zlacker

I'm not so sure about unattainable. Many programs exist that serve the user in very different contexts, for example responsive websites, web apps. Or games that work on console, like Steam Deck, and PC. Or the Nintendo Switch, which can be used in handheld mode, with a small screen and battery, or docked, connected to a TV. Controllers attached or unattached.

Now, I can see problems too: docked and portable modes need very different performance optimizations. But I'm sure that software can handle this, for example, IDEA IntelliJ has power save mode, and OS-es also demonstrated that they are fine on portable and connected systems alike, like MacOS, Windows, Linux.

It's also not a problem that some things are not available in both modes. For example, Switch has games that explicitly need docked mode, for example, Super Mario Party. Yet both the game, and the platform is popular.

I see no reason why a phone couldn't be a mediocre, or better PC.

>>nptelj+(OP)
A phone could be a mediocre PC. In my opinion, it will not gain any significant market share competing against other PCs -- mediocre ones, good ones, great ones, and "insanely great" ones too.

>>maratc+31
I don't think we can fairly compare a phone pretending to be a desktop against other desktops.

It would be more fair to compare a phone that has desktop features, to a phone that doesn't have desktop features.

So let's compare the best Apple phone that refuses to have a dex like experience; to a Samsung that has had a dex experience for about 10 years, or to a Google phone that is now adopting desktop experiences.

If the future is anything like the past, in 5 to 10 years from now we'll see a desktop experience on iPhone and they're going to be snobby about it.

>>pretty+55
Most people have a car, not an RV. And when these people chose theirs, was it "fair" comparing a car that cannot sleep 4-6 people to an RV that can?

>>maratc+31
I can imagine a scenario when it's really useful, when portability is concerned. This segment right now is served by web apps, which essentially give the same end result, supposing a working internet connection: the user can have the same software and the same files on multiple systems, like a phone, and a PC. The device itself being portable would be the same, but infinitely more private: all the apps and files could live locally. Now, I don't know how large that market is, and I suspect that it's not that large, given that people are just fine with cloud based solutions.

In another words, I think that the functionality itself is very useful. It's just that it's currently being served somewhat adequately by cloud based solutions. For this reason, such a phone-pc product could not offer much in terms of functionality, and so, it might not be popular at all.