[drzaiusapelord]

This is classic bikeshedding. A lot of mobile device reviews are pretty unsophisticated, so there's a lot of spilled ink about button location, how the metal/plastic feels, etc. Its a strange regression. Like we just can't judge or weigh the complexity of a modern mobile OS and all its services and apps and just take on this simplified, "Uh, it looks nice" point of view.

Strange that even a hard-nosed tech site like anandtech can't resist the typical fetishiztion of buttons and whispered sighs of "So intuitive" and "designey!" Meanwhile, valid competitors like the Nexus or Samsung line-ups either get strict apathy or get criticized in a way that Apple is immune to (for example the Note's size being unacceptable yet the 6+ size being perfect). Or the Jobsian logic that the press repeats (size of iphone is perfect because of human thumb size) and then ignores when even Apple itself doesn't buy that argument anymore.

I think the world of tech reviewing proves how well marketing works, especially against those who often see themselves as resistant to it and self-declared rational/skeptical/intellectual thinkers. If anything, these types seem more susceptible to it for some reason.

I don't even really read reviews in a serious fashion at this point, except maybe at Ars. Reviews seem to be marketing vehicles, either consciously or sub-consciously on the part of the reviewer. Ars seems to be more even-handed than most and they try not to fall too deeply into the trap of bikeshedding or pandering for ad impressions. I can't be the only one unhappy with how these things are reviewed nowadays. It seems like the narrative of the "nerds have won" in regardless to tech is pretty disingenious. If anyone has won, its the marketers. The more you spend to promote your talking points, the more often those talking points will be believed or, at least, repeated. It doesn't seem anymore complex than that.

I'm also willing to concede that there's a subjective element here that makes reviewing of commodity tech almost like reviewing the arts. At a certain point performance, durability, etc are all fine for the top competitors and reviews just address things that are more subjective than objective for the lack of things to talk about. Mobile has certainly reached that space and the only rational move for these companies is to just invest more in marketing to make your 'SoC tied to a touchscreen tied to a mobile OS tied to an app store' look better than the other guy's 'SoC tied to a touchscreen tied to a mobile OS tied to an app store.'

Now the role of the reviewer is to communicate these marketing messages effectively.

[arrrg]

What’s wrong with caring about tight tolerances and good material choices? What’s wrong about caring about good feeling buttons? (This is besides the point, but I actually disagree with AnandTech there, the buttons on the 6 feel markedly worse then the 5s ones, they jiggle ever so slightly.)

I really don’t get why you think it’s not rational to care about these things. I really don’t get that. It is literally incomprehensible to me. Can you explain that to me?

[archagon]

I don't know about buttons, but "how the metal/plastic feels" is one of the most important things about a mobile device. It's pretty much always in your hand!

[koyote]

About 90% of the people I know who own an Iphone also own a case for it.

So yes, it's always in your hand, but most people don't get to enjoy the feel, the thinness, or even the design.

[ChrisLTD]

That stuff still matters. When the phone itself is extremely thin and light, a case won't necessarily make the combined package too heavy or large.

[iaskwhy]

Just the other I realised Jobs was right saying the size of the iPhone was perfect because of human thumb size, his mistake at the time (assuming he really thought this through and wasn't just being a salesman) was to think consumers would always value the ergonomics above everything else. In time, even Apple realised consumers were probably favouring other things like the screen size itself even when ergonomics suffered a lot with it. It's a very important message right there for any one size fits all strategy.

[smacktoward]

It wasn't a mistake -- "consumers don't know what they really want, so we'll only sell the version they should want" was straightforward Jobsian thinking.

It's similar another famous case of a perfectionist founder rejecting customers' demands, Henry Ford's famous statement about the Model T that "any customer can have a car painted any color that he wants, so long as it is black." (http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/7213/pg7213.html#id00226)

[moogleii]

Er, pretty sure most of their mobile reviews mention where the buttons are on the device being reviewed.

Here's one: http://anandtech.com/show/8425/huawei-honor-6-review

Here's another: http://anandtech.com/show/8441/nokia-lumia-930-review/2

[drzaiusapelord]

Its one thing to mention an obvious part of the device and another to spend too much time on it. Your interpretation of 'too much' is of course yours.

[karmelapple]

You've argued that the tech is "fine," which means it's commoditized.

Commoditized parts don't get mentioned in reviews. (I don't know what USB driver is in my laptop because who cares? It's a commodity)

What is left, then, other than device ergonomics, appearance, and other things that differentiate devices?

[drzaiusapelord]

This is like arguing that brand x's USB cables are softer and prettier than brand y's. Its still a commodity.

[rsynnott]

I don't see what you're so upset about, here. If the button was on the top, as it has been for the last seven years, the device would be hard to use. Thus, it is useful information to a prospective buyer.