This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Only folding phone I’ll accept is a Surface Duo type setup. Don’t fold the panel itself, just have a different panel.
With a seam? I think I’d personally absolutely hate that.
Okay
Samsung briefly had an S4 like this. Oh, I so wanted it to come to market.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Apple is purportedly working on a foldable iPhone internally, according to "a person with direct knowledge of the situation" speaking to The Information.
The report has a long list of design challenges that Apple has faced in developing foldable phones: they're too thick when folded up; they're easily broken; they would cost more than non-foldable versions; the seam in the middle of the display tends to be both visible and feel-able; and the hinge on an iPad-sized device would prevent the device from sitting flat on a table (though this concern hasn't stopped Apple from introducing substantial camera bumps on many of its tablets and all of its phones).
If many of those challenges sound familiar, it's because it's a detailed list of virtually every bad thing you could say about current foldable Android phones, even after multiple hardware generations.
Our first Pixel Fold didn't even survive the pre-release review period, and those well-earned durability concerns plus the relatively high cost have limited foldable phones to roughly 1.6 percent of all smartphone sales, according to recent analyst estimates.
It makes sense that Apple would be testing some big swings as it thinks about the next era of iPhone design; our iPhone 15 review called them the iPhone's "final form," insofar as it feels like there's not much room to continue to improve on the iPhone X-style full-screen design that Apple has been iterating on since 2017.
It sounds like foldable phones will only be in Apple's future if the company can manage to overcome the same issues that have tripped up other foldables—though to be fair, the company does have a pretty good decadeslong track record on that front.
The original article contains 336 words, the summary contains 279 words. Saved 17%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
