For most people smartphone is more convenient. I much prefer desktop computer though, because how more efficient it is, and apps don’t simply stop because of low memory (although I don’t understand why my phone with 6 gigs of RAM has this problem in the first place).
I’ve been wanting a phone that can dock and be used as a full fledged desktop since smartphones first came out. Samsung Dex apparently comes close, but is too limited in terms of the desktop app side.
Depending on what apps you want, you can try downloading Winlator and run them. I’ve had some success running windows games on my phone. However I never tried productivity apps.
But… Theoretically, if “wine” can run them then Winlator should be able to run them.
That’s about as close as it gets currently. Although it does require some level of tech savvy knowledge I suppose (and an android phone). Which thus means it isn’t perfect as you previously stated.
Maybe it’ll improve over time. Just have to wait and see.
Why though?
Why have one device or why desktop mode?
One device because it would reduce the burden on me of maintaining multiple devices, the security updates, passwords, etc.
Why desktop mode? Because when I try to do what I would call “serious work” (probably a bad name for it, but think something requiring extended periods of deep focus), the interface of smartphones is not conducive for it. Precision of a mouse is required, ability to type 100+ words per minute is required, so that necessitates mouse and keyboard. Then there’s the UX itself. Smartphones have tiny screens so they can’t have many menu items or controls in the apps that are used for “serious work”. That requires larger screen real estate, so necessitates an external monitor.
I don’t want to start rambling so I’ll just leave it at that.
My thinking is that having a desktop, laptop and phone that sync data to eachother accomplishes all of that and will do it better because they’re designed for their usecase, why not that?
A lot more people are phone only than computer preferred.
Man, I sure hope not. I will never understand why people are willing to read or view content on that tiny screen. Give me my desktop any day. I can’t even tolerate laptops unless I’m on the road.
I know a couple people who don’t really ever use computers anymore in favour of smartphones.
I generally consume on my phone and produce on my computer. Phones are still mostly horrible for producing anything with a slight complexity.
This is the case for me. Code, serious research, writing music, long posting, blogs, making videos, working on any kind of maker stuff (pcbs, cad/3d print, etc), all pc/laptop
Browsing lemmy/youtube/blogs/reading/etc? Phone or ereader for the last one.
It helps me track mindless consumption, at least. I don’t have ad free youtube on my computers and I much prefer to browse sites like lemmy on mobile apps so I can see when I’ve gone a bit too hard on consuming over creating
I also think this is part of why the internet sucks now. The corporatization is the bigger reason by far but at least some part of it is a huge part of users (globally mobile users overtook desktop in 2016 and it continues to climb, ~ 64% of Internet users globally are mobile and that number is as high as 75% in some countries like Africa and 95% of users being on mobile devices at least some of the time). It leads to a much larger user base but a userbase that is passively consuming. Even commenting has been reduced to reactions and likes
Same here
No way. The mobile is just a phone and messaging device. Without a usable screen and with no real keyboard it is completly useless for anything but that.
Phones… are computers.
They just have a different set of input and output. Phones will never fully replace desktops and no, they won’t merge into one thing. (Microsoft tried this to some extent with windows 8. The thing is, for some things kbm is the best method and for others, cell phones tap and swipe are.)
This could technically be possible with AR glasses. You’d still want to pair them with a wireless keyboard and maybe a mouse for efficiency. I don’t know what’s the state of that though.
Most AR systems aren’t going to be comfortable enough for, say, data entry jobs, mind. VR has come along way (anyone remember virtual boy?) but it does get taxing.
Depending on implementation, it’s also going to potentially have problems with shitty display quality, power/battery life, heat, etc.
You could also use a portable projector for a display. A smart phone is optimized for being a smart phone, though, and a desktop workstation is optimized for that.
Where AR tech is going to be useful is more for things like overlaying directions or providing virtual signage, or stuff. But that’s going to require some new form of UX design that’s optimized for that.
Also, for the record, the google glass headset sucked. Its display was like staring at whatever people did for power point slides in the 80’s. (I’m not that old, someone else is gonna have to chime in.)
Some genuinely mind boggling innovations in UX and AI (not to mention battery) would have to happen to make it even close. There is just way too much that is too awkward to do on a smaller screen or without a proper kbm + the posture of sitting at a desk. You never really see anyone actually using those sci fi handheld devices. They always just kind of magically pull up whatever information is needed without us seeing whatever inputs were required to get there.
Only sort of related: But I always find it funny when I see some older sci fi able to imagine some technology way ahead of it’s time, but fail to think through the implications of how humans will actually interact with it. That’s the part you actually have some info and intuition on even without the technology. If I lived in the 60s I might not have been able to tell you whether we’d ever be able to fit the computers that take up rooms into the palms of our hands, but if you showed me a handheld computer and asked me to suspend my disbelief about the technical wizardry behind it, I could probably tell you whether or not I think someone would actually use something in that way because technology changes, but people don’t. Until we go trans humanist we still have the limits of two hands, 10 fingers, etc.
One funny example of this for me is the pad from Star Trek TNG. There are actually two relevant pieces of technology here:
- A portable computer that can presumably at least display and edit information.
- A ship wide computer that can do all sorts of complicated tasks, has artificial intelligence, a voice interface, and can be accessed via terminals, including personal ones around the ship.
Despite this, they couldn’t put two and two together and imagine that the pads might be connected through the ship’s computer. When crew members want to send information they have on the pads, instead of just sending data through the computer to the other person’s pad/terminal… THEY GIVE THE PHYSICAL PAD TO THE OTHER PERSON LIKE ITS A PIECE OF PAPER!
Yeah, my mother in her 60s never used computers for work. Has never been great with technology has completely abandoned her laptop for her phone.
I can’t even get her to use a tablet. Shes just used to her phone.
I strongly believe that anyone using lemme are not the general population and most likely much more tech savvy than the average person in this world.
It’s interesting that older generations like phones and younger generations like phones … But some of us in the middle are still using computers.
For me not at all, they have totally differnet use cases.
At home the only purpose is of the phone is to be an alarm clock, 2FA machine and maybe for a bit of media consumption while on the toilet. Asides from it’s main purpose is urgent mobile communication and being a music player.
But I really don’t see why anyone would want to use a phone when there is a computer with a big screen and proper mouse/keyboard inputs available.
I personally try to reverse smartphone usage. Got myself a dumbphone and try to use a computer for everything else. The reasoning behind this is, I want it to be a conscious decision to do internet things at a defined physical place, instead of mindlessly using the smartphone everywhere. This should encourage me to reconnect to the world around me.
I’m still in a transition phase though.
A guy from work (millennial) has smartphone, tablet, and gaming consoles, but no computers at home. He works in IT tech support, and is really good, but the only computer he uses is the one at work. WTF.
I suspect that from time to time, he does need things only a proper computer can do, but he simply uses the work computer.
My main use case for a desktop machine is cad. I come from an analog graphics background (I’m old). The whole arrangement of tech for graphics is inhuman and apparently designed to torture artists ;) Humans evolved over millions of years to have a finely tuned hand to eye coordination- that is your hands are directly within your field of view while you are using them. The brain requires this and forcing the hands out of view to operate a mouse limits the brain’s ability to function. Humans evolved as bipeds to stand, walk and move from a vertical position. Sitting unmoving in a chair for a significant portion of the day is damaging to the skeletomuscular and nervous systems. Compressing the human scale of motion onto a screen of less than or just barely within (in the very best case) the size of the human field of view limits the amount of motion the head, neck and spine get during the day. Over time this leads to more damage.
One of the fundamental differences between phones, laptops, desktops, and beyond is size. While that sounds obvious, it also means that the amount of processing within the device is constrained by that size.
The constraints relate to how much energy can be used by each device and more importantly, how much cooling is available for the system.
It means that there’s a physical limit on how much work each device can do without being unusable.
While miniaturization is a factor, it’s not linear and you can only get so small before you fail.
So, depending on what you want to do in any given time, the device you use will dictate what’s physically possible.
Compute can be outsourced to the cloud (not that I think that’s good, but it does lift the limit on small devices)
For some workloads it’s true that you can do the heavy lifting on a more powerful remote machine and transport the results back to an endpoint device like a phone. Websites are a good relatable example of that, as are services like YouTube.
It’s not universally applicable for many activities that computers are involved with, data analysis, record keeping, simulations and a myriad of other processes.
Blurring of the lines between these different orders of magnitude is made possible by faster and faster networks, but that’s physically not able to beat processing done inside a single device.
The more powerful we make computers, the more complex problems we use them for. I suspect that this is unlikely to change as computers evolve.
Unfortunately what the other commenter replied is happening instead.
I will take this opportunity to drop one of my favorite tropes: even 10 years ago, every smartphone had millions of times more computing power than the complete computing power used during the moon landing in '69.
