These people, myself included, don't want to carry a purse full of hardware or a utility belt. If the single device wasn't more convenient we'd all still be carrying a PDA, original RAZR, pager and point and shoot camera. I'm willing to grant the external charger being a solution to no removable battery, although most of these are bulky and ugly and I personally prefer the much smaller and more portable battery. I can stuff 3-4 batteries into my laptop bag or rollerbag without noticing.
You say that people don't want to carry around a "a purse full of hardware or a utility belt" but you are apparently fine carrying around phone batteries in your bag. That's for your own situation. I don't like carrying around batteries period. If you ask the average person if they are carrying around extra batteries - even if they have a replaceable battery - I'm sure he or she would say no. Just because you are comfortable carrying around batteries, but not external ones, doesn't mean someone else isn't comfortable carrying an external battery. You are assuming others won't be inconvenienced by carrying around extra batteries, but will be by an external. I don't think that's a sensible assumption to make, not of the masses, which is what we are talking about unless you have the purchasing power of tens of millions of people.
You and your prior examples don't represent average users. Tens of millions of Android users aren't each carrying around extra batteries for their S series devices. I have no doubt plenty of us enthusiasts are, but does it make up 50% of the Android base? 30%? 10%? Does a replaceable battery translate into sales of these devices? It might account for a small portion, but unless you have evidence (hard statistics), I'd say marketing is still the big reason the S4 is outselling the One by so much. Claiming that the microSD card reader or removable batteries are significant in terms of sales is like claiming that good MPG is what sells BMWs luxury sedans or sports coupes over its competitors. Sure, you would like good MPG, but I'm betting that's not the primary concern of those who can afford them or similarly high-end cars.
USB OTG is a similar solution to an external charger. It's a form factor issue. It's easier and more portable to have a dozen SDcards in your wallet/purse than a dozen USB sticks. As far as 25GB, she snaps about 32 to 48 gigs of pictures that don't need supreme photo quality a day. That's about a terabyte of "cloud" data uploaded (and downloaded) a month, even the $500/month pro plans would kick her off. Yes, a Nokia phone would be better for what she does (better than the S4 and One), but she's already in (and familiar with) the Android ecosystem so is willing to live with sub-par Android cameras because they're good enough.
48GB a DAY? Seriously? One person, without using RAW or "supreme photo quality"? If it there were HD video mixed in maybe that's possible, but otherwise that's over 15,000 photos. Please tell me you meant MB, or a year, or that's for a large team of realtors. If she hasn't lost any photos due to a corrupt microSD card, well, I'd like to invest in the company that makes whatever brand she's using. I get a little antsy having only 100 photos, let alone 15,000, on a microSD without having at least a local backup on a desktop or laptop. One is none, two is one.
That's the most extreme example I've ever heard of, and most professionals taking anywhere near that many shots would at least have a backup or "real" camera. A compact MILC would do the trick and she wouldn't have to worry about the OS potentially messing up or corrupting the filesystem (it happens), or other potential issues that arise from having a smartphone fail. Heck, even viruses can a threat on the Android operating system now. If even 0.01% of the population is taking that many shots, then I'd agree that the S4 is a strong sell. But otherwise at least for photography, I would say 25GB is a decent enough solution. I'm sure many people with large media collections that absolutely need all 10,000 songs and 3,000 movies that they own to be on their phone at all times demand microSD, but again I would bet that the HTC One with 32GB standard suffices for most.
If you look at Android phones and the iPhone, we are already in a world where a large part of the market has already gone away from external and are moving to larger internal storage. I personally prefer 32GB onboard as to 16GB (10GB useable) plus external, but maybe that's only me. Ideally we'll see 128GB and higher onboard be the standard in 2 or 3 years, but for now I'm willing to bet that most people are happy with 32GB, especially considering how many people are on devices with less than that.
I'm sorry, but that's like saying herpes is better than cancer. Yes, the audio on the One is worlds better than any other cell phone. From my own experience, I use the phone speaker for critical listening exactly never. Running and driving are my two mobile listening use cases, and there I use headphones and car speakers.
When's the last time you, personally, used the external speakers and said to yourself, "wow, these make all the difference in the world in the experience I'm having right now." Just like laptops and tablets, the difference between "best" speakers on the mobile device and "good" speakers on a mobile device is the difference between "bleh" and "horrible."
Yes, it's better, but still never "good." What I'm saying is audio reproduction via speaker on a phone has yet to get to the point where it's a definitive, must have feature.
That's the worst analogy I've ever heard or seen in print in recent memory, and completely misrepresents what I posted.
And the last time I said, "wow, these make all the difference in the world in the experience I'm having right now" was with the HTC One.
Go figure.
The speakers on these aren't horrible or "bleh". They are good.
Speakers matter, even on smartphones. Do you know why? It's because there are plenty of cases where I'm not using headphones, though of course for quality I prefer to use headphones (and the built in amp does a geat job there, too). For instance, sharing videos when I'm with friends. I'm not likely to do the Galaxy "clink" of phones even if I had a S3 or S4; like most people, if I'm at a friend's house or traveling and don't have a large screen at my disposal, a phone becomes a reasonable way to share discovered videos or music.
Also, I love to listen to my music, radio (through apps like TuneIn or by web browser), or podcasts and not have earbuds in or larger headphones on my ears all the time. It's a comfort issue. I'm sure you have heard of portable external speakers, right? For a long time people have been buying portable external speakers to use with their mp3 players and phones. Mostly cheap ones that are tinny and don't have a lot of bass, but they get the job done on the go and still manage to be better than admittedly crappy cell phone speakers back-facing speakers. No one buys those portable externals to fill a concert hall, but they used to be practically a requirement just to hear across a small room.
With the One that has changed. The speakers might not be the quality of premium $100+ portable speakers, but they do a good enough job that I don't mind using the One as a small stereo at my desk to listen to music or the spoken word. If you think the speakers don't make a difference, well most of the reviewers and owners of the HTC One would disagree with you. It's fine if you feel otherwise, but you may or may not represent most people. Front-facing makes a big enough difference that the question for those who have used the One has become, "why cant ALL phones have front facing speakers?" It's too early for phones shipping now to start having similar design, but in 1 to 3 years it would surprise me at all if we saw lot more phones with "BoomSound"-like implementation of speakers.
Having the best speakers of any smartphone isn't just a small feature. It's also helps for speakerphone and ringer volume. The One doesn't just get loud, it's also very clear with minimal distortion even at max. They may not be a "definitive, must have feature" but I can't think of anything that is except for the things that make a smartphone a smartphone.
It's a big reason, for sure. I'm still not convinced it's the major one. Even for people who don't "need" the SD/battery having them seems better than not having them. We keep bringing the "average" user into this discussion because of the Moto X -- the display on the S4 is larger and with better black levels and contrast than the One.
Just like "torch mode" used to sell TVs in a brightly lit showroom this alone might account for better sales. I'd vastly prefer LCD to OLED myself, but I won't deny the "punch" of seeing one in store. If they were sold outside, in sunlight, I would bet far fewer "average joes" would buy the S4.
The HTC One has a brighter display that is more accurate except when the S4 is in "movie mode", and with higher DPI. The S4 has higher saturation and contrast, though. There are advantages and tradeoffs to both. I've used and seen both screens next to each other and not just in a store environment, and like I said earlier I don't mind having either. Both are really good and better than the Moto X.
That said, from all reports, the Moto X screen is "good enough" even if it isn't 1080p or with the best color reproduction. I'm sure most users won't complain about the screen on the Moto X, not unless they are coming from an S4 or One or other 1080p screen (not really an upgrade going from those phones to the Moto X).
Possibly. A lot of whether a device is a hit or a miss has to do with the initial tech buzz. The best buzz so far about th Moto X is "it should be good enough for the likes of you, you don't need a premium device." Tech spec hounds get asked for product adice all the time and if asked whether someone should get a Moto X my answer would be "heck no, look at the S4, One, iPhone 5 (and soon the LG G2)" I'm by far not in a minority. It'll take a lot of ads to overcome the advice of basement dwellers whom your "average joes" turn to.
The battery life could be the major selling point. As you rightly pointed out before, there are users concerned with battery life, however swapping batteries or external isn't palatable to most heavy users like execs, people in construction, nurses or doctors, or anyone else working long shifts with no ready access or time to charge devices. For them a phone that truly lasts all day on a single charge with moderate to heavy use could be a good reason to ignore the minor differences (in a non-tech person's eyes) of display quality and processor speed. By all initial accounts the Moto X is actually pretty fast in real usage, being competitive with the other flagships.
Those obsessed with specs can show disdain for the Moto X all they want, but from my viewpoint it looks to be the most marketable phone out there. They don't have to get every single person out there with niche demands, they only need to appeal to the majority - or even less - of those in the market for a new high-end smartphone to make killing. Plenty of people will still by the S4, but after all the commercials start airing and buzz starts building, I can easily see people going for the customizable, non-generic looking phone that performs smoothly and speedily and has nifty features that Google has put in there. The specs of the S4, One, LG G2, or whatever else is available after the Moto X launches won't matter as much to the general population.
I'm happy sticking with my phone, but if the Moto X had come out several months ago I would have given it serious consideration. I'm done arguing One vs S4, by the way, both are good phones and this isn't the thread for that. I end up repeating myself each time someone brings it up, and I'm tired of debating. Just get whatever works for you. If the S4 fits your needs and your wife's needs and all your colleagues and friends' needs, too, that's great. I'm happy for you.