe sounds terrible to me (I'd like the
| headphone jack back but the battery is a tradeoff) but that's
| because you and I have different preferences and priorities.
| And there's nothing preventing all of the above from being
| integrated into a device should there be a market for it. And
| phones aren't the only devices that can benefit.
| ojosilva wrote:
| No, no, give me a phone that is light! What I want is paper-
| level weights, say 300 GSM (grams/sq-meter) which is the weight
| density of a business-card.
|
| Let's fight repetitive stress first, the one related to the
| holding of smartphones for hours. Then we can tackle trigger-
| thumb related issues later (I hope) once, ie, it tracks eye
| movements reliably and efficiently. Our generation is bound for
| a lot of health issues related to hand-held devices.
| sandworm101 wrote:
| Correct. With enough effort we may soon be able to interact
| with others via our phones using only eye blinks. The one
| thing this generation needs is less physical activity.
| itishappy wrote:
| Nothing gets my blood flowing like my Twitter routine, whew
| lad. Been moving up to 2400 calories per day of pure whey.
| These thumb gains aint easy, but the grind is worth it.
|
| Nobody is getting their physical activity via their
| smartphone usage.
| sandworm101 wrote:
| Not yet. My startup is going to disrupt the cellphone
| battery industry by attaching a small crank to the back
| of every phone. We predict this will reduce child
| obesity, saving billions in health care cost the moment
| we go public.
| isodev wrote:
| Phones becoming thinner and lighter would be amazing though.
| Imagine iPhone 7 sized device packing the features of iPhone 15
| Pro.
|
| Having the screen be responsible for (or assisting) haptics
| will also mean "spatial haptics" can be a thing, with extreme
| precision. Also, no more "finger obscuring speaker opening"
| while holding your phone.
|
| I'm all in on thinner phones with less parts.
| SV_BubbleTime wrote:
| Like the phrase _"Nothing in our evolution could have prepared
| us for this"_. I first saw it at XKCD.
| darkerside wrote:
| Well, why not add a keyboard and call it a laptop?
| aceazzameen wrote:
| But it will be great for marketing, a justification to increase
| the price of new phones, and overall great for shareholders.
| Also a no thanks for me.
| dumbfounder wrote:
| All those things you want take up space. Wouldn't it be good if
| current stuff took up less space so you could have more and
| better features? Of course it would. Not that you are getting
| those features, but other features like a bigger battery, a
| better camera, a bigger screen, blah blah blah are all easier
| to do if the necessary features take up less space and weigh
| less. And I think it's cool, it might even open up a whole new
| gaming concept incorporating locational sound.
| nonrandomstring wrote:
| > This perceptual dissonance
|
| Check out Michel Chion and the idea of the "audio-visual
| contract" [0]
|
| I forget, but it has a more formal definition like source
| fusing in experimental perceptual psychology.
|
| What happens is there is a brief dissonance, but it only lasts
| for a few milliseconds and then our brains _very_ quickly
| adjust to align what we see and hear, and crucially what we
| attribute as the source of sounds. This is a actually not a
| learned but a low-level adaptation because sound travels slowly
| compared to light and it reflects (echos) so our brains must be
| able to re-synchronise effortlessly.
|
| [0] http://www.filmsound.org/chion/av-contr.htm
| olelele wrote:
| As far as my experience goes and from what I know of audio
| engineering piezo-electric elements are terrible at flat
| frequency response and mostly unusable except as beep generators.
| There are (older?) models of Behringer cheapo PA-speakers with
| piezos as high-frequency drivers and they are beyond terrible.
|
| Didn't deep read the article however found no hard info as to if
| some kind of breakthrough has been made.
| elzbardico wrote:
| Really, I don't want a thinner phone.
| StreetChief wrote:
| Joe Grand has a fantastic video experimenting with the tech,
| where he builds "the world's thinnest boombox":
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZFQDeBpHmg
| wkat4242 wrote:
| I'm pretty sure that Xiaomi tried this with the first mi mix and
| LG with the crystal. They were all first gen full screen phones.
| The results were pretty crap. Muffled audio and such.
|
| I don't really see the benefit because speakers are tiny as it
| is. And pressing on the screen will significantly alter its
| resonance.
| Giorgi wrote:
| Correct, I had a Xiaomi Mi Mix back in 2017 and audio was nice,
| nothing of spectacular but not muffled.
| wkat4242 wrote:
| Oh ok I never had one but I read that in some of the reviews,
| I was interested because I worked in mobile phone management
| and I really liked the idea of full-screen phones (which
| turned out so great that everyone does it now, of course).
| globular-toast wrote:
| > Speakers usually sit on the sides or back of our devices. The
| sound is supposed to be coming from the image that our eyes see
| on the screen, but our ears know it's coming from somewhere else.
|
| Then put the speakers on the front. Of course rear or side-firing
| speakers are going to sound like crap. This is a totally self-
| inflicted problem and could be solved by just having front-firing
| speakers like some phones still do. The ghost centre channel
| should be fine for smartphones. It's not like you have several
| people watching a single phone complaining that the ghost centre
| channel is 2 inches too far to the left/right...
| adrianmonk wrote:
| > _could be solved by just having front-firing speakers_
|
| That makes the bezel bigger, which (for a given screen size)
| makes the phone bigger and harder to fit in your pocket.
|
| If this technology can move the speakers to the front without
| making the phone larger, that seems like a real benefit.
| Especially since phone size is such a common complaint.
| rcarmo wrote:
| I think this was tried before and bombed in real life
| applications because touch or even any sort of site tension would
| instantly muffle the sound--but I can't remember where I saw it.
| akmittal wrote:
| Speakers are hardly visible in modern smartphones. Do we really
| want everything to move inside screen
| aitchnyu wrote:
| If future laptops will have a screen replace keyboard and
| trackpad, can it mimic the sensation of fingers moving across
| physical keys and the notches on F and J keys?
| Workaccount2 wrote:
| When I purchased my latest TV, I was prepared to also dish out
| for a speaker system to ameliorate the terrible sound that flat
| screens have. A junky small speaker shoved in the rear of the
| panel to wheeze out sounds directly into wall.
|
| However in the specs for the TV I saw it mentioned that Sony uses
| the entire display as a speaker. I was skeptical for sure, but
| man when I turned it on the first time I was actually blown away
| by how good it sounded. To the point where I have had people ask
| "Where do you have the speaker?" when looking at my presently
| speakerless setup.
|
| It's not perfect, it has it's rough moments, but overall it's
| really damn good for what it is.
| silentguy wrote:
| An interesting use-case could be localized haptic feedback on the
| screen. You could rotate a knob or push a button on the screen
| and get a localized sound and haptic feedback from the item on
| the screen.
|
| You may even add haptic texture on the screen. close your eyes
| and scan the screen with your finger. It would feel like a series
| of mechanical switches and knobs. It would be useful for people
| who don't like using only the screen in their car because of lack
| of haptic feedback.
| peter_d_sherman wrote:
| >"So by applying an alternating voltage, you can make the
| transducer vibrate with rather considerable force. These
| vibrations can be slow--the kind needed for haptic feedback--or
| very fast, to the highest audio frequencies and beyond.
|
| _While creating the effect with ceramic material requires
| relatively high voltages--in the range of 40 volts or more--it
| requires very little current_
|
| and, hence, little power--far less than the power used by mobile
| device speakers today."
|
| I'm not too concerned about the high(er) voltage (than say 5V or
| 12V) requirement -- but the fact that this, well, let's call it
| "momentum in an oscillatory/vibratory (AKA trapped) mode" or,
| perhaps more broadly, "energy" -- requires _very little current_
| (AKA "power", AKA "energy") -- should be of interest!
|
| In other words, what devices could be conceived of, for this
| effect, in the future?
|
| Also, is there a potential connection here (if so, I don't see it
| yet! <g>) with warping space (AKA a future "warp field", if one
| could ever be created in the future) -- and "warping" (if ever so
| slightly -- on the microscopic scale) the dimensions of a piece
| of piezoelectric glass -- with a voltage?
|
| Well, probably not!
|
| (But then again... maybe! <g>)
|
| Anyway, a very interesting article!
| alok-g wrote:
| Anyone knows if this could produce better bass?
| krystianantoni wrote:
| Sound is supposed to be as normal, so quality & spacial and
| technology to deliver that as easy to use as possible
|
| Haven't thin/piezoelectric speakers been around for some time now
| without much success? What's different now that makes them better
| callalex wrote:
| This sounds like a repairability nightmare. The number of cracked
| screens you see on an average walk/bus ride is all you need to
| know that phone manufacturers are failing to consider and meet
| the needs of their users.
| whalesalad wrote:
| afaik this is how the mouse in a macbook pro works. you can
| control the click sensation in software because it is 100%
| synthetic.
| zython wrote:
| the home button in the iphone up until the X was like this
| aswell
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-02-12 23:01 UTC)