Imagine a smartphone that has no camera.
It's a smartphone whose hardware specs rival or surpass those of any other manufacturer's flagship device, and it has a few pretty cool and interesting features (both hardware and software) that no other phone on the market has. Its price is competitive too, being considerably cheaper than, say, the newest and most powerful Samsung or Apple phone while being on par technologically.
But it doesn't have a camera.
Would that phone sell even one unit?
Yes, one unit. For me to spit on
I imagine there's some target group for it, but you're losing 60% of the worlds population because no woman would buy it.
The blackberry classic and q10 had cameraless models and they sold them as company phones for a number of years
>company phones
Well yes, but nobody outside of businesses would buy it as their personal main phone
S
What if there was a selfie cam on the front?
No because cameras are no longer features it's a necessity.
Why remove the camera?
The only reason I ever bought one is the get a cheap camera. It's their biggest appeal.
If it offers something ACTUALLY unique, I'm sure some people would be willing to pay for the sheer novelty of it. Personally, I couldn't give a damn about most of the features anyway. As long as it can function as a phone, play music, take pictures, and offer something to pass the time when I'm in a train or otherwise bored, everything else is quite secondary.
You might sell a phone to the dozen or so people that are paranoid about privacy and you can get some people on Sup Forums to shill for it but beyond that no. A phone with no camera has no mass market appeal. The specs alone will not be enough to carry the phone, the average consumer does not care about them.
>no camera
>take pictures
Yes, that was my point. I don't even need a smartphone, but I do need a phone with a camera. So as far as I'm concerned, you can take your unique features and shove them.
>As long as it can function as a phone, play music, take pictures
It's shame there is no smartphone that can do that with a high end camera without also having high end hardware like the latest 512 core CPU and 900 gigs of RAM which make it cost obscene amounts of money
I don't want a fucking quantum computer, I just need a phone that plays music and takes great pics
>It's shame there is no smartphone that can do that with a high end camera without also having high end hardware like the latest 512 core CPU and 900 gigs of RAM which make it cost obscene amounts of money
Aren't previous gen flagships usually relatively cheap?
Get a k800i
The cheaper models of the new Nokias should have pretty good cameras.
The military/govt would buy a fuckton because no cameras allowed in secure facilities.
>no cameras allowed in secure facilities
So do people who work there have a dumb phone for work and a smartphone for when they're anywhere else? Or do they just bring their smartphone to work and leave it at the door when they go to the no cameras places?
They (us) leave at a locker before entering sensible areas. I had a flip dumbphone back then.
There could be a market for personal phones but some areas are even more restricted than that (no USB ports or no external memory).
This. And plenty of private industries too. My last job had lockers past a certain point but photography in any part of the building was not advisable.
Bingo.
I have to leave my phone in a locker at work because it has a camera.
One of the guys I work with is still using a flip phone from like 2002, with no camera, and he's allowed to carry it in some places.
The "secure" areas of the facility are more stringent than just camera, though. I can't have my car keys with me because of the keyfob.
I would if it had some alternative QR code reader.
No phone take great pictures.
Buy a Sony RX100 or Ricoh GR.
I would buy one.
I really don't give a shit about having a camera at all, if it can be removed to shove up more battery, a better SoC or something then it's fine by me.
I basically never use my camera for anything aside of snapdick, a flashlight, or quickly taking pictures of something important.
There's a viable alternative to each of those, so I would consider getting it.
True, however no camera can txt, make calls, browse the web or play music. Ill take the smartphone with a alright camera in exchange for those features and the convince of only carrying one device instead of 2
itt: neets that never leave their parents basement opine about why no one needs something they themselves never use because they never leave the basement
>no camera can txt, make calls, browse the web or play music
Wrong.
I would buy a decently specced phone without cameras in an heartbeat.My first smartphone was a Lumia 630 specifically because it had no selfie camera, but then Windows Phones went to shit
I'd buy that, actually. It would probably be loved by tinfoil hats too.
i would lol
Everyone would buy it.