Design Thinking: The greatest Danger to Brainstorming! (In defense of Brainstorming - Part 2)

(A little while ago Fast Company's Rebecca Greenfield wrote a piece entitled "Brainstorming Doesn't Work; Try this technique instead". I wrote a response: "In Defense of Brainstorming (aka you may not need Brainwriting)", but I realized *now* that I had forgot to add what I think is instead the biggest obstacle to Brainstorming, so this Part 2 attempts to address that.)

There are *many* obstacles to a good Brainstorming session, but the actual biggest *danger* I believe is not having enough 'quality' ideas and especially getting those amazing, once-in-a-lifetime radical ideas. It's the same principles regarding Quantity and Quality of ideas.

(For more info on why I believe quantity begets quality, see a previous post on 50 lbs of clay and how Quantity also intrinsically begets Quality.)

User Interview/Insight expert Steve Portigal has a great graph I like to use to illustrate the divide between the 'first wave' of pedestrian ideas and the 'second wave' of magical of "Wacky, transgressive, innovative, breakthrough, weird" ideas. Steve goes so far as to say we need to slough through the 'bad ideas' to get to this 'second wave'.

(Steve Portigal - Power of Bad Ideas)

As good Design Thinking coaches and Brainstorming facilitators we need consciously to *PUSH* to get people into the 2nd hump or 'second wave'.

This is why as part of Part 1 of this post, we have rules #1, #2, #6 & #8

1. Defer Judgment - to prevent smoothing radical ideas
2. Go for volume - to push envelope to get to great ideas
3. One conversation at a time - to ensure everyone gets a voice
4. Be visual - to stimulate right-side of the brain and communicate efficiently
5. Headline - to communicate efficiently, allowing iterate through ideas quickly
6. Build on the Ideas of others - to help iterate and evolve ideas
7. Stay on topic - keep sessions moving and prevent time wasting
8. Encourage wild ideas - getting past the easy, obvious ideas

(8x Rules for Brainstorming)

Over the years I've personally become more keenly aware of passing through the barrage of easy ideas ('first wave'), into the more difficult silence or lull of little/no ideas and then finally into the flood of 'second wave' ideas.

(1st Wave vs. 1st & 2nd Wave Brainstorming)

The above graphics attempts to show the difference between simply settling with only 'first wave' Brainstorming vs. 'first wave' and 'second wave' Brainstorming. In this example, it's 7+ more Ideas Total and 3+ more Great Ideas.

Funders and Founders Anna Vital has a great post called How Many Times You Should Try with an info graphic that shows James Dyson tried 5126 prototypes before his initial success. How close are you to Brainstorming out that truly great idea? Are you giving up before the second 'hump'?

If you want to keep doing additive or derivative innovation, don't worry about what Steve Portigal is talking about. You can Brainstorm out the next iPad-mini from the normal sized iPad, basically a slight/marginal improvement over the original. (BTW Apple/Tim Cook, if you reading this, maybe you should 'invent' the *new* iPad-Biggie while you're at it...)

OR *IF* you want to do something disruptive and truly innovative, to build that first iPad, iPod, or iPhone, then I encourage to have a look both the Quantity and Quality of ideas your next Brainstorm.


Hope that helps...

Wayne Pau


p.s. There is no magic number of post-it-notes where the you know you are getting the 'second wave' of ideas. However it's not uncommon when I get a group as small as 5 people to aim for 150 post-it-notes within a 30 minute session.

5 people x 30 mins ==> 150 Ideas

It sounds radical, but it is really is a reasonable target. The first 50-100 will probably be 'first wave' ideas. If you push really hard, often you can get an extra 50-100 ideas if you are consciously about it. (As your diverse, T-shaped, multidisciplinary teams evolves, you'll easily surpass this target! Honest.)

UX: Don't Make Me Think Revisited (aka 3rd Edition)

When I came into the office in January I realized that Santa (aka Steve Krug) via Amazon had left me a belated X-mas gift via mail!

If you are in UX and haven't read this book (in any edition), I can't over emphasize how important this book is. Steve is great at making complex things seem "common sense" and his super reasonable, laid back, humourous approach can warm even the grumpiest usability Grinch.

The "revisited" (or "reloaded" for Matrix fans..) part also includes a whole new chapter on Mobility (Chapter 10, titled "Mobile: it's not just a city in Alabama anymore"). Really this chapter will take you 20 minutes to read but it could change your life, I mean app. It might be worth it to just to buy the book only to read this new chapter! It's 21 pages of very, very relevant material for anyone doing mobile development.

For something more "fun", have a look @ Steve's Blog on how he played with the covers before settling on the current design.

(http://someslightlyirregular.com/category/usability/)

=) Then... for even more fun do a quick search in Amazon of the book to see what other covers exists! It took me a bit to identify the 1st edition cover being so vastly different from 2nd edition, but I did find one in German with a neat look (Das intuitive Web!). So from 1st to 2nd edition, not much changed, but Steve and the published definitely made some whole-sale changes for 3rd edition. I personally think it looks great.

(Amazon Web Search URL)

With a gun pointed at my head, (ignoring that I consider Steve a friend) and told I could only get my team-mates and stakeholders to read just one book, this would be that book. It totally puts UX concepts into things the "everyday" person can understand. The examples (updated in 3rd edition) are incredible helpful and the humour makes it easy to get though the book in single day or sitting (although you might want to spread it out to let it sink it more or just constantly keep using as a reference).

Hope that helps...

Wayne Pau

p.s. In full disclosure, I admire Steve's knowledge and expertise in usability and even more importantly I really like him as a human being. He was generous enough to add me to acknowledgements page (yes I'm that Wayne Pau) but really my contributions and insights (if any) in the Mobility Section (Chapter 10) were very tiny. He's just that nice of guy! Thanks Steve...

Fun Topic: Apple vs. Samsung (Fine Dining vs. Mega Buffet)

*Sorry for the gap in posts. Being in Toronto, Canada we've been through Ice-Storms, Polar Vortex and Power Outages! Hopefully we'll get this back on track again in 2014... thanks for your patience.*

There is no getting around that Samsung and Apple are two very different companies. They are headquartered in two different continents, have two very different corporate histories and basically seem to go about business in polar opposite ways. Apple does everything, including write the OS and design the perfect matching hardware. Samsung uses (non-exclusively) a 3rd party (Google) to write the core OS (Android) and focuses on adding on the basic OS with value-adds aligned with in-house designed hardware. Apple only supports iOS devices, yet Samsung makes more than just Android phones, hedging their bets with Windows Phone, Bada and Tizen phones. Apple is concerned with the end-product, where as Samsung also sells it components to other companies (even at one point to ironically Apple possibly for shortfall of retina displays for new iPad Mini Retina).

However today I want to look at one specific difference in basic philosophies between the companies. In Apple we have a 'brand-name' synonymous with design, and like a fine dinning establishment believe they know what consumers want and have no problems telling customers what that is. It's the "chic" resturant with only one or two daily specials. Where Samsung seems to be the more accommodating endless buffet whose goal is to have something that will please anyone.

If you look here, it lists no less than 23 models of phones that Samsung has released in 2013. For Samsung, it seems they would be embarrassed if you asked for a phone format combination that they didn't already produce. The older Galaxy Y Pro Dous was the smallest display at 2.6" and new Galaxy Mega 6.3 is currently the largest at 6.3" (phone-format device that is not a true phone, but tablet like Tab 7" and 10"), more than DOUBLE the size!

• Samsung Galaxy S5
• Samsung Galaxy Win Pro
• Samsung Galaxy S Duos 2
• Samsung Galaxy Express 2
• Samsung Galaxy Round
• Samsung Galaxy Ace 3
• Samsung Galaxy Note 3
• Samsung Galaxy S4 Mini
• Samsung Galaxy S4 Active
• Samsung Galaxy S4 Zoom
• Samsung Galaxy Pocket Neo
• Samsung Galaxy Star
• Samsung Galaxy Core
• Samsung Galaxy Y Plus
• Samsung Galaxy Win
• Samsung Galaxy Mega
• Samsung Galaxy Fame
• Samsung Galaxy S4
• Samsung Galaxy Xcover 2
• Samsung Galaxy Young
• Samsung Galaxy Grand
• Samsung Galaxy S II Plus
• Samsung Galaxy Pocket Plus

(From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung_Galax)

(Samsung Galaxy Y Pro Duos - image from here)

(Samsung Galaxy Mega - image from here)

Apple on the other hand released 2x models in 2013, doubling the previous year's models with the 5s and 5c. Besides the *slight* pricing difference and visual colour offering, there really isn't that much difference between the available iPhones. Even Apple's own site points this out. The 5c has older A6 chip which isn't 64-bit, but many users would be hard-pressed to know the difference at this time between 64 vs. 32-bit iPhones (at this time... who knows about it in the near/short-term future... with apps and api in the feature that better take advantage of this... it may be more noticeable). Both phones use lighting connector, 720 video recording, 1080 HD display, 1136-by-640 resolution
and 326 ppi.

• iPhone 5c
• iPhone 5s

(iPhone 5s & iPhone 5c - images from here)

From a developer point of view, I find it hard to manage with the Samsung philosophy. There are so many disparate models with differing physical differences like screen sizes, resolutions, but also software & O/S level difference like Android O/S version and Premium Suite & security enhancement support like KNOX and SAFE. Having an app work perfectly on one Samsung Galaxy device does not ensure portability to another Samsung Galaxy device. Compound that with the issue that many models are region specific, it becomes a nightmare to support all but the most popular permutations.

From a consumer point of view, I find it hard to imagine how Samsung is able to make any "economy of scale" saving with so many different models of products. Shipping 3 or 4 models a year can be daunting for any company, but 23 models?!? For me I already get confused which are "budget" models or "premium" models. "S" and "Note" vs. the cheaper "Y" and "M" devices.

However it's hard to argue with Samsung's relative success. Compared to all other Android device manufacturers, they are the Apple of the Android world. For example, in 2 months, the new Galaxy Note sold 10 million units.

So bottom line? I hope I don't get into trouble for saying this, but it seems like Samsung is taking the safe-bet. It's spreading it's investment and ensuring that no device format is missed and basically offering the proverbial "Chinese Menu". So as a 'developer', I feel like the innovation is going to come from Apple and Samsung will always be playing catch-up. Realistically it seems like there are more Chinese Buffets than Michelin Star Restaurants.

Therefore, it might make sense for companies to develop for the less varied, but more refined iPhone and then attempt to move to support the massive offering from Samsung Galaxy/Android. Do you think Samsung took that into consideration when coming up with their product offering?

Hope that helps...

Wayne Pau

Fun Topic: Cellphone Economics Part 2 (aka. WiFi iPad vs. 4G iPad)

So this is a follow-up to Part 1 in which I compared the iPhone 5 to iPod Touch, which was almost 1/2 the price. I got thinking and said, 'hey wait, the iPad comes in in WiFi and WiFi+4G versions', maybe we have a breakdown for that. Luckily, IHS/iSuppli has come through again:

(From http://www.isuppli.com/Teardowns/News/Pages/New-iPad-32-GB-4G-Carries-364-35-Bill-of-Materials.aspx)

So, when looking at the iPad 3, the main difference is the $41.50 modem. (I believe this is a Qualcomm Golbi, but it's not officially called out. For some reason it's about $3 more expensive than the one in the WiFi iPod Touch.) We also have a slightly more expensive Manufacturing cost, about $0.75, most likely from the need to mount and solder on the chip, maybe antenna, etc. The total difference is $42.25.

The simply math is that $42.25 allows Apple to charge $130 more. That's basically 3x or 308% markup. Compare that to the roughly $52 (Camera + 4G modem) that allows Apple to charge $420, that 8x or 807% mark-up when going from iPod Touch 5 to iPhone 5!. (This is one is "approximate" because I have costed it out totally electro-mechanical differences + labour cost, etc., unlike in the iPad 3). 

Clearly, there is a huge mark-up for making an iPod Touch 5 (entertainment device) into a iPhone 5 (cell phone). 

If you think this is the only place where Apple really gauges people, it's not. Another very obvious area is extra memory aka. NAND flash memory. (BTW, note that Apple isn't the only one to do this.)  For iPad 3 WiFi+4G, going from 16GB to 32GB, it's an additional $16.80, but an overall consume cost of $100, or basically 6x or 595% mark-up. Going from 16GB to 64GB it's an additional $50.40, but an overall consume cost of $200, or basically 4x or 397% mark-up. (Note to self, if you're splurging, it's a better deal to go for the larger 64GB. You're paying less mark-up!)

I *think* this is a BIG reason why all iOS devices don't offer external storage via MicroSD slot is because it makes good business sense *not to*. The going rate today I think is about $50 for 64GB MicroSD. So on any Android with MicroSD slot you are only paying like 25% of the price (or $50 instead of $200) to get at least 64GB of (extra) memory (that you can re-use potentially later down the road). 

Andrew Rassweiler of IHS pretty much sums it up here:

“The NAND flash memory is one of the key profit-generating components for Apple in the new iPad line, as it has been in previous iPads and in the iPhone family,” Rassweiler noted. “Apple makes far and away more money in selling consumers NAND flash than NAND flash manufacturers make selling it to Apple. And the more flash in the iPad, the higher the profit margin there is for Apple.”

(http://www.isuppli.com/Teardowns/News/Pages/New-iPad-32-GB-4G-Carries-364-35-Bill-of-Materials.aspx)

So while there may be concerns with security of having external storage, etc, Apple is definitely taking full advantage of the situation.

Hope that helps...

Wayne Pau.

p.s. So what *if* Apple did offer external storage like Android does? 

Once again with Android  (And from this post, it seems *a lot* actually do) , if it supports SDXC, you could actually get even more memory than just 64MB. The specs say that SXDC can actually hold up to 2TB! Imagine a 2TB iPhone? No need for iPod Classic anymore...

However SD card storage comes at a cost. It's harder to manage from a software point of view and it's a potential security threat or attach point. Yet a big part of the real motivation for for Apple is 'possibly' economics.

For the record, HTC One line (everywhere but Asian) doesn't offer SD Card storage either. So it's not just Apple. 

Fun Topic: Cellphone Economics Part 1 (aka. iPhone vs. iPod pricing)

The question I've been asking myself lately is:

"Are cellphone prices heavily inflated?"

So a few weeks ago I had a posting about the rumoured iPhone 5C release and I had a link to IHS/iSuppli breakdown of the iPad Mini. That got me thinking (which is never a good thing...) as I was peeking around at the pricing of the latest generation of iPod Touches and compared that to iPhone 5.

• iPod 5 Touch 16 GB - $229
• iPhone 5 16 GB - $669 (unlocked)

Pricing from Apple.com

 I was *shocked* (although I probably shouldn't have been) that you could get a iPod Touch 5, essentially get a iPhone 5 without the cellular part for less than HALF the price!

What is the *same*:

• 4" retina display (1136x640 @ 326 PPI)
• Almost identical bodies (iPhone is 7.6mm vs iPod 6.1mm)
• FaceTime HD Camera (720p)
• WiFi & BT connectivity
• Apple EarPod headphones

What is *different*:

• iPhone 5 has 8MP camera, iPod 5 has no camera (only 5MP on 32 + 64MB models)
• Qualcomm Golbi MDM9615 4G LTE modem

I checked to see if IHS/iSuppli had a breakdown of the iPod 5 available for public consumption, but they did not. However I did find the iPhone 5, which I was at least a starting point to do some estimates on:

(From http://www.isuppli.com/Teardowns/News/Pages/iPhone5-Carries-$199-BOM-Virtual-Teardown-Reveals.aspx)

So... basically the total cost of iPhone is $199 in parts and $207 in BOM + Manufacturing in 2012. That's about 29.6% of $699 list price. Now if we subtract out the Golbi modem and camera, that's a simplistic subtraction of $52. That leaves $155, or 67.7% of the list price of $229. (Note: I image if I were cut everything we'd be closer to 50% mark... with lesser processor, etc)

That's *shocking*, that the margin on iPod is HALF of what it is on the iPhone.If we interpolated the same mark-up on iPod as the iPhone, we get $306, which is less than HALF again what the list price is. Now there may be more sub-par components in the iPod that I haven't caught cost-wise, but I can't image that you could get the BOM + Manufacturing costs below or around $100. 

(I'm actually more confident in that, after looking at the iPod Nano breakdown, which  IHS/iSuppli pegged at $43.73. This is with only 8MB and tiny display. There is $40 difference alone in LCD display and $6.45 in memory. That would put that almost at $90.20, and we aren't adding in more costs for bigger battery, WiFi and housing ,etc.)

What are looking at here then? I mean the iPod Touch is the closest thing to a cellphone without a cellular modem. Does this mean that Cellphone Companies and the ODMs are colluding together and inflating the prices of "smart-phones"?

This article from CNET had Luke Westaway discuss a very similar comparison with Asus. However I found the article somewhat unsatisfying considering I have the BOM breakdown in front of me from iPhone 5. Processor only accounts for less than 10% of the build cost.

Bottom line is that cellphones have a inherent "luxury" tax over non-cellular versions. This is probably driven by carriers who want very expensive phones that they can heavily subsidize with multi-year plans.  They want to sell you $700-$900 phones, it makes good business for them. 

Note (again): please understand that I am using information from IHS/iSuppli in my analyst which is by no means official pricing from Apple (as I doubt any exists). I have also made a lot of estimates and assumptions. This article was created for education or entertainment reasons *only*. 

Hope that helps...


Wayne Pau.


p.s. So what does that mean for someone frugal like me who might want a iOS device? (ie. for those Candy Crush Saga addicts...not me...personally, I'm OK with my current phone...) I'm wondering if you're better off with a $0 Android phone that you can share WiFi and buy a iPod 5 Touch. The main drawbacks are:

• you won't have integrated calling and contact book 

• you will have to carry 2x devices

• you have to charge 2x devices

but you could be saving yourself like $400! Like you'd also save yourself some data charges as you're more likely to go free WiFi spots than tether to your Android Phone when given the chance @ Starbucks, etc.

I wonder what the carriers would do if everyone did this? Would that deflate or inflate usage charges as maybe more expensive handsets help off-set data, messanging and voice changes?

Pop Question: Do I need a different Phone *and* Tablet app? (Zebras vs. Horses)

I have to say, I get this (and a related) question quite often. It makes a lot of sense from a technical point of view, since 2x different apps means twice as much work, 2x different entries in Google Play Store/Apple iTunes/BB World, etc.

(Pair of Zebras @ Toronto Zoo)

Have you ever asked yourself what differentiates a  Zebra vs. Horse? They are both part of the Family "Equus" and some sources say the name the word "Zebra" comes from Portuguese meaning "Wild Horse" or "Wild Donkey". However, as much as a Zebra looks likes 'White' Horse with 'Black' stripes, turns out they are physiologically quite different. Zebras are said to be very hard to tame, have solid (aka "meaty") tails and ultimately Zebras are only native to Africa continent. For more info see here and here.

So for your apps, you need to take a look at how different it *would* or *could* run on Tablet vs. Phone. Can a single code-base run with enough detection/adaptation code to adjust properly on both formats? Would future enhancements or changes to one platform but not the other cause issues?

For example, look at my friends at NitroDesk, who offer a 'popular' (to the tune of 2 million users) very "security-focused" 3rd-party Email-App Vendor. Their Android offerings have both a Phone (aka "smartphone") and  Tablet (aka "HD") version.

TouchDown email for Android SuperPhones

 The Phone version is mostly optimized to the typical "Portrait" view with ListView control. In contrast the Tablet version is optmized to the typical "Landscape" view with multiple panel approach. It's not *just* the the size of the screen that is optimized, it's the user & interaction.

TouchDown email for Android Tablet

For us @ SAP, for the current mobile app I am working the answer was 'NO'. So the group I am working with has chosen to create separate a Tablet and Phone optimized with different IxD. (Note: The plan is actually for eventually 4x releases, iPad, iPhone, Android Superphone & Android Tablet.) 

Yes you can 'code' some of the logic into the app to auto-detect the screen size, density and layout, but especially for Android with the "Fragmentation" (not to be confused with a code android.app.fragment... I will have a posting on this topic soon...keep an eye out for it...), I don't believe this is going to be always 100% reliable. 

My current advice is to design and offer 2x different apps and guide the end-user to pick the optimal version. Ultimately I'd rather have 2x great apps posted vs. 1x mediocre one. 

Bottom Line: 

A Zebra is in fact not just a White Horse with Black stripes. 

Just like a Tablet is not just a bigger Phone, and therefore we shouldn't treat it as such.

Hope that helps...

Wayne Pau.

p.s. Yes, the opposite is also true. Can you "pigeon hole" users with 2x different apps? With both a Tablet and Phone optimized apps, what about Phablet users? My suggestion is to make Tablet and Phone optimized apps, but not restrict them via the app store (ie. Android Manifest file, etc). This way for users of a device that is a hybrid they can test out *both* apps and find which works best for them.

UX Term of the Day: "Fitt's Law" (aka Fat Fingers...)

Ever have one of those controls on a screen that was Soooooooo small you couldn't tap it twice in a row if your life depended on it? These are the apps that make me pull out my pinky-finger in order to try to tap something... (If I'm totally honest with myself, pretty much every mobile phone soft-keyboard feels like this at times...there just *never* seems to be enough space to fit in all those keys!)

Earlier this year I was helping test an application for BB10 that clearly had some usability struggles. One of the issues that really stuck out was that one UI controls was about 4mm in width. That's actually about 1/2 what size it should have been.

So how big is big and how big is big enough? Turns it's not arbitrary and we have some math & science that basically tells how big something should be. The formula often used is called Fitts' Law:

Fitts' Law Formula

I've *simplified* here, but Difficulty (or technically the ID - Index of Difficulty) is logarithmically proportional to Distance Moved or how far the user has to move (the cursor or their "finger") and the Width of Button or the size of the 'tappable area' of the UI control. 

When we're talking about menu or nav buttons which could be selected from anywhere, really we don't care about distance moved (because it varies a lot), so really usability is somewhat *inversely* proportional to size. Even more so, if size *approaches* zero, the difficulty level becomes infinite! (Starting to remember infinity and limits from first year calc class, right?) 

In plain English, smaller buttons are harder and larger buttons are easier. Obvious right?

*However* the 'amount' that they are easier to use isn't linear, but rather at some point making the button bigger doesn't help *that* much. The converse is also true, at some point a little smaller can make it *really* *really* *really* hard to use.

For the full math and derivation of Fitts' Law, I'd suggestion the following links. (These are mostly best left for "geeky" HCI PhD's...)

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitts's_law
• http://www.cs.umd.edu/class/fall2002/cmsc838s/tichi/fitts.html

For the rest of us 'mere mortals', I would use Microsoft's (see below) much more human-understandable guidelines. I especially like MS depiction of various 'sizes' of fingers!

Quote from Microsoft (Win8) Touch Interaction Design Guide:

"People often blame themselves for having "fat fingers." But even baby fingers are wider than most touch targets. The image on the left shows the width of the average adult finger is about 11 millimeters (mm) wide, while a baby's is 8 mm, and some basketball players have fingers wider than 19 mm!"

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/apps/hh465415.aspx

MS goes on to say if you have a control @ 7mm, your error rate for mis-taps is about 1%. If you can make it at least 9mm, it's 0.5%. Notice how the curve is *almost* logarithmic? (Anything after 10-11mm, the difference is marginal at best. The % of missed taps gets smaller, but never 'actually' becomes zero...)

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/apps/hh465415.aspx

Apple too states that UI controls should be about 44 Pixels, which is about 9mm in real life on iPhones and iPads. Google/Android says 48 DPs, which is about 9mm on Superphones and Tablets, but the guidelines say stay within 7-10mm range if possible. 

(I think this is one of the *only* times I've ever seen all 3x big players agreed on anything!)

So bottom, if you don't want to do the messy math, 8-10mm should be a good threshold. Any smaller and you run a real risk of "mis-taps" from your mobile device (and likely *frustrated*) users.

Hope that helps...

w.

p.s. Still don't believe me? Every platform has a default "calculator" app. Load up the calculator app on your device and measure the physical size of the buttons. Break out the ruler and give it a try yourself!

Every time I've done this, at least one dimension is always at least 8mm long or longer. 

For the record here a quick snapshot of my finger on a ruler. I'd say that's just under 10mm and I assure you I don't have basketball player sized hands!

Pop Question: What's a Phablet? (Is the iPad Mini a Phablet?)

For a while now the 'industry' has been just inventing terminology for devices. The latest one is 'Phablet'.

Phone + Tablet = Phablet

Basically it's a device that is too big to be a phone and too small to be a true tablet. Here is "semi-official" breakdown of devices:

• Phones - 5" or smaller display
• Phablet - >5" and <7" display
• Tablet - 7" or larger display

Phones today range up in size to largest phones like today's HTC One, Samsung Galaxy S4 or iPhone 5. On the smaller end they are like the cheaper "free" with contract Android phones or smaller HTC One SV or Samsung SIII (S3) Mini.  They are generally cellular devices, used regularly as phones and kept on the individual at all times.

Tablets today range up in size to 10"-ish devices like Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1, Google Nexus 10 or iPad 3. On the smaller end they are like Samsung Galaxy Tab 2 (7"), Kindle Fire or iPad Mini. They are mostly used on WiFi or data-only devices, and often used in landscape (and not portrait) mode.

Phablets are the compromise between the two worlds. While other 5"-ish sized devices existed first, the forerunner for Phablets was the Dell Steak 5 (which died in 2011) which was unique in that it was bigger than a phone, but still could be used as a phone. 

However in my mind, the real 'King' of Phablets now is Samsung Galaxy Note and Note II (2). What makes it unique to me is not so much the size, but the EMR stylus which I mentioned in a previous post here.

Practically what does this mean? I don't really develop directly for Phablets. In reality I treat them as Phones, since the overall dimensions more resemble a Phone. 

For example, Samsung S4, a definitely Phone format is:

• 5" Display
• 16:9 Ratio
• 1080 x 1920 Pixels

For example, Samsung Note II, a Phablet format is:

• 5.5" Display
• 16:9 Ratio
• 720 x 1280 Pixels

Therefore the Note II is basically about 10% larger diagonally and lower number of pixels (but identical to the older SIII, which was 720 x 1280 pixels). The difference is **nominal**. (The Galaxy Tabs have 5:8 ratio which is much more "squat".)

Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 (left), Galaxy Note II (middle) and Galaxy S4 (right)

Have a look at the low-res snapshot above. Which one do you think the Note II more resembles? Tablet or Phone?

So practically... for me... from a mobile app development point of view, there is still just Phones and Tablets. 


Lastly, is the iPad Mini a Phablet? In my mind "no". It's well in the Tablet 7"+ space (7.9" to be exact) and it keeps the full-sized iPad ratio of 4:3. So for me, Phablets are pratically *only* an Android concept right now. 

For Apple, there are only iPads and iPhones. No iPhablets. Yet. j/k.


Hope that helps...

w.

p.s. For a great list of screen size, density and ratios, this Wikipedia page below is great. I use it all the time and it's fairly up-to-date and has almost all the most common devices:

List of displays by pixel density

The other list I usually use is off Blundell's blog, which is also updated very regularly. 

Blundell Blog - List of Android Devices