It can help keep temperatures cooler by allowing more room for heat dissipation.
I haven't had issues with it overheating. With it being slimmer, there is a higher surface area to volume ratio. As a result, I'd expect the heat dissipation would have an easier time. After all, increasing the size purely for heat would increase the volume at a greater rate than it would increase the surface area. That means there's more volume to stay warm inside with less surface area to dissipate the heat to other locations.
I suppose you could put a larger battery in by doing this. How much more thicker should we make it purely to increase battery?
More room for frame reinforcement and corner stabilization.
The device being thicker would do nothing for corner stabilization. Sure, you could use a thicker frame. But, it's already sufficiently strong. If you try to break it, it'll break. If you don't, it won't. Making it thicker so you feel more secure that you won't break it doesn't make any sense from a practical viewpoint. That's like requiring all shoes to be platform shoes because you believe they'll provide more padding when you walk.
No external camera bulge.
So instead of "camera bulge," you'd prefer "phone bulge"? If that little bulge annoys you, why would the entire device being that size not annoy you?
Possibly even a great antenna or signal boosting internal band.
Something boosting the signal is essentially an antenna. When it comes to antenna theory, increasing the thickness of the phone isn't going to provide much of a benefit. Antennas are fickle creatures. They aren't something that increase signal simply by being larger.
I still think this is a bit unfair, I too see the benefit in a slightly more sturdy and bulkier frame. I don't know, I guess I just see things differently. Aesthetics are important to me, yes. Though I weigh the benefit of design versus practicality. I know everyone has their own feelings on this. I don't think anyone is wrong here.
You think it's unfair because you didn't understand my point. I didn't claim there couldn't be benefit from a larger design. It's unfair for you to suggest I did. In fact, it's intellectually criminal to suggest I'm putting a large weight on aesthetics. Did you read the conversation? I claimed he was trolling because he based his opinion of the design purely on his perception of the aesthetics rather than anything functional. It's absurd to claim I'm valuing aesthetics over design.
There are very valid reasons to disagree with the design. That's going to be true with any design. Most of what you offered here was grasping at straws to try to justify your reasons for not liking it. Here's the thing. You don't like it. You don't need to justify it, to me or anyone else. But, if you're going to justify it you should do so logically. The reason the OP gave was asinine. When someone is offering an asinine opinion, the most common reason is trolling. His reason was "I perceive it to be weak so it's bad design." It wasn't even "it's weak as a result of this design decision." It was like me saying "I believe wheels being round mean the car won't stop. Therefore it's a bad design." We both know that doesn't prevent the car from stopping and my belief has no actual relevance on whether or not the cars can stop. It's not a valid point.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram