You’ll readily give up this one feature for a cheaper smartphone

Smartphone functions and components are like candy. The more and better quality you replenish, the higher the price you will end up paying. That’s not to say that you need the best of features to have a decent device in your hands. This is exactly why Chinese phone manufacturers have managed to cut the excess fat from phones in order to bring their prices down. However, if you want the best of the best in smartphone technology, you are sure to want to pay a premium price.

That is why we have provided you, our readers, with a list of smartphone attributes that allow you to select only one feature that you would like to do without if you want to buy a phone at a cheaper price. You chose a particular role best from all of the others on the list. That’s how you voted.

Which smartphone functions would you like to give up at a lower price?

Results

It’s interesting to see that a majority of over 4,300 total voters in our poll chose wireless charging as the only feature they’re willing to give up for a cheaper phone. Over 45% of respondents voted to give up wireless charging.

As you can see, our list also included features like a glass body and 5G connectivity. These two were the next features our constituents wanted to cut out to get a cheaper phone. 19.7% of respondents agreed not to have a phone with a glass construction, while 8.2% didn’t mind losing 5G. It’s understandable that glass-body phones have their own drawbacks and 5G is still not where we want it to be.

Some of the respondents also voted to include the IP rating (6%) and expandable storage (5.9%) in the chopping block. Few, however, were willing to part with the latest Snapdragon 800-series processor, fast charging, high refresh rate displays, and even chargers and other accessories.

Your comments

The comments indicate that many readers may want to use more than one feature in order to bring the price of a phone down. However, the survey itself only allowed a single selection. Readers also noted that there are other features they want to get rid of in the name of cheaper phones, with wireless charging being one of the most commonly chosen features. Here’s what you had to say.

bigdav1178: “Glass body” would have been my first choice; But wireless charging came first, and I couldn’t do without either. Actually, I’d rather lose the glass, even if it wasn’t cheaper. I never understood why increased fragility equals a premium.

dark5un: I totally agree. All this glass did for me is worry about all the sides and angles of drop and cover the phone so it doesn’t break! I would love a plastic front screen if it had the same touchscreen performance as glass.

NubCake: I wanted to choose wireless charging, IP protection, glass body, 5G.

Chet: I would have gone charger in box charger, then glass, then IP protection. This is followed by a high refresh rate of then 5 g. Although the last two are interchangeable as they don’t add any real function to the phone. 5G, I’m sure I’ll do it someday.

Shubham Sundrani: Camera should have been an option. I almost never actually use the camera on my phone, but companies probably charge most of their fees based on that.

Sami Bhai: Wireless charging and vitreous can go.

Milivoe: Remove fast charging, wireless reverse charging, 5G (it’s still rarely available), a high refresh rate display (who the hell cares what the scroll looks like what it looks like when you stop scrolling , has meaning), a curved display, a crazy amount of high quality cameras, including at least the high quality of the selfie camera, IP rating, camera bumps. And I’d trade all of that for just an OLED display, a huge battery (and I mean twice as much as the flagship), double the volume on stereo speakers with triple bass level, and a sleek, matte case (back and sides) iPhone -People) or brushed metal, brushed rubber or brushed plastic back, flat, sharp look (a combination of iPhone 5, iPhone 12 and Sony Xperia 1 III, flat and sharp look).

lincolnmon: That will sound very different from everyone else, but this overly expensive camera has to go. I use it as a work phone with consuming media without doing it.

Albin: We chose wireless charging, but we’re actually going to buy a phone that most of the others are missing. The only must is the expandable memory. Not listed: selfie camera.

disqus_wqgHkhxYHN: I actively avoid phones with glass backs.

TheOracle: I just knew wireless charging was going to win that poll. I know a lot of people find it convenient, but it’s one of the most hyped features by tech journalists. Several surveys in different locations have shown that people use wired charging rather than the outright shock of pollsters. The same hype for QHD screens started a few years ago when manufacturers found out that people were happy with 1080p FHD.

Mr_Bucket: Given the option, I would never buy a glass body phone. It could be the same price and I would still go for any other material as long as it is less fragile. Too bad I clicked “Wireless Charging” before I knew it was a single choice poll. Down with the vitreous!

Lumi Kløvstad: Wireless charging, the latest 800 series processor, a high-refresh display and glass body can IMHO be offered in the name of the price. The 600 and 700 series SoCs are actually pretty decent. 60Hz isn’t top notch, but it’s been the standard for years so we’re all used to it and glass breaks too easily AND has grip problems. You put your glass phone in a case that destroys the sense of owning. First, a pretty glass phone, especially since wireless charging is not possible.

Henry Park: Any charging technology. I don’t need and don’t want. It ruins batteries faster and is usually the first thing I turn off.

Christian Hinayon: Wireless charging. As long as it has over 30W of wired charging, I would definitely offer wireless charging for a cheaper smartphone.

Shizuma: This really has to be a multiple choice survey. In the order in which I would prefer to forego more reasonable prices …

-5G, as the speed is basically unusable on phones.
– Wireless charging, I would much rather use a more energy efficient, faster corded charger.
– Ridiculous massive camera modules, 1 decent flush camera, maybe 2 if the second is a telephoto lens.
-Glass body, although I would prefer an aluminum body, so probably not cost-saving.
-IP evaluation, without guarantee coverage, an official IP evaluation is an insignificant additional effort.
-High refresh rate, love on computers for gaming, for phones although it’s just a killer for battery life.
-Expandable storage, now that we’re getting large internal storage options, it just isn’t needed.