Originally Posted by Sarec
This still feels like a cop out. You're stance is that no company will back the idea and ultimately you see the disadvantages out weighing the advantages. 30 years ago people wouldn't have believed in earnest that we would be 3D printing human organs based on the hosts own DNA and yet we do. It is not called "vision" because everyone can see its benefits. I'm just asking not to shoot it down before it has even begun. Bring up issues with it and talk about it earnestly? Absolutely! I love discussions but so far it has been people saying "no, you're wrong. Stop".
Again, your example is not applicable: 3D printing organs using the host's DNA is made to reduce organ rejection and other issues that come from implanting foreign tissue into the body. This device is not a matter of life-or-death, it's not a matter of national pride, it's not a matter of major scientific advancement, it's a matter of efficiency. This will not be as efficient as a custom design
. This will never be as efficient as a custom design
. Which is a bit ironic, really, considering the design's stated purpose is to increase efficiency...
To get this phone to work, you'd need to convince a huge number of companies (probably at least LG, Samsung, Qualcomm, nVidia, Broadcom, Hyinx, Sony, Google, etc. to get the level of customisability shown in the video), each with a very large, very skilled engineering team that could easily pick this device apart much more than we have here, to each spend billions of dollars creating a phone that would, quite frankly, suck; even when compared to current phones (or even past, for that matter), this thing would be horrible. What's more, it would have to directly compete with the absolute crème de le crème
of mobile tech from several years in the future, because it would take years to develop this. It would be slow, it would be big, it would be heavy, it would probably be fragile, it would be absurdly expensive (at least 2-3x a new, unlocked flagship from Apple or Samsung), the software would be buggy, and no one in their right minds would actually buy it. Not to mention the fact that getting FCC approval for the thing, which you would need if you were to sell it, would be, for all intents and purposes, impossible. Or that you'd still need to replace the device every couple years anyway, due to the rapidly evolving nature of mobile tech; you can only squeze so much power out of an outdated system, hence why Intel changes sockets every couple years and AMD is abandoning/replacing AM3+.
This isn't an achievement that several major corporations will collectively spend at least tens to hundreds of billions of dollars to develop. I would love for these problems to be solved, don't get me wrong; a modular, user-upgradable smartphone would be a cool thing to have. It just isn't going to happen. By the time anyone could get this to a point that it could compete with phones like the iPhone 5s or Galaxy S5 in any way, those will practically be antiques.
And really, the only benefit would be a slight reduction of e-waste, and the time and money required to develop this device to the point that it could actually work would be better spent building up the recycling industry, if that's your goal. If you can think of any other benefits, or any ways to overcome the problems with the design, I'd love to hear them, though.
TL;DR: It's a neat concept, it's theoretically possible, it's almost certainly not going to be made.
Now, if you took this basic concept and applied it to a situation where things like performance and size weren't as much a concern (development/controller boards, a la
Arduino or possibly RPi, perhaps?), and had one or maybe two companies work on it at most, you might be able to produce something useful. Emphasis on 'might', though.