The smartphone release cycle needs to slow down
Samsung’s A series and Xiaomi’s T series are the most recent examples of why we don’t need new smartphones every year. As for Fairphone, it got it right from the start.
New smartphones are boring me more and more. My verdict when testing them is increasingly «better than the predecessor, but the differences are so small you can go for last year’s cheaper model without a second thought». Technological progress no longer justifies annual updates. It’s all just marketing now. Even going back to S models, as my colleague Lorenz Keller proposed over a year ago, wouldn’t change that.
Technological progress has plateaued
Smartphone development has long since stopped making leaps and bounds. Displays and cameras are – physics-wise – close to the limit of what’s possible. Top-end chips are more than powerful enough for what 99 per cent of people do with their smartphones. At most, there’s still room to improve efficiency.
Chinese manufacturers have recently extended battery life with silicon-carbon batteries. New software features rarely actually require new hardware, and design changes tend to be subtle.
At the same time, the extended software support mandated by the EU means devices stay usable for longer, making it more appealing to buy one- or two-year-old models at a lower price. Consumers are ahead of the curve (link in German), keeping their smartphones for longer and longer on average.
Good examples from Amsterdam and London
Fairphone is the obvious example here. With just one exception, the Dutch manufacturer has presented its smartphones on a two-year cycle from the start. The company is committed to sustainability, so yearly releases would fly in the face of that.
The brand Nothing is going partly in the same direction. At least for the flagship, no substantial improvements over the Phone (3) seem possible this year – hence no Phone (4). That said, this hasn’t stopped the London-based manufacturer from introducing two new mid-range models – the Phone (4a) and (4a) Pro – just twelve months later.
Manufacturers are unlikely to change voluntarily
Manufacturers are unlikely to voluntarily walk away from the annual release cycle. They’re too dependent on using a new model – and the attention that comes with it – to boost sales. No CEO with investors and shareholders to answer to can afford to ride that wave only every two years.
Imagine how much doom and gloom there would be if Apple stopped announcing record numbers in the quarter after each new iPhone launch. A normal quarter would immediately be blown up into a weak patch, or even the beginning of the end.
Switching to a two-year cycle probably won’t save a company any significant development costs, and they’re unlikely to spend much less on marketing either. And given their volume, not having to reconfigure production capacity is unlikely to be much of a financial incentive for large manufacturers.
That leaves only two factors that could push things towards a two-year cycle: political regulation or the market itself. At present, there’s no discussion of any regulation at the EU level. The current memory chip shortage could, however, influence the situation. There are rumours that the cheapest Pixel 11 model could start with less memory than the Pixel 10. This would make it even harder to sell the annual release as progress.
As a primary school pupil, I used to sit in a friend's living room with many of my classmates to play the Super NES. Now I get my hands on the latest technology and test it for you. In recent years at Curved, Computer Bild and Netzwelt, now at Digitec and Galaxus.
This is a subjective opinion of the editorial team. It doesn't necessarily reflect the position of the company.
Show all
