Foldable phones promise an appealing combination: a large screen when you need one and a compact device when you do not. Yet after years of experiments and major product launches, they still account for only a small share of the global smartphone market.
Their appeal is easy to understand. An unfolded screen provides more room for watching videos, reading and working across several apps. But creating a phone that can bend without breaking involves difficult trade-offs. Foldables often cost more than conventional smartphones while offering weaker cameras, shorter battery life and a visible crease down the middle of the screen.
The category had a particularly difficult start. Foldable-phone concepts had existed for decades, but display maker Royole is widely credited with shipping the first commercial model in 2018. Its FlexPai featured a 7.8-inch screen that folded outward. Reviewers, however, criticized its awkward software and bulky plastic hinge.
Samsung brought greater attention to the category with the Galaxy Fold, one of the first foldables aimed at the mass market. Its launch quickly ran into trouble. Several reviewers reported broken screens, while others mistakenly removed a protective layer that looked like an ordinary screen protector. Samsung postponed the launch and recalled its review units.
Those early failures revealed the central challenge facing foldable phones: the screen must remain flexible while the rest of the device stays strong. Hinges have to survive thousands of folds, screens must resist dust and damage, and the phone must remain thin enough to carry comfortably.
Manufacturers also had different ideas about what a foldable phone should be. Some developed book-style devices that opened into small tablets. Others revived the clamshell design, allowing a standard-sized phone to fold into a smaller square. Outward-folding screens offered another approach, while Microsoft's Surface Duo connected two separate displays with a hinge instead of using a single flexible screen.
Over time, better hinges, stronger materials and improved manufacturing made foldables more reliable. Creases became less noticeable, and devices grew thinner. The category took another step forward in 2024 with the arrival of three-panel designs. These devices could unfold into even larger screens, although their high prices kept them beyond the reach of most buyers.
Technical progress, however, has not settled a more basic question: What shape is most useful?
Among book-style foldables, some models are wider and shorter, resembling a passport when closed. When opened, their proportions are well suited to video, with smaller black bars around the picture. Taller designs may offer more room for reading documents, multitasking and other productivity-focused activities. Neither format is ideal for everyone, and the variety shows that manufacturers are still trying to discover what consumers actually want from a folding screen.
The market nevertheless continues to grow. IDC has estimated that foldable-phone shipments will rise by nearly 30% this year, even as shipments of conventional smartphones decline slightly. Analysts also expect new competition to bring more attention and investment to the category.
Greater visibility alone will not guarantee mainstream success. Foldables have become sturdier, thinner and more practical, but they remain expensive and still involve compromises. Their future will depend not simply on whether manufacturers can make screens bend, but on whether folding makes a phone useful enough to justify the price, the crease and the other trade-offs.