this post was submitted on 09 Sep 2025
97 points (96.2% liked)

Compact Phones

267 readers
1 users here now

Phones are too big. We've come to accept that 6" phones are normal, and we're mis-sized. But just a few years ago, people hated big phones. We complained that they were uncomfortable to hold, didn't fit in our pockets, and that these phones were "clumsily oversized." Now big phones are all you can buy. Why? Did everyone's hands and pockets get magically bigger? Are phones big because manufacturers want us to drop them?

Whatever the reason, we know what we want: We want small phones!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Wouldn't Moto Razr and Samsung Flip both fall into that space?

[–] mulcahey@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

This is likely to be different for every person, so no judgements, but I don't think a flip phone can ever qualify as "compact."

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

I'm confused then.

  • Moto Razr (when closed) is 103,295 cubic mm in volume
  • Jellymax (a phone your graphic labels as compact) is 126,975 cubic mm in volume

Moto Razr (again when closed) is substantially smaller than Jellymax at its largest dimension (88mm for Moto vs 128mm for Jellymax)

What is the criteria here for a "compact phone" then?

[–] mulcahey@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I don't know, but it's closer to the one on the right

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

I don’t know, but it’s closer to the one on the right

So that one on the right looks like the Razr V3 (circa 2004) with the dimensions of 98 x 53 x 13.9 mm. By that measure the Jellymax you're labeling as a "compact" phone doesn't qualify as compact as it has a significantly larger largest dimension and total volume that either the modern android Razr or the 2004 Razr.

So I'm still confused what you definition of compact is for a phone, but you and others here clearly know what you want even if I can't figure it out. I'll leave you to it.

[–] noodles@slrpnk.net 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

It depends on why you want a compact phone. If it's to fit into small pockets then the flip phones do great, but if it's because modern phones are too large to comfortably hold and use for your hands, or because you want a smaller screen (for less distraction or for better battery life) then the flip phones are pretty bad.

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Small enough to hold in hand and small screen like this?

[–] noodles@slrpnk.net 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Didn't realize the outer screen was fully featured now, that does make them a lot more intriguing!

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

I can't say I use the outside screen a ton (because my eyes are getting old and a larger screen helps that so I unfold to use for longer periods), but I do use it for quick checks and media controls for streaming apps often. I've only run into one app that I've tried that doesn't work on the outside screen and that is Microsoft Authenticator (MFA app) as it requires a separate type of screen unlock instead of the normal screen unlock challenge. Gmail, cal, chrome, firefox (Ironfox) all work on the outside screen. Another nice thing is, on the outside screen you can get the full on-screen keyboard for typing too, but it takes up about half the real-estate when its up.