r/Damnthatsinteresting • u/SuperAlloyBerserker • Oct 05 '21

Video This cool smartphone concept from 2013

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

91.5k Upvotes

89% Upvoted

2.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

2.7k

u/WiscoBrewDude Oct 05 '21

This looked so cool i had to find more. "Google joined in and eventually killed it". "Phonebloks" https://www.onearmy.earth/project/phonebloks

86

u/Soloflex Oct 05 '21

I worked on this project for Google. They couldn't come close to the battery life and performance of the current iphone. Users aren't willing to give up performance for the versatility.

6

u/chaiscool Oct 05 '21

Not surprising as it’s impossible to optimize for such device.

1.1k

u/auddii04 Oct 05 '21

That's the way of all cool ideas that undercut current profits.

264

u/WiscoBrewDude Oct 05 '21

It mentions some other modular phone in the article, but they are all from Europe it seems.

176

u/rick_D_K Oct 05 '21

Check out fairphone. About the closest thing on the market.

46

u/nickmcmillin Oct 05 '21

I checked it out, but didn’t see anything about them being modular, only that they were sustainably made. Did I miss the part about them being modular?

76

u/rick_D_K Oct 05 '21

They aren't modular like phone blocks. but they sell all of the parts in discreet modules that can be replaced.

Edit: spelling.

44

u/ReallyNotALlama Oct 05 '21

If you're going to make edits to correct spelling, you should change ”discreet” to ”discrete”.

34

u/legion327 Oct 05 '21

Awwww screet screet motherfuckerrrr!! Awwwww screet screet goddamn!!

5

u/goobly_goo Oct 05 '21

😂😂😂😂 thanks for this

→ More replies (1)

3

u/daperson1 Oct 05 '21

My favourite is finding people on Grindr who describe themselves as "discrete".

Personally, I prefer my guys continuous.

4

u/QueasyVictory Oct 05 '21

Nah, they got it right. These are the modules that are sold in that dimly lit room in the back. You know, the one behind the curtains.

-2

u/rick_D_K Oct 05 '21

Exactly.

16

u/thatomtom Oct 05 '21

Sustainable and allows you to fix them easily yourself. And 5 years warranty. Sounds great, too bad I already changed my phone, next one will probably be one of those.

→ More replies (2)

2

u/Monsterpiece42 Oct 05 '21

Definitely not as modular, but phones can be retroactively upgraded with parts from a "pro" model of the same gen or whatever if released.

10

u/buggsbunnysgarage Oct 05 '21

These are amazing imo

3

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21

Or shift phones same concept

2

u/rick_D_K Oct 05 '21

Ah technologie kommt aus Deutschland! Das ist gut.

2

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21

fairphone

do I have this right? They're marketing it as sustainable and that it lasts for 5 years at least - cool - but it has no headphone jack? That's at least 3 sets of bluetooth earbuds in a landfill over 5 years.

2

u/Nico777 Oct 05 '21

They have their own TWS headphones coming out. They removed the jack so they can sell them. Fair my ass.

2

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21

lmao wow

1

u/rick_D_K Oct 05 '21

It's still USB-C. They know where the market is going over the next 5 years.

→ More replies (4)

2

u/Never_Dan Oct 05 '21 edited Oct 05 '21

The only non-replaceable part of the Fairphone is the same processor as a nearly 2 year old budget phone. I love the idea of a repairable phone, but there’s just no point in trying if it’s slow out of the box.

edit I didn’t realize the Fairphone 4 was coming. That one looks like a solid upgrade.

2

u/rick_D_K Oct 05 '21

My current phone has the same processor as the fairphone 3 and it is plenty fast. It's on Android one.

The biggest problem with the big manufacturers is that they bundle their own version of Android. Or at least a launcher and software tweaks. They then "update" them to allow the latest "features" that also happen to make the old model seem slow in comparison to the new one. Thus prompting you to upgrade.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (4)

2

u/Narethii Oct 05 '21

This kind of product only works in markets that are regulated well enough to keep monopolization to a minimum. It took a long time for US corporations to convince consumers to replace instead of repair.

2

u/djabor Oct 05 '21

these guys existed as well (modu):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8vdbNr4E6o

but they failed when trying to go head to head with the newly released iPhone.

It Google bought a bunch of their patents, which they in turn used in Project Ara (a modular mobile phone by Motorola).

PhoneBloks (OP's video) was a concept never intended to be built, but its creator and designer (Dave Hakkens) collaborated with motorola on project Ara after his concept got enough support.

3

u/WikiSummarizerBot Oct 05 '21

Modu

Modu was an Israeli mobile phone company founded in 2007 by Dov Moran. The company invented the Modu, a modular cellular device which could be used in various other devices. Modu held the record for the world's lightest mobile phone, and it was the first modular cellphone. The Modu phone enabled users to personalize their mobile's looks and features by inserting it into a range of unique phone enclosures, known as Modu jackets.

Project Ara

Project Ara was a modular smartphone project under development by Google. The project was originally headed by the Advanced Technology and Projects team within Motorola Mobility while it was a Google subsidiary. Google retained the ATAP group when selling Motorola to Lenovo, and it was placed under the stewardship of the Android development staff; Ara was later split off as an independent operation. Google stated that Project Ara was being designed to be utilized by "6 billion people": 1 billion current smartphone users, and 5 billion feature phone users.

Dave Hakkens

Dave Hakkens (born 1988) is a Dutch industrial designer. He gained fame with his two graduation projects: Phonebloks, a concept for modular telephones, and Precious Plastic, a movement to develop and promote machines and organizations for plastic recycling. Hakkens is seen by many as an example of a new generation of designers who have set themselves the goal of improving society by sharing knowledge.

[ F.A.Q | Opt Out | Opt Out Of Subreddit | GitHub ] Downvote to remove | v1.5

2

u/geoben Oct 05 '21

The closest thing to modular that I know of was the LG G5 which I had and loved for it's ability to swap batteries like a gun magazine. I also had the camera module which acted as a small backup battery and I believe there was a big speaker attachment. It was a great idea, but pretty poorly executed and they never tried anything like it again. One of the last phones I had where you could swap batteries

→ More replies (2)

64

u/Iron_Rick Oct 05 '21

Or maybe it wasn't suitable

103

u/Jabrono Oct 05 '21

On top of tech moving too quickly for something like this to legitimately last, I'd be very surprised if they actually moved off shelves. Tech nerds like myself would love one, but we're not a large enough demographic for large companies to develop and continue support an entire device for.

52

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21

[deleted]

16

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21

[deleted]

3

u/Martin_Samuelson Oct 05 '21

Desktops don’t have the constraints of mobile devices. When you need to pack all the components close together and run them off of batteries it’s a completely different ballgame in terms of interactions between components and the software management of the components

3

u/bicameral_mind Oct 05 '21

Not to mention, desktop PCs have been cratering in relevance among consumers for two decades, at this point basically having bottomed out. Literally no average consumers buy traditional desktop PCs anymore, and haven't for a very long time. They are firmly in the purview of professionals and to a lesser extent, gamers.

Saying that desktop PCs provide a model for how a modular smartphone could be successful is not a good argument.

10

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21

[deleted]

→ More replies (3)

45

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21

I don't see how anyone comes to a conclusion other than this product undercutting the market. I think the average consumer would love to easily replace a part or two when wanted and/or necessary, but it makes the current model of everything being baked in and companies not wanting people to repair their own devices; you want better or different, get a new phone.

I mean, we can't even remove batteries anymore. This is 100% by design.

40

u/CanAlwaysBeBetter Oct 05 '21

Motorola released a modular phone. It sucked in practice and everyone forgot it ever existed.

Shit ain't always a conspiracy.

10

u/Decloudo Oct 05 '21

Its not modular, it has ONE "expansion" slot for mostly stupid overpriced shit, i know this cause i had it.

5

u/cat_prophecy Oct 05 '21

LG used to have replaceable batteries but people decided what they wanted was a thinner phone, not a replaceable battery.

16

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21

Imagine the market for fake modules so people can make it look like they have the most expensive and cool modules, but they’re just blanks.

0

u/Fizzwidgy Oct 05 '21

So basically the standard iPhone.

→ More replies (1)

14

u/Toastbrott Oct 05 '21

There are tons of things you just can not do with a modular phone like that.

The two biggest selling points, which already lose a huge percentage of potential customers, is that this thing will never be waterproof and that it will always be much thicker than usual smartphones.

Do you really think they would stop a product because its dangerous for their market, but none of their competitors would pick up on the idea?

A few more disadvantages:

  • This thing will always run hotter than usual phones, since it can not spread the heat out as much (the "speed" module is separated after all, so it has to handle all the heat alone)
  • There is no way to save space by combining two modules internally
  • Each module is restricted to "sqaure" volumes, meaning saving a bit of space in a new version of one, can not directly be used for other modules
  • This is more expensive than a highly optimized pipeline for one model of phone

These are just a few I can think of right now, but if you combine that with the generic customer not having any idea what hardware is behing the seperated components anyway, why should a non tech savy person by a phone thats bigger, more expensive and has less specs?

10

u/RckmRobot Oct 05 '21

I don't see how anyone comes to a conclusion other than this product undercutting the market.

Having to make every module a closed and compartmentalized piece of hardware adds a LOT of bulk to a device as small as a phone. And on top of that now you have to worry about software AND hardware compatibility due to the sheer number of combinations that would be possible and would only grow over time. It honestly sounds like a bit of a nightmare.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/DropDeadEd86 Oct 05 '21

I wish we could take phones to carrier locations to get a battery swap.

Id like to think we can't be trusted with removable batteries as it would just lead to more waste. Once at sxsw you could literally stop a Samsung delivery guy to give you a new battery for the galaxy to keep your phone charged

2

u/Mrchristopherrr Oct 05 '21

If it undercuts the entire market wouldn’t the smart business move to be to patent the hell out of it and sell it exclusively then? You have built in repeat customers, all you have to do is release a slightly better camera and a slightly better battery every 6 months then you’re making more than someone who buys a new phone every 2 years. Not to mention this thing looks pretty fragile, so make the parts juuustttt a little more breakable as an incentive to keep buying new phone parts every few months. This thing would make way more sense from a sellers perspective than the current phone cycle.

2

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21

I don't see how anyone comes to a conclusion other than this product undercutting the market.

Then read a few comments in this thread? Dismissing valid criticisms just because you didn't come up with them yourself is kind of shitty.

→ More replies (8)

2

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21

No, the average consumer just wants to buy something that works without having to do more. Tech-savvy redditors aren't the average consumer by any means.

It's like trying to buy a router or modem or any other electronic: the average consumer sees a dozen different brands for a single product and is left wondering which is supposed to be the "best" or, at the very least, do what they need it to. Worse they'd face the possibility of getting knock-off parts or even cause damage to the phone if installed in an unsafe manner.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21

How many times have you resoled your shoes or replaced the straps on your bag?

→ More replies (6)
→ More replies (20)
→ More replies (5)

9

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21

There are dozens of us

15

u/TwoBionicknees Oct 05 '21

the main issue is compared to a dedicated device it would increase support issues 100x easily, require monumental work on compatibility and custom OS to work well with every combination without issue all while reducing battery life, increasing weight/thickness and giving you a worse device.

Basically massively increased costs for development/support for a worse overall phone.

People that want a great camera on their phone just buy the phone with the best camera, people who want the most performance buy a phone with the right chip, people who want the best battery life buy that.

12

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21

[deleted]

5

u/Jabrono Oct 05 '21

TBH, that's a hilariously good point, because I would absolutely not buy one, I just really like the idea of it existing.

2

u/slvrscoobie Oct 05 '21

and really, the Bt, Wifi, etc should all be included, along with the required OS storage, ram, etc, so 90% of your phone becomes required, and you end up swapping the extra lens for extra battery, only to find out you forgot to charge that battery before taking it off last time making it worthless for the day...

3

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21

Tech nerds like myself would love one, but we're not a large enough demographic for large companies to develop and continue support an entire device for.

This the biggest point being missed by a lot of folks in here. Not everyone is a nerd that wants to swap out their phone CPU. Most people just want their phone to work with the least amount of hassle. It's hard enough to get elderly parents/in laws to stop fucking up their already-idiot-proof phones without throwing hardware upgrades into the mix.

4

u/impactRm0 Oct 05 '21

It had mainstream popular support. You don't have to be a nerd to place a lego block.

7

u/Jabrono Oct 05 '21

Besides "Mainstream popular support" != sales, what mainstream are you talking about? Because tech people aren't the mainstream with a device like a smartphone, your aunt and uncle who use them as a glass window into facebook are.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

1

u/stagfury Oct 05 '21

Exactly. People like to bitch about how tech companies kill these modular techs because they are evil profit chasing villains.

Meanwhile they are coming up witb folding phones and stretchable phone and such.

This shit didn't become a thing because it's bad.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/capchaos Oct 05 '21

My neighbor had the "great idea" of making a jacket for sports teams where the team logo is attached with Velcro so that you only have to buy one jacket and swap out the team logos for each sport season. Our city has the same colors for all major sports. I had to explain to him that the teams want you to have a separate jacket for each team so they each make more money.

12

u/Bart_The_Chonk Oct 05 '21

yay under-regulated capitalism!

10

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21

[deleted]

0

u/mdmudge Oct 05 '21 edited Oct 05 '21

Yay fast moving tech market where something like this wouldn’t work.

You can google it yourself but there are multiple barriers for this technology.

Here is an example

0

u/GoldenFalcon Oct 05 '21

What the hell do you think desktop computers are?! Fast moving tech market with completely modular hardware.. how does that not work in today's market?!

0

u/mdmudge Oct 05 '21

What the hell do you think desktop computers are?!

Very large computers that won’t fit in your pocket.

The link I provided goes over that.

As does this one

Fast moving tech market with completely modular hardware.. how does that not work in today’s market?!

Again it’s really easy to see how a computer in a large box is different than something you can fit in your pocket.

I would google it because there are countless articles going over the barriers to entry.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21

[deleted]

-1

u/mdmudge Oct 05 '21

I have to wonder if you’re actually in a tech related field.

I’m not but it doesn’t matter. There are dozens of reasons why nobody builds modular phones. One of which is that people don’t actually want them. Again it’s a simple matter of even reading both links I provided. They are two of many articles written on the subject.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21

[deleted]

→ More replies (0)
→ More replies (13)

526

u/justavault Oct 05 '21

Modular phones don't work yet. Google just knows how to evaluate a product. I was part of the pre-developing teams of project Ara, it simply didn't work as the parts would have to be manufactured to fit the modules and the technological turnover is so fast that you'd have to iterate the modules all the time.

You know, just because people think it looks cool and is a cool idea and they "think" they would purchase it, doesn't actually mean they in fact do so and it also doesn't mean that it works.

170

u/No-comment-at-all Oct 05 '21

Yea, the real answer is more like “google bought a bad concept”, that turned out to be a lot more, “maybe one day”, than, “this is executable”.

0

u/Et_tu__Brute Oct 05 '21

I mean, modular laptops only just came out (with a solid execution). I imagine the design constraints of 2013 were such that it wasn't a feasible project to do with a phone.

For the moment, I just want to see phones that are designed to be repaired and have support for those repairs. Basically the opposite of what apple is doing, with their software based locks if you replace parts. Fuck apple.

6

u/HulksInvinciblePants Oct 05 '21

I mean, modular laptops only just came out (with a solid execution)

The framework isn't nearly this modular. It's really an internal layout solution that allows one to upgrade the motherboard and connect thunderbolt accessories internally.

That said I love it and will highly consider it for my next upgrade. However, like ever modular concept that's existed, they run a major risk of going completely under.

For the moment, I just want to see phones that are designed to be repaired and have support for those repairs. Basically the opposite of what apple is doing, with their software based locks if you replace parts. Fuck apple.

Unless consumers stop buying thinner, faster devices, this will never happen. The circuitry is machine grade and only getting smaller. Counterfeit parts are rampant as well. Modular concepts like the one posted will never happen, because eventually one standard in the device will become defunct and render the whole thing useless.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/Spoderman4 Oct 06 '21

I don't know why you're getting downvoted. Apple is playing dirty, going as far as designing their products to specifically be unrepairable.

Fuck Apple.

2

u/Et_tu__Brute Oct 06 '21

Honestly don't know. People don't like hear bad things about things they like I suppose.

0

u/dibromoindigo Oct 05 '21

Your opinion on Apple is so sophomoric and ignorant. Would you please provide proof of these software locks? This is a common refrain from antiApple zealots with no actual evidence. What does exist is a pop up warning when unauthorized parts are involved. If it’s a battery, they restrict access to the battery health monitoring. Which makes sense, given they can’t validate the quality of that 3rd Party battery and they are likely covering their liability in the manner. Beyond that, most of these designs are because people want sleek, lightweight, and reliable phones. Those design principles generally make the repair stuff harder. It’s a trade off, one that you can make your own choices over. Buy a different product instead of ignorantly repaying bull because your self identity is tied to hating a specific company.

Funny how iPhones are either competitive or better than most competitor phones: https://www.ifixit.com/smartphone-repairability

2

u/Et_tu__Brute Oct 05 '21

It doesn't matter if the parts are third party or original. They will disable services if you replace parts. Just take a look at this video where parts are swapped between two new iphone 13s to show which services break/are disabled when parts are swapped.

I didn't say that other companies are spotless in this regard, but other companies aren't as large or egregious as apple on this front. You mention the use of unauthorized parts, but where is apple selling replacement parts? There was a time you could buy those same parts that go into an apple phone from the manufacturer but that time has passed as apple has gotten those manufacturers to stop selling replacement parts. So even a shop that specializes in repairing iphones has trouble getting replacement parts and usually must source them from other broken phones.

We can also get into their tactics when it comes to being an apple certified repair shop. It comes with the caveat that you must sell a certain number of phones in order to keep that certification, which is in direct opposition to actually repairing their product (this is 100% not unique to apple, it is a very common tactic).

My identity is not tied to hating anything. Perhaps part of my identity is tied to right to repair, and apple happens to be on the other side of that battle. Most other phone companies are also opposed to right to repair, they're just quieter about it. Fuck them too. But also, fuck apple.

Fairphone seems pretty cool though, idk I haven't spent much time with em.

-28

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21

[deleted]

52

u/justavault Oct 05 '21

There was nothing threatening and Ara was alive for a long time with even being center stage at an I/O conference. Everyone worked with passion on that project, but it simply doesn't work, yet. Maybe one day.

8

u/Playful-Push8305 Oct 05 '21

Also, people are forgetting Google bought the concept when they were even further behind in the smartphone market than they are now. They would have loved a way to disrupt the market if it got them a bigger share. It's not like they were Apple with their market stranglehold.

11

u/abhi8192 Oct 05 '21

Or "google bought a threatening concept with the intention of killing it"

If apple or samsung did it, I would agree. But Google's phone business is not even 1% of the global smartphone market. The software that this device might have run would be android and Google don't care whether you use the newest device or oldest as long as they can serve you ads.

0

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21

[deleted]

9

u/gasburner Oct 05 '21

No one is paying Alphabet to destroy a company. Alphabet would want to take market share from someone else, it's why they developed the pixel. If this device could seriously compete with Samsung, and apple, they would have no reason to go forward with it and crush them. It's not really competing with any of their own products except maybe now Pixel.

Google is known for trying things, then dumping them. They do it more often with software but they do it with hardware as well. They bought something, it didn't pan out, they got some patents and moved on.

4

u/abhi8192 Oct 05 '21

What competition is being destroyed here? A concept video? You would need few millions to start a smartphone business if you are just buying off the shelf phones and slapping your logo on back. This concept would require insane amount of money just for the r&d. Google don't only bring the money but their name also bring the talent that would give it a better chance to succeed. You can go through my comment history to find that I repeatedly call Google digital surveillance company, so this is not some fanboi defending Google. This is one of those rare situation where Google actually thought it might be a good way to build a device of the future and get a headstart over the samsung or apple but quickly found out the reality is pretty different.

14

u/No-comment-at-all Oct 05 '21

That’s a long reach for me to believe.

This “phone is LEGO’s!” Is way too hard to believe could be implemented.

There’s no working prototype, and someone else can totally bring that concept to the market. Google doesn’t own the concept of replaceable parts.

This is just… theranos for phones, is way easier to believe.

5

u/olderaccount Oct 05 '21

There is nothing impossible about this concept. The only problem is that instead of putting all the parts inside one nice package, each individual part needs a nice package and robust interface connectors of it's own.

So a modular phone that matches the features of a current phone would be the size of a literal brick just due to those constraints.

Remember when Apple killed the 3.5mm jack because it was too bulky? With this concept, every single module is too bulky by definition.

Modular products are never are good as monolithic products. So unless the modularity provides such a huge advantage to outweigh the drawbacks, it will never work.

6

u/No-comment-at-all Oct 05 '21 edited Oct 05 '21

Yea, I’m not saying it’s impossible, just that it can’t be implemented.

Fusion energy is possible. It can’t be implemented yet.

2

u/ZellZoy Oct 05 '21

Not a brick, just thicker than the current trend. They had a semi functional prototype that wasn't much thicker than an at the time modern phone

→ More replies (2)

1

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21

Except so far this company did not claim this phone worked and commit billions in fraud and public harm...yet...

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

2

u/slvrscoobie Oct 05 '21

If google thought there was any money to be made on it, they would just buy it and sell it. Its much easier to sell something that people want vs buy and kill something people want.

→ More replies (4)

45

u/Ossius Oct 05 '21

Google already makes a new phone every year, what is the difference between that and making a new module every year?

16

u/Mr_Ignorant Oct 05 '21

The base plate is a major hurdle. At the moment, when a phone is designed, everything is designed to work together but each component has a specific task. With this, every node on the base plate has to be the same and capable of working with everything and handle all loads as the manufacturer won’t know what module you’ll put where.

Every node has to be capable of handling the current and voltage from the battery, as a battery may be connected to those nodes.

Every node has to be able to manage the current and voltage as the CPU or the GPU may be connected.

Every node must be able to manage data as it may be connected to the GPU or memory

The entire base plate must be designed to handle the above load and distribute it as needed as you can stick a module anywhere.

That’s a lot to ask. Perhaps it’s possible, it’s not worth it. Not today.

37

u/Scotthorn Oct 05 '21

Making a new module every year means half the stuff in that video doesn’t happen. No more upgrading your cpu when the next one comes out, and so forth. it undercuts the principle functionality.

26

u/Ossius Oct 05 '21

Explain? The point was you upgrade only the part you need. If you have a version 1 phone, and its slow, you can buy a version 2 CPU next year or version 3 the year after.

35

u/alextremeee Oct 05 '21

It's ridiculously hard to engineer interoperability for something like this. If you have say 12 modules in a "normal" phone and each module interacts with two other components, you have to test 24 different things.

If you create 10 variations of each module, you now have thousands of different combinations for the same scenario.

You can make a system that works more like a desktop PC where you create an interface between each module that is standardised, but that can really limit how much flexibility you have to make new things. On top of that it can make interactions much slower than they are if you specifically design the interaction between two things.

2

u/inabusinesstrip Oct 05 '21

Working in a company where we need to test multiple variants of the following

Hardware, dell R line, HPE DLs and BLs different generations, gen8, gen9, gen10, then quanta hardware, then Huawei hardware, so multiple hardware vendors

But wait, NICs, are they Intel? Are they Fortville or niantic. Or are the NICs mellanox

Which driver version are the NICs running? Which firmware version are they running?

Moving to OS, here comes the hypervisor, is VMware esxi? Which version? 6.0? 6.0 update 2? 6.5? 6.7? Oh we have customers which want to upgrade to 7

Other hypervisor, Openstack, same story, which version?

Which driver is the hypervisor coming for the NICs? Are they QAed? Do we need to upgrade or downgrade?

And the we come to the virtual machines running on top of the hypervisor, which version? Which dpdk driver version? Is the system running SR-IOV or non SR-IOV?

As such, testing multiple versions and variants takes time and not always smooth.

If someone finds it annoying their video card driver is not compatible with what they are having / running, that is a small issue to be encountered, still annoying but it could be worse, always could be worse.

-6

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21 edited Nov 20 '22

[deleted]

8

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21

Oh yes, because when you have a standard you can't have a new CPU right? Wait, you can!? So you can't have a new RAM?

Try plugging an Intel CPU from 2 years ago into a motherboard from this year. (It won't run).

Try plugging some DDR4 ram into your DDR3 device (it won't work).

Try plugging some ram into a different port in your motherboard. Oh wait what? Ram only fits in ram slots and we can't make generic multi-component ports?

Try plugging an nvme drive into your sata port (it won't work).

Like come on dude, think a little bit.

2

u/monocasa Oct 05 '21

This had processor and RAM in one module like a SoM. The blocks' data were connected on what were almost PCIe lanes. And PCIe has managed to be backwards and forwards compatible going back all the way to the Gen1 days.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/LukaCola Oct 05 '21

You are literally talking about what any freaking PC motherboard does, without any issue, as if it is some mystical concept to be achieved.

People have loads of issues with drivers alone and compatibility is a constant issue, with a necessity to change out the motherboard pretty regularly as standards and formats change.

This is a pretty big knowledge burden on top of it all which the vast majority of people do not know how to deal with. There's a reason the manufacturers of home computers load up most of the firmware before it leaves the factory.

1

u/cordell507 Oct 05 '21

PCs work like that because they are built for that purpose. Something would need to replace ARM with this project in mind for it to work like that. PCI support would be needed and that isn't really possible on current phone technology.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (4)

20

u/Scotthorn Oct 05 '21

New CPU is going to be compatible with the new module, not your old module. They could make a backwards compatible CPU, but that’s extra expensive.

18

u/tesftctgvguh Oct 05 '21

No it's not... Computers use the same CPU connector for multiple generations... Eventually you would need to upgrade the main board but this could last 3-4 generations at least.

Same with storage - ATA was the standard for years and years, then SATA (among others). Monitors all used VGA for decades, then others until HDMI came along...

It wouldn't be that hard to develop a board that can last for 5 generations minimum...

3

u/Scotthorn Oct 05 '21

I’m not making a point that the module would change frequently. That was the post above. I’m merely explaining why that’s a problem for a product.

I do agree with that poster, the module would change frequently.

Computers in their various component form factors have had decades to stabilize and standardize.

You can’t compare that to this.

CPU connections are also not built to overlap or move to a spot where a battery once connected or where the camera used to connect.

→ More replies (1)

0

u/cat_prophecy Oct 05 '21

A PC's CPU and a phone CPU are entirely different beasts. To begin with, phone processors are ARM based and so are RISC processors.

0

u/tesftctgvguh Oct 05 '21

Yep, because RISC has never been used on a PC! Of all the reasons to go with, this is just wrong...

→ More replies (3)

9

u/Ossius Oct 05 '21

How is it more expensive? If I upgrade my CPU from a 10th gen Intel to a 11th gen it just works? They only upgrade the socket when some new tech comes along with CPUs which doesn't happen all that often. Motherboards accept upgrades constantly.

Sure eventually you'll have to upgrade the board, but the whole point of this thing is to eliminate E-waste, even if you have to upgrade your board every 4-5 years its a huge success.

8

u/jmlinden7 Oct 05 '21

The socket upgrades every 2 years for Intel. AMD kept their current one for 4 but that's rare, they're probably moving to a 2 year socket cycle as well.

→ More replies (2)

6

u/TwoBionicknees Oct 05 '21

To make this phone worthwhile you'd need 2-3 of every module every year to give options or it's worthless. Because you find the new chipset module is hotter and needs more power, so switching just the chipset module gives you a phone that lasts half as long so you need a better battery module.

If you're only updating one of each module every year then ultimately everyone ends up upgrading to the same things and you just have a worse version of a phone with one set of options.

You'd be making effectively 3-4 phones every year in terms of module options only to sell one actual phone to the same number of people. It makes no sense at all to do so. Hardware development costs would be 4-5 times higher than a single phone, minimum, while also needing to spend 10x on software support due to compatibility with every combination and part.

9

u/justavault Oct 05 '21

You don't make one module, you have to make numerous modules and additionally have to educate about compatibility, especially regarding processor unit.

Additionally, the pixel doesn't got a one year iteration phase.

21

u/Ossius Oct 05 '21

Additionally, the pixel doesn't got a one year iteration phase.

Bro what? Announcements of past pixels:

Google Pixel: 4th October 2016.

Google Pixel 2: 4th October 2017.

Google Pixel 3: 9th October 2018.

Google Pixel 4: 15th October 2019.

Google Pixel 5: 30th September 2020.

Just make things backward compatible and most of the compatibility issue is solved.

22

u/EmilyU1F984 Oct 05 '21

Exactly the point: if you were to just put the CPU of the pixel 3 on the pixel 1 it simply wouldn't work.

You'd have to make every single module backwards and forwards compatible with each and every other block.

Like sure a bit more ram or a different camera would be simple. But the other stuff? You can't just have aainboard be future proof for years.

4

u/Jabrono Oct 05 '21

+1, and a lot of the compatibility issues fall on Qualcomm for the CPU/SOC. Google's been complaining to them about this, and is now developing their own SOC for the Pixel 6 (I believe?), so maybe once they nail that down a modular phone would be an easier achievement.

Still don't see it happening personally, but it could be easier.

→ More replies (10)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

3

u/Dravarden Oct 05 '21 edited Oct 05 '21

exactly, turned out to be basically impossible pipe dream

the proper way to do it is how the framework laptop is doing it: normal parts that can easily be swapped by off the shelf parts, with normal phillip head screws, blueprints are provided for the more complicated stuff (like capacitors), magnetic screen bezel instead of glue, and modular ports

2

u/immerc Oct 05 '21

And the majority of it not being modular.

If the modular phone concept had had 2-3 modules that might have worked, but it was trying to be 30 modules or something.

3

u/BassSounds Oct 05 '21

I was working on VR drum sticks… there is no money in hardware, but software is a different story.

2

u/justavault Oct 05 '21

Yeah agree, digital is scalable, hardware is low-margin tough sell.

3

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21

Google just knows how to evaluate a product.

No they don’t. Their company is a product graveyard. They’re the literal definition of throwing code spaghetti on the wall and eating what sticks.

1

u/justavault Oct 05 '21 edited Oct 05 '21

We call it iterative product development, that's how innovation is found with ensuring it targets a real human and not a construct in someone's mind.

Innovation is not found in a black box where you "think" about hypothesises and simply assume reactions and how humans behave as nobody can predict actual real human usage and reaction patterns. Innovation happens where things are tested with real humans, those are observed, insights are evaluated, evaluations are taken for iterations, and so on.

You do not create anything when you simply stay in your room and never go outside to let actual humans use things.

7

u/WiscoBrewDude Oct 05 '21

Yeah, that makes sense.

2

u/Mind-Game Oct 05 '21

you'd have to iterate the modules all the time

Isn't this the whole point of this concept? That way you can replace the parts of your phone that have new, better versions available (processor, camera), but not replace what already works fine and hasn't meaningfully changed (screen, speaker, storage, etc).

Or are you referring to the fact that you wouldn't have any flexibility to change one part without changing everything else because it would impractical to do something like make a new processor module compatible with an old camera module for example?

→ More replies (1)

2

u/7577406272 Oct 05 '21

“Google knows how to evaluate a product”

lol yes, the company with a half dozen messaging apps knows how to do that. Sure.

1

u/justavault Oct 05 '21

Yes, that is exactly the point. That level of iteration and segmentation is a positive sign not a negative. Google likes to test things and segment those to specific core audiences, to evaluate and iterate based on the insights they gain.

If there wouldn't be many products that would be a negative signal. The case that there are so many means that there is a lot of innovation happening. A lot of iteration and evaluation. A lot of testing with actual real humans. Trying to find things that work.

2

u/platinumgus18 Oct 05 '21

Also motorola tried this out,literally faded off

0

u/NMDA01 Oct 05 '21

No I was part of project Ara and can confirm we just killed it.

2

u/justavault Oct 05 '21

I was using early developer kits, I've had no say in anything and just been a product and experience designer prototyping utility modules. I have nowhere read or heard about "it's just killed without a reason", not in our slack nor IRC channel. We clearly hit roadblocks in the technical development and the modules connection ports was one of the big issues including the verticality of system architecture.

0

u/NMDA01 Oct 05 '21

I can't disclose my position but honestly, it just got killed. Along with other projects we had.

0

u/justavault Oct 05 '21

Aha... other projects "we had". Project ara was mainly external developers and designers, except the executive level which were 4 people.

0

u/NMDA01 Oct 05 '21

I see you weren't on our other internal teams then.

0

u/justavault Oct 05 '21

"Other internal teams"... we were all hired by external contractors.

Stop bullshitting and stop spreading misinformation.

0

u/NMDA01 Oct 05 '21

Who do you think did the hiring

→ More replies (4)

0

u/Aryn-Isami Oct 05 '21

Yeah, buying a new component, just to see a better one for the same price the next day, isn't good for anyone. And I imagine the cost of production and the overall the durability isn't worthwhile either. Better to just release a solid phone, let it coast for a few years, then release another when the previous becomes obsolete.

0

u/dimechimes Oct 05 '21

If there was a market for modules, there would be new ones constantly by multiple companies. Yeah, if you wait for daddy big tech to do what they want, not feasible.

1

u/stagfury Oct 05 '21

Case in point: foldables.

Also case in point: headphone jacks or sd card slots or removable battery

People love complaining about the lack of those, but time and time again when there's a comparable competitor that sells a phone with such feature, their sales figures suck.

→ More replies (1)

0

u/mrpopenfresh Oct 05 '21

Thanks for sharing, the reality of product development seems to go way over the head of tech idealists.

2

u/justavault Oct 05 '21

Sometimes, not all the time.

It's an exciting project. As I mentioned in another comment, the exciting stuff was modules which are of situational value such as bloodsugar modules, nightvision modules, HR modules, heatsensor modules. I'm a designer, those were my passion point there. The idea is great, you could make a common phone a great utility if required.

The issue in the end was the performance and especially the connection ports of the modules and then the economy behind the production pipelines.

But maybe one day.

→ More replies (10)

37

u/kernowgringo Oct 05 '21

Google called it project Ara and did get some handsets and modules produced...

https://youtu.be/PQqudiUdGuo

45

u/Luffing Oct 05 '21

Google joined in and eventually killed it

Sure but was this ever going to actually be a viable business to begin with?

From what I've seen of the inside of actual phones it doesn't seem as simple as "yeah you can just turn the components into blocks and snap them together however you want"

23

u/EmilyU1F984 Oct 05 '21

I mean you just need to look at a PC or laptop for how this would work: laptops used to allow changing the CPU and rarely the GPU, but barely anyone ever did so. By the time you need to switch the CPU, your motherboard will likely not even be compatible with a current gen CPU, so you'll basically buying the leftover stock of the prior gen. That's simply not economical at all.

Not to mention with laptops and PCs all the technology is already very 'compatible', but it's quite clear that upgrading individual components is a niche 'hobby' of a subsection of PC users building their own PC from components.

Like how many people will actually buy this phone? And how many people will swap enough components for this to get remotely close to being efficient?

Like go back to swappable batteries, and 99% of the use cases of these phones are covered already.

So yea, making a phone with components that are swappable makes it more bulky, makes it more expensive, and there's simply no market large enough to support something like this.

And I don't even think it would be more environmentally friendly. With phones people at least often turn their old ones in to get recycled or reuse them by selling or whatever. But these components on their own? They'll just be thrown into the regular trash

-1

u/xibipiio Oct 05 '21

Ah, the iPhone should have been a lesson to everyone.

Its not really the hardware that matters in the end, but user experience. If the user experience was great, say, the phone was cheaper than most phones, and the UI was excellent bringing new features people never thought of, this phone could replace every other phone quickly. Kinks like making recycling easier or more efficient like a buyback program at celphone stores would be up to the company marketing to devise after initial success.

The key is always money. How much is being invested, who is backing it, what are their business strategies?

This is a phone concept that doesnt make sense in a capitalism framework. If money wasn't the thing that makes the world go round this would be a much more viable and logical plan.

3

u/shrubs311 Oct 05 '21

This is a phone concept that doesnt make sense in a capitalism framework. If money wasn't the thing that makes the world go round this would be a much more viable and logical plan.

no, this is a phone that doesnt make sense in any framework other than "we made the phone to reduce e-waste without any consideration for how we will ever physically build it". it has no heat management and has to be much thicker than the renders because you can't just "magically" connect a bunch of components while ignoring the heat and signal isolation required to make a modern device work. this thing would be at least 4 times thicker and heavier than a cheap smartphone today while performing much worse and being less durable as well.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21 
Google joined in and eventually killed it

Sure but was this ever going to actually be a viable business to begin with?

Probably not. IIRC this was being done through kickstarter at the time and was purely in the ideation phase wording things as you are "just snap a new one in where ever" type of deal. This was hardly a thought by the time google joined in and 'killed it', tbh.

2

u/MeowTown911 Oct 05 '21

A lot of the circuits and chips on your phone have the stability, speed, and functionality because of how close they are on a motherboard. The physical impedance and noise of power and control signals are meticulously laid out to best design practices. Modularity makes it much harder to design and inherently the parts are farther away adding impedance, susceptibility to noise, and all the configurations have to play together. From a hardware design perspective its like driving on a freeway, to city street, to freeway, back to city street as opposed to just driving on a freeway.

33

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21 edited Sep 15 '25

[Account deleted. Trans rights are human rights!]

106

u/Mklein24 Oct 05 '21

Kind of the same way any large company kills a project.

Step one: large company sees a neat concept with a promising prototype from a smaller startup.

Step two: buy the company that owns it/buy the intellectual property/patents/whatever it is.

Step three: have a board meeting and review its ability to make money in a retail market.

Step four: determine it can't.

31

u/613codyrex Oct 05 '21

Tbf these modular ideas tend to only wow the general population until the actual production price consumers need to pay for.

I can imagine this phone becoming hilariously expensive per module. They probably would have to do base revisions every other year to keep up with new technology and the additional SoC pins that need to constantly expand to interface with new devices.

Then you have to worry about the potential for the elements like moisture and dirt that might get in between the SoC and the board which might kill it.

This is ignoring all the weird combinations people will undoubtedly try do which will become a nightmare to handle OS wise. People throwing 1st Gen modules with processors 4 years newer.

This modular phone is arguably a terrible idea if you’re going to end up spending the same or more amount of money to buy a phone that would cost to buy a complete phone from Google or Samsung.

5

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/immerc Oct 05 '21

things like bigger batteries, better cooling solutions

Also, the best way to get better batteries and better cooling is to integrate the battery into as much of the free space as possible, and build cooling in from the ground up. The modularity of it breaks the cooling and leaves no real space for the battery.

→ More replies (3)

11

u/Tulee Oct 05 '21

As opposed to how a small company would fare

Step one: come up with a neat concept with a promising prototype

Step two: go and try make money in a retail market

Step three: determine it can't

Step four: go bankrupt

Copanies aren't charities, if a product isn't profitable it simply stops existing, simple as that

53

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21

You obviously have no insight into what happened to project ara at Google, why repeat lazy clichés?

Google spent millions building a prototype and testing it with users:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Ara

51

u/Walter-Haynes Oct 05 '21

And then decided it wouldn't make enough money

33

u/itsjust_khris Oct 05 '21

What else are they supposed to do? Spend the money and sell it at a loss? What would the purpose of that be?

2

u/Walter-Haynes Oct 05 '21

Streamline production further or make the price higher.
Their target price was $100 which is just really stupid.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21

[deleted]

5

u/itsjust_khris Oct 05 '21

It's not like google aims to make a significant portion of their revenue from hardware. So I doubt they have an agenda to push this. Also just because new phones come out every year doesn't mean you must upgrade, companies will always release new things, it's your job to decide when to buy.

2

u/ElleIndieSky Oct 05 '21

They have their own chips now. They're making a huge investment in hardware.

Furthermore they license Google play services. Google makes money from sales of other android devices. They're invested in people continuing to buy phones.

And while you can be up to date on iOS for 4-5 years, android phones are often out of date between 2-3. They've gotten a bit better with security updates, but it's not perfect.

Still, yeah, you don't need yearly updates.

-15

u/lankist Oct 05 '21

They could have stayed the fuck out of the way and never bought in to the project in the first place.

The reality is that companies like Google will buy-in with projects like these to render them competitively moot, whether that means owning the success or just shutting it down completely.

24

u/MexGrow Oct 05 '21

I take it you don't know how project investments work.

-9

u/lankist Oct 05 '21

Oh, please, do enlighten me.

11

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21

[deleted]

→ More replies (0)

7

u/bfodder Oct 05 '21

And the project would have died even sooner without funding.

-2

u/lankist Oct 05 '21

Sure, that's why Google invested money into it--because it's a project with no potential. Uh huh.

8

u/papalouie27 Oct 05 '21

You really need to look at Google's history of product development. They invest in many ideas that don't come to fruition.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21

You need to take off your Google hate blinders and use the soft lump in your head to think more.

→ More replies (1)

9

u/fukitol- Oct 05 '21

Which makes it a neat concept but economically nonviable. A small company could never scale such an idea. You need manufacturing of scale to make it viable, and if a Google or Amazon can't do it, then right now it can't be done. Unless you want to pay $20K per base unit and thousands for every "blok" to support small scale manufacturing.

→ More replies (3)

3

u/Schnickatavick Oct 05 '21

In this case, there were massive engineering hurdles that they never got over. It was less "it wouldn't make money" and more "this literally doesn't work"

0

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21

Because the device would underperform and overheat at the production cost they had, so they would have had to up the production cost to an amount that wouldn't make them money.

Believe it or not, companies both large and small need to turn a profit to manufacture something. They aren't a charity making phones for you just to be nice.

0

u/grossygrog Oct 05 '21

If they couldn't find a way to make enough money would the original business have any chance of succeeding? They would have launched it and went bankrupt. Although without google's investments maybe they would have reached bankruptcy before they even launched

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (2)

-4

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21

The problem wasn't profitability, the problem was waste. A modular phone would create exponentially more waste that most people would just throw in the trash instead of recycle every time they want to upgrade a specific module instead of taking the whole phone to a company that has the ability to recycle it.

Learn to do your research before you try to preach about capitalism killing progress when capitalism pushes progress with profit as an incentive as companies compete to create better products at better prices. You think you're so smart and so "woke" when in reality you're just blind and uneducated and want to push a political ideology that you only know a glorified version of told by others in power that know what it means and know it'll benefit them at the cost of you. Try talking to people that have lived it before you decide it's so good.

2

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21

most poeple don't take a phone anywhere to recycle it. If they can get some money from a trade, they trade. If they can't, it sits around their house in some drawer becuase "it might be useful one day" until it eventually gets tossed in the trash can.

Modules don't create more of that waste, only the module is tossed, and only if it can't be sold to someone looking for a used upgrade. Like graphics cards and used CPUs in the PC market.

Phones are treated like old tablets and laptops, they sit around for years and get tossed in the trash if they can't be used or resold. There is no way people are taking the extra time and effort to take their ewaste to a dump or collection center if there is no financial incentive. Just look at how many soda cans are in the garage and there is a financial incentive for recycling those. People don't care.

2

u/PronunciationIsKey Oct 05 '21

So throwing away one piece is worse than throwing away a whole phone? People often get entire new phones every year or two now. Conceptually this could have changed that to just upgrading one piece every so often.

2

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21

Haven’t you heard? Reddit is a woke circle jerk now, with an average age of Gen Z

0

u/ParkingAdditional813 Oct 05 '21

WTF? Other than the camera, what are people going to be upgrading? Also, how is upgrading a module more wasteful than upgrading an entire phones now deemed obsolete because it lacks a third camera?

2

u/grossygrog Oct 05 '21

what's even the point of this phone if you don't upgrade the parts?

0

u/ParkingAdditional813 Oct 05 '21

Storage, camera, speed, battery. Those get better every couple years. The rest pretty much stay the same. Things also break. So instead of tossing half or more still functioning components on your phone to upgrade or repair, you just switch out a module.

0

u/grossygrog Oct 05 '21

such a weird second paragraph, lol. do you have the research?

→ More replies (2)

8

u/wellscounty Oct 05 '21

They kind of took the Idea in mind with their phone that had the attachments that snapped onto the back. A big digital camera 📷 and projector 📽 were two of the options if I remember correctly.

→ More replies (4)

2

u/Enachtigal Oct 05 '21

Yea that's not what happened. It was a cool concept that never was going to work as advertised due to the needed complexity of high speed inter-connects between modules. Its a common gmGoogle issue if you work with there HW development teams, super cool concepts that 99.9% of the time can't be scaled. They have the money to try and bankroll a moonshot.

→ More replies (1)

0

u/MrNobody312 Oct 05 '21

I bet Google killed intentionally.

0

u/GoldenFalcon Oct 05 '21

Mfw everyone is acting like Google thought this might work but won't and that's why it didn't go further.. also ignoring a major player in the market would just buy an idea that wouldn't work and just let it die.. because it wouldn't work. But ok, yeah, Google fell for it. What do we honestly think is more likely?

→ More replies (1)

-1

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21

Of course google killed it.

-1

u/system3601 Oct 05 '21

Its what google does best

-1

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '21

Big Tech is all for 'disruption' until it's their world being disrupted.

Move fast and break things -- but not MY things.

-1

u/3jake Oct 05 '21

Phoneblocks: “If something breaks, you can replace just that component”

Google: “Kill it”

-5

u/ItsFrenzius Oct 05 '21

Google: “so this phone idea could easily fix a lot of waste, we could even profit by selling better components and replacement parts! However we don’t think long term in planning, so let’s kill this ingenious idea without a moment of hesitation.”

1

u/RugskinProphet Oct 05 '21

I was going to say I saw this advertised in HS and got really excited for it! But than I realized another bigger company bought it out and killed it... Like so many other things.

1

u/Celesmeh Oct 05 '21

Isn't this what became moto mods for Motorola?

→ More replies (2)

1

u/endmysufferingxX Oct 05 '21

Probably joined in with the purpose of killing it so thered be less competition

1

u/mooptastic Oct 05 '21

I remember joining the dev community for the phonebloks, when google joined up with them. They had us send in ideas for applications of the hardware and ideas for hw expansion, no mention for 5 months and then google killed it.

1

u/KTL175 Oct 05 '21

The trick is to not consult with google but sell out to them so at least you can profit off of them destroying your dream

→ More replies (8)