Mobile Phone Users Struggle With Hardware Adoption 386
Ian Lamont writes "A Google executive speaking at the Emerging Technology conference has described a problem that mobile phone carriers and manufacturers have been struggling with over the last few years: Users aren't taking advantage of many phones' hardware-based features. Rich Miner, Google's group manager of mobile platforms, stated that 80% of mobile phones being sold today have cameras on them, yet the number of people who actually know how to use them or get the images off the phones ranges between 10% and 50%, depending on the model. Miner listed several reasons for this state of affairs, including bad UIs and small screens, but added that the participation of companies with software expertise — including Google — would help increase usage of such features."
Cell phone companies to blame? (Score:5, Insightful)
Or perhaps it might also involve the locking down of phones by carriers?
If you can't use bluetooth for file transfer because the carrier locked it out, it makes it harder to get pics off. If you can't use the phone as a usb mass storage device because the carrier is worried about you copying ringtones yourself, obviously getting the pics off will be hard.
That said, this "article" contains almost no useful information, so maybe Righ Miner had some better examples than the pictures...
What happened to just a plain old phone? (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually, I just want a phone. Not a friggin' handheld multimedia device.
I'd use my camera phone if (Score:1, Insightful)
I could get the pictures off of it without having to chew up my data plan limits! Damn rip-off!
Re:Cell phone companies to blame? (Score:4, Insightful)
Amen! The fact that AT&T charges more for an unlimited data plan than I currently pay to browse the web at home on a real computer is also a joke. And then AT&T expects me to pay even MORE if I want to use my phone as a Bluetooth modem? What, do I get a higher data rate if I surf that way instead of on the phone alone? It's all a big scam just ripe for an upstart company to come in and undercut all of them.
Re:What happened to just a plain old phone? (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't get it... (Score:5, Insightful)
Why is this a problem? Isn't this like fretting that 60% of Dodge Caravan owners don't use the rear-seat cup holders? Maybe people just don't want to take pictures with their phones.
Re:What happened to just a plain old phone? (Score:4, Insightful)
Proprietary transfers are an issue (Score:3, Insightful)
The phone should be able to store the photos and transfer them directly (for example a USB port plugging into a home computer just like a regular camera does). Transferring them immediately should be an option, of course. But wise people would do that only when they need to (urgency of sending the photo, or they have filled up their flash memory and need more space back).
FYI, I've yet to take even one photo with my phone. I use a digital SLR for photos.
I wish them well but... (Score:5, Insightful)
I am probably one of the majority.
If I want to look at the internet, I like a big screen.
If I want to take pictures, I want 10 megapixels.
If I want to send someone some words, I want a keyboard.
My phone is really good for me speaking to someone. That is what I use it for. I could use skype on my laptop but the phone has a better form factor.
At work I find multifunction devices a bad thing. Scanners scan good, faxes fax, printers print and so on. Those clever boxes that do all three, never seem to do any of them as well.
If my phone plays music as well as an mp3 player, that's good but there are few other things I have seen mobile phones do as well as the original devices.
I don't think that the carriers are "struggling".. (Score:5, Insightful)
Verizon cripples bluetooth on all non smartphones they sell(headset only, no obex etc) in order to force you to buy media from their overpriced store and encourage you to use the phone camera to send MMSes. They don't package cables or software for connecting to computers with their basic phones(or even attempt to upsell you on such accessories). Going directly through the manufacturer and/or with third party utilities, it is possible to connect the phone to a computer, and with a bit of hacking I've heard tethering is even possible.
I don't mean to underestimate the stupidity and willful ignorance of users; but this is mostly the carriers problem. Their obsession with all-data-must-be-transferred-through-our-network-and-paid-for is particularly troublesome. If cell companies sold computers, you'd need a family plan and a SIM card for each of your peripherals. 10 bucks a month would cover your mouse's connection. Depending on how much you used it, you could pay for right clicks at 5 cents a piece, or 5.99 for unlimited right clicks.
People don't care (Score:5, Insightful)
The average consumer is not interested in learning how to user another device. They don't have the time or interest. I use my phone for all sorts of things: creating maps, navigation, photos, music player. A lot of the things I do with my phone are seen almost as science fiction by people like my parents.
The thing is though - if my parents were to spend the time to learn how to use all of their phone's features - it probably wouldn't improve their quality of life at all.
I can't see how more than 50% of the population would ever be bothered enough to learn how to use all of their phone's features even if they were dirt simple to use. It's just one of the facts of life that us geeks need to be willing to accept.
Re:good for you (Score:4, Insightful)
Open source changes **nothing** (Score:5, Insightful)
They don't care whether these are free and open source or not - all they care about is getting what they want, at a reasonable price.
Taking the camera example, many people don't want to use a crappy (as many phone cameras are) phone camera to take a picture and then download it via a USB cable into their computer, or screw around with SD cards etc. Give them an end-to-end solution where they snap their pic and it automagically ends up in Picassa/whatever. That would make them happy so long as the cost of doing so is a few cents per picture.
Re:What happened to just a plain old phone? (Score:3, Insightful)
Not always an option.
For example. I want a cell phone with a speaker because sometimes my wife and I want to hear and contribute to the conversation at the same time. (Usually it is to my extended family, but sometimes to friends.) Plus, I wanted one that would receive text messages (pages from work) that I could look at without opening the phone and jumping through hoops to shut the beeper off. However, when looking at phones, only a few have speakers. In order to get one with a decent battery and a speaker, I had to accept one with a camera (which I don't really need, but I have used it once or twice) and an MP3 player.
Now why would I want the MP3 player as part of my phone? In order to use it, I have to pay extra for the connection package which includes a proprietary cable and bloatware. I don't really listen to all that much music, and I really don't want a phone that is a music player. But in order to get the features I do want, I had to settle for some extras that I don't care about and never use.
Camera Phones (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's look at the problem with camera phones. I'm on my third, an iPhone 3G.
Lets face it, things like cameras are crammed on the phone as a bullet point and no thought is given to how it operates or how easy it is for someone to use.
My mom has never used the photo function on either of here two camera capable phones (the previous one she owned, and the current). She can't get the photos off (would need a special cable and software) except by sending them for $0.25 each (or whatever insane price Sprint charges).
Heck, that's what my parents (and most "normal" people I've run across) have learned about their phones. They do neat things, and each one comes with a horrendously expensive charge. Phone calls are one thing, but text messages are $0.10 each unless you pay monthly. Web browsing is useful, except you pay $0.25 per KB unless you pay monthly. Games are fun, but they cost at least $5 to buy and most must be bought on a subscription basis (every 30 days or 3 months it's another $5).
Lesson they learned? Don't use the phone for anything but as a phone, it's too expensive.
US cell phone users maybe. (Score:4, Insightful)
For some US customers, pressing a button can result in opening an Internet application that charges a terrible data rate or something else that's both costly and unintentional. So some US users opt to just not try to poke around much beyond phone functionality and camera use.
Re:Cell phone companies to blame? (Score:4, Insightful)
Have you ever tried to read a manual for any cell phone? It is usually 200+ pages, in 5 different languages. With wire diagrams, keys to press, page after page.
Frankly, there is no need for an instruction manual. If a user cannot pickup the device and begin to use 80% of the features within a few days, then the user interface, the device, and the concept, is broken.
Lindsay
Re:I'd use my camera phone if (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Connectivity (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:What happened to just a plain old phone? (Score:4, Insightful)
this banal argument crops up in _every_ single /. article about cellphones.
and the answer is the same every single time. as icydog and countless others have replied, there are tons of cheap phones with minimal features.
the only reason camera phones are so visible and common is because they're popular with consumers. it's useful having a camera on your person at all times, and most people don't need a $3000 DSLR for their uses. with point and shoot cameras becoming smaller and cheaper, it's simply more convenient to incorporate this feature into a device that people carry with them most of the time, such as a cellphone.
if you work somewhere where camera-phones aren't allowed (like a court house) then just select a phone without a camera. how hard is that? certain handset makers, such as Nokia, even have models that have a no-camera option. this CNET article [cnet.com] even compares 5 popular big brand phones that are camera-free (or have the option of being so). so stop complaining.
Exactly (Score:5, Insightful)
90% of the people never have a NEED to take a picture with a cell phone. If all you had to do was point it and say 'Fido, take picture, send to Jane' it still wouldn't interest 50% of the population, they just plain don't need or want to take pictures. If they really DO want a picture, they want a good picture.
So basically there are 2 issues here, one being people aren't all that interested, and secondly the extra gewgaw features on phones really aren't all that great. The cameras are mostly marginal to almost useless, etc.
Re:Open source changes **nothing** (Score:3, Insightful)
"They don't care whether these are free and open source or not - all they care about is getting what they want, at a reasonable price."
This is not true. I'm a user and I do care whether something is free and open source. It's not ALL I care about, sure, but I do care.
So, while you are ultimately right anyway, it is all about what I want at a reasonable price, what I want is a broader, deeper and more profound "thing" than you realize.
I realize that little decisions I make impact the greater state of things. So while I want a phone, I do not want to pay for the phone with any of my freedoms. So, ultimately what I want is not a phone per se, but an experience that has a phone-like element in it, but the main feature of that experience is freedom. The phone-like element doesn't even have to be a phone, but freedom is essential and cannot be replaced by anything.
So even though I want a phone, I am careful that the phone I pick doesn't hurt things I want just as much or even more than a phone.
As the people become more and more enlightened to the true impact of their day to day decisions, what I am saying will become more and more relevant. People are going to see the connection between little mundane things and transcendental concerns such as freedom and they will act accordingly.
I suggest you stop trivializing what we want. We don't want just some device. We want a good experience. While a device may or may not be a part of it, freedom is essential. It's not optional. The device is optional. Please don't get this backwards.
Re:All I want is a damn headphone jack (Score:2, Insightful)
It's just Americans man. They go out to the store buying whatever the salesman says is good for them. So they all have overfeatured phones with expensive subscriptions.
It's important to them also. If their phone wouldnt have a camera their friends go like "maaan that phone is sooo 20th century! That's not even American!"
You see it's a patriotic deed to support the nation's economy, and Americans do like other people to tell them what's patriotic and American, as if it's a great shame if you dont exactly do for your country as expected by the corrupted souls leading it. Especially in times of great danger and fear like now (booooooo!)
Re:Why no Minoxes in 1960s telephones? (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, I've tended to have that feeling for quite a while too, but I'll say this. . .
I can see why some people might want a camera, PDA, and web browser built into their phone. It's 1 small gadget to haul around instead of 2 or 3. Nobody is looking to do professional level photographic work with such a picture, but sometimes those grainy, low-res, slight motion blurred pics from a phone are enough. Sometimes they are better than nothing.
My big gripe with camera phones, one that's already been stated by numerous other posters but it irks me too. . . the stupid phone companies won't sell you a phone where you can easily download the images straight to your computer, unless you buy a $500 top-of-the-line model, maybe. They want to nickel and dime you for every damn thing. They want to control what you do with your own camera/phone/mp3 player. Well SCREW THEM. My phone, I dictate what I do with it. So, last time I renewed my phone contract, I got a phone that *really* truly is *just a phone*. You can get them, believe it or not. It also happened to be the only phone from Verizon, at the time, where I didn't have to pay a dime for the phone - almost all the other models you at least had to pay $20 or $50 even with the two year contract.
Although, I suppose they are honestly laughing all the way to the bank, because even though I got locked into the two year contract, all they had to do was give me a phone which probably cost them $10. Still, I've not payed for any MMS, or $3 ringtones, or any of that nonsense that people with more dollars than sense buy, so I figure I come out ahead of what I would have been spending, anyhow.
Bullshit: very few people value freedom per se (Score:5, Insightful)
Typical users don't care if Google or MS or ATT have monopolies, so long as they get what they want at a reasonable cost. Nor do they care if their phones or sneakers are made in a sweat shop or whether the workers have the vote and have medical benefit, so long as they get them at a reasonable cost. Nor do they care whether Starbucks or Budweiser open sources their recipes so long as they get a drink at a reasonable price. Same deal with cars, etc etc.
Very few people really value freedom unless they are being personally hampered by it. Heck only around 50% of eligible Americans vote and they supposedly value democracy!
Still, even these Open Source phones are still closed at some level. Try to get the design files for the chips and GSM module.
Re:Camera Phones (Score:0, Insightful)
I'll spell it out.
I have a N95, I live in Canada. it costs 50$ a month for 8MB of data. The N95 takes 5Mpixel photos that can range from 250KB to 20MB. All it takes is ONE photo to blow the data limit. at 5 cents a kilobyte, screw that.
So no sending photos to anyone, no even thinking of using 'video phone' feature. Hell Rogers does offer an 'unlimited' data to use the video feature, but you need to buy the locked down version, which does't have the microSD card, and probably has crippled other features typical of other Robbers(Rogers) phones.
I have never bought a phone from Rogers after the first one in 2001. I bought an Unlocked Nokia 35something after the POS motorola gave the worst reception ever (1900Mhz only) and kept the low end Nokia till someone at work ruined it. I bought the next Nokia 6200 in 2005 after ATT Wireless stopped selling them and got it off eBay and used that up until a few months ago. I didn't use the data feature on the 6200 either because it was 5 cents a KB.
Rogers can goto hell with it's useless data plans.
Now WiFi does get used. At home. Try using it in an airport, it just doesn't bloody work, since all the interception pages for the hotspots want to open a frame that tells you how much time you have left or something like that which you can't do with the phone. I tried it with the Nintendo Opera browser as well, same problem. You simply can't use any non-free hotspot. You are stuck with borrowing any open hotspot or peoples unsecured wireless routers when you are away.
So that leaves the bluetooth and usb features for transfering. I use the phone as a mp3 player more than I use it for anything else. For the price I paid I could have bought an actual iPod.
Re:All I want is a damn headphone jack (Score:2, Insightful)
Then there's the other end of this carrot/stick combo which is the gotchas they attach to everything, like having to shell out $75 for a fucking cable just so you can download/upload photos/contacts/whatever to your phone without having to pay $1.25 (per item) to transfer the data across their damn network.
Honestly, I've found occasion from time to time to use the camera on my phone, but I'll be damned if I'm going to pay $75 for a cable, or pay $1.25 a photo just to get the photos off my phone. I know my phone has a web browser, and all kinds of other features, but I also know the minute I use the damn things I'm going to be charged an arm in a leg somewhere along the line.
Re:People don't care (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm a geek. If I want a phone, it's because I want to phone someone, or I want them to phone me. I don't need all this other stuff.
If you're a geek you don't need all this other stuff because you already have it hanging from pouches on your belt or in your cargo pants, right? Palm Tungsten -- check. Pager -- check. Digital Elph camera -- check. Calculator (HP-41C, no doubt) -- check. iPod -- check. GPS -- check.
Maybe it's just me, but the all-in-one phone seems to be a lazier choice. And we geeks are a lazy lot, after all.
Re:Exactly (Score:3, Insightful)
If... you've paid the phone company for the ability to send the picture off the phone. I haven't spent the extra time to find one that doesn't require the extra fees to "send the picture" but from the modest amount of checking (and I'm sure dozens of Slashdotters will kindly inform me of those companies I overlooked) I find that that's pretty much standard. I'd prefer it if the darned phones merely plugged into your USB port and you could pull the darned photos off the camera yourself. Haven't found one that'll let you do that yet. For now I'll carry the camera along with the phone.
I agree when I'm somewhere and see something that I want a photo of I'll want a good quality photo. When phones can take 10M-12M pixel images with, say, a zoom equivalent to a 35mm camera's 20mm-200mm, then we'll have something. Make that a macro lense as well, will ya. (Oh yeah... it's also gotta be light enough and small enough to fit in my pocket when I'm out on my bike or out on a run.)
Re:good for you (Score:2, Insightful)
no they are not useles toys. it just depends what you want them for. for me the camera is very useful as it allows me to take a photo of an a4 sheet of paper and read the text later if necessary. handy if you're give a sheet of paper on site with the configuration information and there is no photocopier handy to bring a copy back to the office. also screenshots with errors are handy to keep so instead of writing down a screen of gobbledegook i just take a picture knowing that i can reference back to it in the future.
i currently have a nokia e71 and use the 3mp camera for this purpose. the e61i and n70 i had before that with a 2mp camera did this as well. the 1mp camera in the palm zire 72 also achieved this aim. it just took a bit more care with lower resolution devices.
as for taking pictures outside work the devices mentioned above do fine for my needs. hell the vga res palm pix i used on my palm iiix took some good pictures but that seemed to have a pretty good lens.
it is better to have a simple camera always to hand than drag along another device and charger in my book. the e71 lives in a holster on my belt and is always ready to go. having to fetch or unpack a camera from my bag would have lost me some great photos of stuff that was happening around me. ymmv.
as for cheap service i'm in europe and use a prepay system. i average 10 a month for my phone. sometimes less some times more. when in hospital recently i used the e71 for web (99c for 50mb a day on prepay was sufficient for my needs using rss and lo bandwidth sites, cheaper than the newspapers others on my ward were buying to stave off boredom), email and etext reader as well as fm radio. i used an ipod for music and movies as the 160gb gave me a huge library to keep me amused with while the e71 was limited to 8gb. wow to think that i now see 8gb as a limitation. :-)
Re:Exactly (Score:4, Insightful)
"I'd prefer it if the darned phones merely plugged into your USB port and you could pull the darned photos off the camera yourself. Haven't found one that'll let you do that yet. For now I'll carry the camera along with the phone."
Every phone in europe. If not as a USB mass storage device (many are) or Bluetooth equivalent, then with some free (as in beer) software that comes with the phone.
Seriously. This is why people don't use these feature, the US market is extremely warped by the networks sucking money out of people for no good reason, to the extent that people seem to be scared to do anything with the phone other than make calls in case they get stuck with an enormous bill.
Re:People don't care (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't carry a cell-phone. The last thing I need is another leash for people to yank. But my wife is a real-estate agent, where it is pratically required. The has one with all the bells and whistles.
Let's look at the features:
- Mobile internet access. A ridiculous ($40?) fee every month so that she can get spotty internet access at modem speeds on a 3 inch screen.
- GPS. Tried to use it once trying to find my son's wrestling at an away match. It was so far off (opposite side of the town) that we've never tried to use it again. It was simply pathetic.
- MP3 player. She hasn't even considered using it for an MP3 player. When she's at home, she has a stereo system. When she's in the car, she has a stereo system. The only other place she would consider using a player is when she's exercising. There is no way she (or I) would entertain the thought of trying to carry an bulky and expensive piece of delicate electronics on an extend jog so that it can be bounced around.
- Camera. Again, exhorbitant fees to use a crappy digital camera. They want to charge you to transfer each picture. Why?! I can use my $100 camera that holds 1000 decent snapshots at reasonable resolutions and transfer them to my computer with a USB cable. All for free.
YMMV, but my experience is that cell-phone features are either useless or priced out of reasonableness. Now I'm sure there are plenty of counters of "I get feature X for free" or "I get googly-bits of data access and I don't mind $40/month", but the point is that there is a lot of marginal, overpriced features that most people don't find useful for their situation.