I simply have to get this one off my chest: I am totally sick of the term "flagship killer" being used.
The mobile news industry is using it with wanton abandonment at the moment, and I would absolutely love it if everyone stopped for a minute to work out what the term is supposed to mean.
Back in 2008, we had "iPhone killers", mainly in the shape of the Nokia 5800, which was at the time a pretty good phone, but it was not an iPhone "killer" at all: In fact, after 2008 and the eagerly anticipated but flawed N96, Nokia began its steady decline.
What is a "killer" phone anyway?
Most manufacturers would want a bite of the pie to lessen their rival's market share, but with each manufacturer producing one flagship phone and several variations every year, they realistically have become high end feature phones that have "killer" features over each other.
Pit other manufacturers against each other, and you'll find loyal fans who swear that they prefer Apple, HTC, Samsung and so on.
Flagship killer? Name one, go on!
I gather that the mobile news websites love to say that phones such as the Moto G 2015 is a "flagship killer". It's not. It is an exceptionally good phone for the price, but it's no flagship killer, otherwise Motorola would be scamming themselves by even bothering to market their Moto X.
The quicker that lazy writers stop using pointless terms, the better.
Thank you for reading.
