comparative perceptions
As you will soon be aware (assuming you read the next post) or are already aware (if you've already read it, though I find that unlikely) I have a new phone.
What I hadn't previously mentioned is that my wife decided to get a new phone on the same day. She is much less stalwart than I am about her choice in phones so has a greater choice at her disposal. She settled on the KRZR K1. Although I would never have chosen it for myself, I quite like it. It's small, but heavy which makes it feel metallic and solid, rather than overweight and cumbersome.
When I was looking at it on the table next to my old 6310i I realised that in actual fact, aside from being narrower, it is the same height and (surprisingly) the same thickness. The thing was though, it looked quite a lot smaller. This got me onto how we look at devices and how we determine whether we think they are large or small.
Courtesy of sizeasy, the above image shows the top down view of the comparative sizes of the 3 phones. Since within 0.5mm they are the same height, I chose this as the most representative view.
I came to the conclusion that expectations entirely define perception of size. I don't expect phones to be thin, so my phone, although it's the widest by far, to me seems small. Dimensionally the nokia is indeed closest to a standard house brick which has the relative dimensions 100 x 45.3 x 28.1. The KRZR to me seems narrow but thick. Since it is only a whisker narrower than the nokia I presume this perception comes from the fact that it's thinner, but at the same time my perception of it being thick comes from the fact that I see it as a small phone, but it's thicker than a phone that I consider to be small-ish.
I think I've failed miserable in translating my thoughts into my blog, so I'm going to quit before I can get any further behind.
What I hadn't previously mentioned is that my wife decided to get a new phone on the same day. She is much less stalwart than I am about her choice in phones so has a greater choice at her disposal. She settled on the KRZR K1. Although I would never have chosen it for myself, I quite like it. It's small, but heavy which makes it feel metallic and solid, rather than overweight and cumbersome.
When I was looking at it on the table next to my old 6310i I realised that in actual fact, aside from being narrower, it is the same height and (surprisingly) the same thickness. The thing was though, it looked quite a lot smaller. This got me onto how we look at devices and how we determine whether we think they are large or small.
Courtesy of sizeasy, the above image shows the top down view of the comparative sizes of the 3 phones. Since within 0.5mm they are the same height, I chose this as the most representative view.
I came to the conclusion that expectations entirely define perception of size. I don't expect phones to be thin, so my phone, although it's the widest by far, to me seems small. Dimensionally the nokia is indeed closest to a standard house brick which has the relative dimensions 100 x 45.3 x 28.1. The KRZR to me seems narrow but thick. Since it is only a whisker narrower than the nokia I presume this perception comes from the fact that it's thinner, but at the same time my perception of it being thick comes from the fact that I see it as a small phone, but it's thicker than a phone that I consider to be small-ish.
I think I've failed miserable in translating my thoughts into my blog, so I'm going to quit before I can get any further behind.
posted by nj at
16:03
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home