Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 27 of 27
  1. #21  
    Quote Originally Posted by rmausser View Post
    Unless using MHS, you probably arent going to be using that much data on a phone this small. Emails and the odd app. Web pages are kinda out of the question.
    What? Why are web pages kinda out of the question? For lack of 80 pixels? A column of text will still be the same width, there will just be less of it. Okay, landscape web pages will be narrower, but is anybody looking at full, non-mobile-optimized web pages on the Pre without zooming?

    I really think the screen size business is well overblown. Okay, bigger screens are better for web browsing, but web pages on the Pixi, which has the same size screen as the Veer, are pretty frickin' far from unusable.
    Palm III-->Handspring Visor-->Sony Clie PEG-NR70-->no PDA -->Palm Treo 755p-->Palm Pre-->HP Veer
  2. j_benj's Avatar
    Posts
    224 Posts
    Global Posts
    465 Global Posts
    #22  
    What? Why are web pages kinda out of the question? For lack of 80 pixels? A column of text will still be the same width, there will just be less of it.
    LOL exactly.

    Was browsing the web on a Pixi impossible? Not at all. The only side effect of less vertical pixels is having to scroll more. *shrug*

    I know I'm in the minority, but I'm dying for Sunday.. I can't wait to get rid of my giant Epic and grab the tiny Veer.
  3. #23  
    Quote Originally Posted by gmlongo View Post
    You are right...because the target audience of this phone will have any idea what Mhz or RAM means. The Kin proved there is not a large enough audience for this type of phone, but HP in all their brilliant wisdom chose the same path.
    People on this forum are not the target market although there are plenty interested in the Veer. The Veer will be very successful! If you think about what a tablet user needs in a phone, the Veer is it! You aren't going to do web browsing on a phone if you are carrying a tablet. In fact, you are probably only going to use the Veer for phone calls ... But you have the other capabilities for when you don't have the tablet with you ...
  4.    #24  
    Quote Originally Posted by gmlongo View Post
    You are right...because the target audience of this phone will have any idea what Mhz or RAM means. The Kin proved there is not a large enough audience for this type of phone, but HP in all their brilliant wisdom chose the same path.
    You are right, they dont care about Mhz or Ram.

    You know what they do care about? How much a small phone like this costs, how much the monthly data plan costs, and if it has Angry Birds, Facebook and Twitter on it that they can use at the same time (Multitasking) as well as IM and SMS capability that blows any other phone out of the water.

    The Kin had none of theses. The Veer has all of these, at a cheaper price upfront and monthly.

    That, is what people of this phone market care about.
  5. ahitz's Avatar
    Posts
    412 Posts
    Global Posts
    418 Global Posts
    #25  
    Quote Originally Posted by gmlongo View Post
    You are right...because the target audience of this phone will have any idea what Mhz or RAM means. The Kin proved there is not a large enough audience for this type of phone, but HP in all their brilliant wisdom chose the same path.
    the point is the Kin PROVED NOTHING. It didn't fail because it was small, or even because it was underpowered. It failed because, even though it required the same monthly plan as the most advanced smartphones out there, it was NOT a full-featured smartphone. No apps, and not even a good, or even complete, OS.

    A couple reviews of the Kin actually pointed out that a Pre or Pixi was a better option for the same upfront and monthly pricing.

    There are arguments to be made that the Veer is a bad idea, or a poorly executed one. But "the Kin failed, so of course this will too" is a terrible argument.
  6. libray's Avatar
    Posts
    195 Posts
    Global Posts
    204 Global Posts
    #26  
    My guess is the Veer will get buyers mainly from non-target who know and like it's specs. The intended target are not those in the category, so they won't care that it can do so much in such a tiny frame.

    The target buyers may as well get a bigger screen if they have to slide out a keyboard. And they can even be "on Google" to boot if getting android. "No headphones will work in the Veer" says the salesman "... but you can take your adapter with you everywhere" he says the first few days until he gets tired of explaining this all the time.
  7. gmlongo's Avatar
    Posts
    14 Posts
    Global Posts
    30 Global Posts
    #27  
    Quote Originally Posted by ahitz View Post
    the point is the Kin PROVED NOTHING. It didn't fail because it was small, or even because it was underpowered. It failed because, even though it required the same monthly plan as the most advanced smartphones out there, it was NOT a full-featured smartphone. No apps, and not even a good, or even complete, OS.

    A couple reviews of the Kin actually pointed out that a Pre or Pixi was a better option for the same upfront and monthly pricing.

    There are arguments to be made that the Veer is a bad idea, or a poorly executed one. But "the Kin failed, so of course this will too" is a terrible argument.
    It is not a terrible argument. Obviously there are a lot of similarities between these phones, so it wouldn't be prudent to ignore history. I'm not saying that the Veer is not a better phone, because obviously it is (although the Kin at least had a freakin' flash). However, I have yet to see anybody who is looking for a smaller phone. This includes women and teenagers. They all seem to want the iPhone or something similar. The Veer is not going to cut it...

    The market is CLEARLY moving toward bigger and more capable phones...the Veer is a move in the opposite direction, and I do not believe that their is a sizable market for this type of phone.
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions