Talk:Phablet

iPhone X

Darius robin about your edit here [1]: I have at least two sources describing the X as a phablet [2] [3]. e.g.

• But in practice it sits in the hand just fine, and you're able to interact with most functions comfortably. There's definitely a set of gestures for which you have to use two hands, so we'd definitely still categorize this device as a phablet, rather than a 'standard' phone like the iPhone 7.
• Now Apple has come along and spoiled Samsung’s party with not one but two new phablet-sized phones: the iPhone 8 Plus and the iPhone X.

Descriptions should be based on reliable sources if possible to avoid WP:OR. The Samsung Galaxy S8+ has thin bezels and is included; by that logic so should the X and S8. Arguments that certain phones should be excluded due to compact sizes is inconsistent and dubious, as it is so open to interpretation it turns out to be useless; but all the same nobody has described the X as compact. Including some phones with thin bezels but not others makes any definition unworkable, unless you try to work with reliable sources. The X is not a compact phone either, which seems to be the basis for some exclusions.--Jules (Mrjulesd) 08:59, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

@Mrjulesd: Take a look at Apple's compare iPhone section, you can see that the size of the X looks closer to that of the 8 and not the 8 Plus. But you could include it with the phablets. Darius robin (talk) 09:20, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

@Darius robin: thank you. I think it should be added. Although the form factor is not considerably larger than the iPhone 8, with a 5.8” screen operation is more tablet like, and sources indicate that the two-handed approach is preferable, consistent with phablets in general. Also sources calling it a phablet also indicate this is correct. --Jules (Mrjulesd) 11:04, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

@Mrjulesd: Yes, but please have a word with Hayman30 before you make any changes, as I feel he disagrees with it being called a phablet. Darius robin (talk) 11:11, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

@Darius robin: I wasn't against it being called a phablet, I was reverting them merely because it was not supported by a reliable source. Calling it a "phablet-sized phone" doesn't directly imply it's a phablet, they would've simply put "phablet" there if those are actually phablets. They're trying to express that despite the phablet-sized screen, it's still a smartphone considering its small form factor. @Mrjulesd: You should've opened this discussion at Talk:iPhone X, as it has nothing to do with this page. Hayman30 (talk) 11:21, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

@Hayman30: I wasn't aware of the discussion. And I think "phablet-sized phone" does indicate it is a phablet as all phablets are also phones; more precisely phablets are a subset of smartphones, so using a phone quantifier changes little. Also some sources just call it a phablet. --Jules (Mrjulesd) 12:09, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

@Mrjulesd: No, "phablet-sized phone" doesn't mean phablet. They phrased it that way to indicate that its screen is phablet-sized but its form factor is not, they would've simply put phabet there if they want to categorize it as a phablet. Hayman30 (talk) 12:13, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

@Hayman30: Well being able to ask to writer exactly what they meant further comment on this is probably not worthwhile. --Jules (Mrjulesd) 12:19, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

@Mrjulesd: I guess so. Hayman30 (talk) 12:27, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Ok, so it's fine to call it as a phablet with these sources. I'll make the changes. Darius robin (talk) 11:29, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

@Darius robin: Make sure you don't cite Macworld. Hayman30 (talk) 11:31, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Agreed. --Jules (Mrjulesd) 12:10, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

New sliders

Recently sliders phones as Xiaomi Mi Mix 3 and Huawei Honor Magic 2 could qualify as phablets? Considering that tablets are slates by definition.

New words

What do you think about naming it tabphone, or tellet?--Porbóllett (talk) 06:47, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

I think all races and religions should unite under the banner of finding and crucifying whoever invented the word "phablet". A Shortfall Of Gravitas (talk) 19:27, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Agreed Hobbesdream (talk) 22:17, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Neologism template

I threw the template on here, I'll leave somebody who cares more to decide what to do with that.

My reasoning behind it is that the entire usage of this invented word seems to be amongst the type of disguised advertisement articles that technology blogs and magazines publish, and I saw no reference indicating that the word itself is important. They could have called these things "hoo-hoo dillies", and tech blogs would still be the only people calling them that. Normal people do not use this word in conversation. It doesn't even have a solid definition, and if it did the whole wikipedia is not a dictionary thing applies pretty badly here.

As is, it looks like it's just a spot for any and all tech blogs that feel like spamming an extra link somewhere to throw another one on the fire by claiming relevance for having used the word.

Assuming that some reference can be found that explains some deep necessity and importance of the word, it does not require 50+ articles which are not specifically written about the word and a giant list of phones to explain this concept and this is generally the kind of thing that doesn't belong on Wikipedia. Wiktionary, maybe... A Shortfall Of Gravitas (talk) 19:55, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

I removed the template because the article has many sources demonstrating this is not a promotional term. I consider myself a normal person and use the term phablet when discussing large phones. If you have further objections to this article, you can nominate it for deletion. —dgies^t_c 22:54, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

@A Shortfall Of Gravitas I agree. It was a neologism used by the tech press to argue about the Galaxy Note (source), back when it was the only phone that big. Now every phone is a phablet, yet almost no reliable source calls them that (according to both my own searching and Google Ngram). The term is less used today than 7 years ago (source), despite the number of so-called phablets exploding in that time. The most plausible explanation is that "phablet" is not a genuine subcategory of smartphones, it's a term formerly used by the tech press in a bygone "iPhone vs Galaxy Note screen size debate". That debate is dead, and so the neologism is dead.

I think this article should present "phablet" as WP:WORDISSUBJECT and discuss the term's use, and the pro/anti-phablet debates in the tech press between roughly 2011 and probably 2018 or so. Not present it as a true "subcategory" (it's not even really a subcategory: the Venn diagram of smartphones and phablets is now a circle). This would only require a partial rewrite, not a full rewrite. DFlhb (talk) 07:33, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Why does "smartlet" redirect here?

I am not aware of "smartlet" meaning phablet. It does have several real meanings, e.g. a homing/guided bomblet as part of a weapon. Equinox ◑ 22:12, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

History misleading

pc mag link is broken; here is new one https://www.pcmag.com/news/enter-the-phablet-a-history-of-phone-tablet-hybrids

secondly, from that same article, which is the source for history section: "There are also some phablets, like the Sharp IS01, that were released in Asia but never made it to U.S. shores, so we didn't include them here. " That is not history, that is US phablet history. Also, that fact isn't stated anywhere in history section. 95.178.152.20 (talk) 09:31, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Huawei Mate 30 Pro (1).jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:37, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Notched/Cutout in phablet table

I don't think the notched/cutout status of a phablet merits a column in the table. Nelsonblaha (talk) 16:11, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Proposal to remove 'Devices' section

I propose we should remove 'Devices' section because as the article itself notes, "As of 2020, most budget and entry-level Android smartphones constitute the phablet form factor". Because the majority of phones on the market now are 'phablets', this list ends up being not much more than an incomplete list of all phones.

It seems there is some value in listing early phablets, as covered in the 'Origins' section, but I don't see much point in cataloging them after about 2015 or so when they became common. —dgies^t_c 21:12, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

I disagree. First, the sentence you're quoting doesn't have a citation to prove the claim it's making. Secondly, there are and have been a TON of phones on the market that don't meet the phablet definition. Spin off the section into a "List of Phablets" article, maybe? But I don't think we should remove it entirely, or stop referencing them after 2015.Centerone (talk) 00:25, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

How do you propose to maintain this list? It's perpetually incomplete, and while folks did add entries from time to time, it ends up being just a mishmash of some of the more popular phones released since 2016. If someone proposed an article "List of phablets", it would fail WP:SALAT: "Lists that are too general or too broad in scope have little value". What value do you get from having this list? —dgies^t_c 20:05, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Articles about words that real humans never used in conversation don't need to exist in the first place because of WP:NEOLOGISM. As a non-reader of tech blogs which are just poorly veiled ads for the most part (the ones worth reading never used the word phablet) this article is the only place I've ever seen the word used. There have been plenty of small phones on an ongoing basis, probably more than there are large phones since the term got made up and then after it got abandoned, but there's far less profit in an article + amazon affiliate links to a $200 phone than a $1500 one and margins on web ads are already low so they need as much exposure as possible to work... hence why this article was even started. --A Shortfall Of Gravitas (talk) 17:29, 28 January 2024 (UTC)