> Not sure where you get the patronizing tone from.
This would be a start:
> Most people doesn't have your or my kind of work. And even those that do will be able to use their phone on any screen at some point.
Nice assumption there.
> The numbers speak for themselves both when it comes to webstats, sales stats, usage etc.
How so... You make it sound so obvious. Webstats, sales stats, usage... you'll need to elaborate. The sales stats of smartphones vs desktop/laptop really doesn't by itself prove declining use or a shift in use. In my industry (which is not tech BTW, so stuff that notion), almost everything across levels in mostly desktop and average age of devices nearing 10 years - this refutes the relevance of sales stats. Primary software is all "native desktop", and real desktop, not some fucking Electron app, not a web app. There are players in this industry that are trying to shift to tablet/smartphone with cloud apps, but they have made little actual conversion - ie it is a rounding error. Webstats are not an issue.
No the numbers don't speak for themselves. Continue implying I'm an idiot that knows nothing outside tech (ha!), or explain.
> some people are going directly to smartphones instead.
"some people" are always doing something.
> primary device the mobile takes over more and more of that work.
The other argument is that mobile devices have augmented many things without significantly replacing existing systems. And really, while that is all fine, if critical things are still dependent on the "old tech" than it is a counter to the significance of a mobile invasion. From personal experience, in a few industries, in 2017, you could make all the smartphones disappear and people would be sad and there would be some significant efficiency losses, but things would move one. On the other hand, make the old PC infrastructure disappear and everything goes to hell. That I felt was, in part, the gist of the OP's arguments and I agree.
I think you're a prick. You certainly come off that way in text.
> You see that once you have to build solutions for the masses.
Oh and I'm going to opine based on your generalizing assertions that your definition of masses must be more limited than you think. Unless you mean masses as "media consumers", in which case I'll just say it is not a small industry, but it is a minor part of the economy.
This would be a start:
> Most people doesn't have your or my kind of work. And even those that do will be able to use their phone on any screen at some point.
Nice assumption there.
> The numbers speak for themselves both when it comes to webstats, sales stats, usage etc.
How so... You make it sound so obvious. Webstats, sales stats, usage... you'll need to elaborate. The sales stats of smartphones vs desktop/laptop really doesn't by itself prove declining use or a shift in use. In my industry (which is not tech BTW, so stuff that notion), almost everything across levels in mostly desktop and average age of devices nearing 10 years - this refutes the relevance of sales stats. Primary software is all "native desktop", and real desktop, not some fucking Electron app, not a web app. There are players in this industry that are trying to shift to tablet/smartphone with cloud apps, but they have made little actual conversion - ie it is a rounding error. Webstats are not an issue.
No the numbers don't speak for themselves. Continue implying I'm an idiot that knows nothing outside tech (ha!), or explain.
> some people are going directly to smartphones instead.
"some people" are always doing something.
> primary device the mobile takes over more and more of that work. The other argument is that mobile devices have augmented many things without significantly replacing existing systems. And really, while that is all fine, if critical things are still dependent on the "old tech" than it is a counter to the significance of a mobile invasion. From personal experience, in a few industries, in 2017, you could make all the smartphones disappear and people would be sad and there would be some significant efficiency losses, but things would move one. On the other hand, make the old PC infrastructure disappear and everything goes to hell. That I felt was, in part, the gist of the OP's arguments and I agree.
I think you're a prick. You certainly come off that way in text.
> You see that once you have to build solutions for the masses.
Oh and I'm going to opine based on your generalizing assertions that your definition of masses must be more limited than you think. Unless you mean masses as "media consumers", in which case I'll just say it is not a small industry, but it is a minor part of the economy.