Slashdot Mirror


Testing an Orange SPV 'Smartphone'

theolein writes "The register has an article discussing the first major phone company's implementation -Orange SPV- of MS Smartphone as well as a common user's experiences with it. More or less confirms what quite a few expected."

232 comments

  1. I don't like Orange by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Nothing rhymes with it, and that makes it hard for a rapper like me to rap about it.

    1. Re:I don't like Orange by MoThugz · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      What about "deranged"?

    2. Re:I don't like Orange by lsdino · · Score: 1

      Nothing rhymes with it, and that makes it hard for a rapper like me to rap about it.

      Try "door hinge", it almost works.

    3. Re:I don't like Orange by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      {pump up tha beat}

      Nothing quite rhymes wif da word called Orange

      So I'll just rap wif da word that's Orange

      Except when it comes to da B*cth that's Green

      Dat yo color aint quite so mean

      (Fold arms in Rappa Style and strike a pose)

    4. Re:I don't like Orange by 1u3hr · · Score: 1

      Larry Niven's acronymous exclamation: tanj (There Ain't No Justice)

    5. Re:I don't like Orange by Andreas+Rueckert · · Score: 1

      No range, exchange,...

  2. Beating about the bush by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hate it if people beat about the bush and can't say what "quite a few expected"
    FOAD

  3. So what's the best implementation? by saihung · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Smartphones have been available in one form or another for a while. While reviews are (nearly) unanimous that the Stinger isn't it, what's been the best smartphone so far? I love my Zaurus, and I might be interested in a GSM module for it, but I'm not sure that a huge screen on a phone is what I really want. I'm thinking that maybe the Ericsonn T68 is a good compromise. It does a lot, and it offers easy connectivity to just about any computer/pda if you prefer to use a dedicated device for surfing the web/etc.

    1. Re:So what's the best implementation? by gilesjuk · · Score: 1

      Nokia and their series 60 seems to be the bandwagon that everyone wants to jump on. If it wasn't for the limited execution RAM in the 9210(i) and 7650 they would be amazingly good phones.

    2. Re:So what's the best implementation? by wbm6k · · Score: 2, Informative

      I've been very happy with my Kyocera 6035.
      When the flip is closed, it is a tri-band mobile phone, with real keys and one touch access to the Palm address book.
      With the flip open, you get the Palm 3.5 OS, and access to all the desktop connectivity and 3rd party programs available for Palm.
      Downsides: A bit bulky and heavy, wider than most phones, thicker than most PDA's. Grayscale screen, small for PDAs (but this also makes for great battery life). A little cludgy to surf the web with, but it can easily get you the movie listings and such.

    3. Re:So what's the best implementation? by DJProtoss · · Score: 1

      Depends what you want. Personally, I want it all (I use mine as a laptop substitute), and for that, none can touch the 9210i imho (well, except the 9210 (less ram and no official opera) and 91xx (b/w but 486 arch - they got dos and even (limited) linux running on it...)).

      --
      "Success is based on knowing how far to go in going too far"
    4. Re:So what's the best implementation? by mlk · · Score: 1

      You can get Linux running on my EPOC based Revo (search sf.net), so you might be able to get it running on your Nokia 9110i

      --
      Wow, I should not post when knackered.
    5. Re:So what's the best implementation? by mejh · · Score: 1

      I love my T68 in all departments except one: SPEED (or rather, the lack of)
      Navigating around when you know the key combinations is dead slow, but mainly I notice it when writing SMS messages. Argh!

      I heard that there is a software upgrade that helps improve the speed a bit (and the T68i has a newer version than the T68 so is a bit faster)

      Good battery life though, specially compared to my girlfriend's newer Nokia 3210 which seems to need charging every other day.

      YMMV though,
      Mark.

    6. Re:So what's the best implementation? by Troed · · Score: 1
      The Sony Ericsson P800 uses an ever better UI (UIQ) - the Series 60 platform doesn't have touch-screen with pen-input.


      Disclaimer: I once worked for Symbian and was one of the people who began working on what's now UIQ .. ;)

    7. Re:So what's the best implementation? by Yer+Mum · · Score: 1

      You could wait for the P800 (also by Sony Ericsson) out in January or Februrary, or go for the Siemens S55 which is going to be released in the next week or two - it's the T68i done right and with Java so you can bolt on the extra Smartphone stuff with midlets if you like.

    8. Re:So what's the best implementation? by Ch_Omega · · Score: 2

      No, Series 60 doesn't have a thouchscreen, but are much better suited for one-hand use, than the P800. And last time i checked, there was no universal truth that said that pen-based input automaticaly makes a better UI on smartphones.

    9. Re:So what's the best implementation? by Ch_Omega · · Score: 2

      Nokia and their series 60 seems to be the bandwagon that everyone wants to jump on. If it wasn't for the limited execution RAM in the 9210(i) and 7650 they would be amazingly good phones.

      The Nokia 3650 will have everything the 7650 has, as well as being triband AND having an MMC memory expansion port. :)

    10. Re:So what's the best implementation? by Troed · · Score: 1

      We optimised the Quartz UT (now UIQ) a _lot_ for one-handed use - I'm curious, have you tried both?

  4. Watch the salesman sqirm! by grundie · · Score: 4, Informative

    I went in to my local Orange shop to get a demo of one of these phones last week as I was tempted to get one.

    Fortunately I decided against getting one when the salesman tried to make me believe it was normal for a mobile phone to take 60 seconds to start up and log on to the network!

    My overall impressions of the device was that it was incredibly slow, not slow as in running Doze 98 on a P75, but slow as in Doze XP on a 286. It was also incredibly heavy and long for a mobile phone.

    I can't see Orange shifting many. Me, I'm waiting for the SonyEricsson P800.

    1. Re:Watch the salesman sqirm! by g4dget · · Score: 4, Informative
      Fortunately I decided against getting one when the salesman tried to make me believe it was normal for a mobile phone to take 60 seconds to start up and log on to the network!

      Sadly, it pretty much is with GSM/GPRS-based phones. However, good ones will maintain the connection once established so that you usually don't have to wait. Newer, better wireless technologies should fix that.

    2. Re:Watch the salesman sqirm! by BrokenHalo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't know what network you're running on, but my GSM phone powers up and logs on to the network (Vodafone, Australia) in about 4 seconds.

    3. Re:Watch the salesman sqirm! by G-funk · · Score: 2

      Same. Although it does take about 60 seconds to read the addresses from the sim card, and if you try before it's finished, the count seems to start again... A real PITA when you turn on your phone just to get a number when the battery is almost dead :(

      --
      Send lawyers, guns, and money!
    4. Re:Watch the salesman sqirm! by g4dget · · Score: 2

      Well, I tried AT&T and T-Mobile with several phones. GPRS access takes a long time to be established initially, sometimes as long as a minute.

    5. Re:Watch the salesman sqirm! by avdp · · Score: 2

      Maybe so. But I think we're talking about the time for basic phone functionalities (making a call) to be available after turning on the phone.

      On my T-Mobile GSM phone that takes just a few seconds. Maybe 3 or 4.

    6. Re:Watch the salesman sqirm! by F13 · · Score: 1
      Wow that is fast, I am not sure if it depends on the handset but the Telstra GPRS network takes around 10-15 seconds at times to log on.

      On another note though I wonder what Telstra is going to do with their GSM network eventully as they recently announced to go with 1xRTT tech with their CDMA network.

    7. Re:Watch the salesman sqirm! by bwulf · · Score: 2

      On my Nokia D211 (GPRS cardphone), the time between the 'ATDT*99#' and the PPP-session is established is negligible (using pppd).

      In Windows, connect-times vary. I blame this on general DUN suckage, though.

    8. Re:Watch the salesman sqirm! by Wonko42 · · Score: 3, Informative
      Sadly, it pretty much is with GSM/GPRS-based phones.

      Um, no. My Nokia 3390 has never taken longer than three seconds to connect to the network (T-Mobile).

    9. Re:Watch the salesman sqirm! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      go get one!

      http://www.ericsson.com/mobilityworld/sub/ecomme rc e/products/p800bundle.html

    10. Re:Watch the salesman sqirm! by grundie · · Score: 1

      Sadly, it pretty much is with GSM/GPRS-based phones. However, good ones will maintain the connection once established so that you usually don't have to wait. Newer, better wireless technologies should fix that.

      I already have an Ericsson T68i with GPRS on Orange and it logs on within 10 seconds. The SPV seemed to spend at least 40-50 seconds just to boot up its OS, before attempting to log on to the network. You must admit that is slooooow.

      Apart from being a bit of a big irritation it could have other implications. Imagine coming across a road accident and having to wait a minute before being able to call the emergency services, just because the phone wasn't switched on.

  5. Once More the Monopolist at Work! by IrvineHosting · · Score: 3, Informative

    Looks like the convicted monopolist is up to their old tricks again: "For reasons best known to itself (and possibly whoever devised the Ts & Cs of its Microsoft licence) Orange has crippled the SPV so that it will only run Microsoft certified software. According to developer Paul O'Brien (who also runs MoDaCo), prerelease versions of the phone had the Microsoft Root Digital Certificate, which trusted certificates produced with the Smartphone 2002 SDK, but this was removed from the shipping device. How to win developer hearts and minds - let them get their apps running fine on the prototypes, then break them when the product ships."

    1. Re:Once More the Monopolist at Work! by akac · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Developers have to get their app signed for that mobile phone network. Its supposedly to make sure no viruses get onto the phones. Wonder where we'll see that next...

    2. Re:Once More the Monopolist at Work! by Ponty · · Score: 2

      I don't know if I'd call those tricks. Just stupidity. As the reviewer says, MS wanted to blunt Symbian and rushed this thing out the door. Interestingly, it's consistent with almost all MS 1.0 releases. They're barely capable, but they improve with the later releases, then they start to get crufty and awful after about 3.0.

    3. Re:Once More the Monopolist at Work! by IrvineHosting · · Score: 2

      Suddenly requiring a $600 fee to get your app signed so it can be used seems like a pretty dirty trick by anyone's book. The ancillary result is that this will probably kill off any plans for freeware, shareware, gpl or bsd licensed software.

    4. Re:Once More the Monopolist at Work! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is this really a 1.0 release, WinCE has been out a LONG time, and had finally got stable (ish).

    5. Re:Once More the Monopolist at Work! by mcjulio · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Let's clear a few things up - this "crippling" is done by Orange, not by Microsoft. The phone supports signed apps as part of its security model and it is up to the carrier what policy they want to allow on the device. One of the available policies is "all apps run, no matter their signature or lack thereof."

      Regarding the $600 fee to have the app signed with a Microsoft cert: this is perfectly reasonable and probably even cheap, considering that the coder writing the app is buying Microsoft's good name, so to speak. This is a shitty compromise, and it is definitely not what Microsoft would want, but Orange has made it hard.

    6. Re:Once More the Monopolist at Work! by bobstay · · Score: 1
      Compare this to Sharp's attitude to developers, when releasing their Zaurus. They:
      • Had excellent developer support - a forum where their staff answered development queries within a day
      • Used a (reasonably) standard crossplatform development environment (QT)
      • Offered a competition with significant ($15,000 iirc) prizes for the best app
      • Attracted OSS developers by choosing linux as the OS
      and, perhaps most impressively,
      • Lent me a developer model for free when I expressed interest in developing an app for the platform

      The Zaurus has been a great success, and has a goodly application base now (see here)

      I don't suppose we can expect Microsoft to think like that, though...

  6. Too funny by octalgirl · · Score: 3, Funny

    "This is a phone that has shipped before it's finished."

    That review really was just as bad as everyone expected. I was waiting for the guy to say it blue screened on him.

    1. Re:Too funny by bstadil · · Score: 0, Troll
      say it blue screened on There is a special feature whereby you can select the Screen Of Death TM in 10 different colors. It's called SSOD (Select), and works with the game console XBOX.

      --
      Help fight continental drift.
  7. Unsigned Code by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Has anyone realized that if you allow the device to run unsigned code, you can effectively steal their access, cause them large phone bills, etc. It's VERY dangerous, much more than your typical virus.

    1. Re:Unsigned Code by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Just like everything else Microsoft, that sounds good until you really think about it.

      In this case there will no doubt be some way to crack this protection - either somebody will get a signing certificate, or find a hole in the implementaion on the phone (gotta be a buffer overflow in there somewhere).

      The end result is that the phone will run viruses just fine, but NOT legitimate software.

    2. Re:Unsigned Code by jonr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Tecnically, probably. But I simply don't have the GSM/GPRS knowledge to be sure. The ID is stored on the SIMS card, a fingernail-sized smartcard you get with your phone. So to steal the access, you need to read the (AFAIK) encrypted ID (It has indeed been done, so phone companies are aware of this problem), send it back to you, and then you have to rig your phone to transmit that ID. Hardly worth the hassle, and I'm sure that phone "server software" detects duplicate ID. At least I hope so, otherwise some developer should definetly start a carriers in the Fries business!
      J.

    3. Re:Unsigned Code by chl · · Score: 1
      Well, all you have to do is make someone run your nifty program that keeps dialing the 0900 number you set up for $40 per minute.

      chl

    4. Re:Unsigned Code by wanderer72 · · Score: 1

      How could a program make a call, when apparently even the user can't?

    5. Re:Unsigned Code by NormX · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Are you suggesting that signed code cannot do those bad things, or that MS can look at code and tell, or that MS will indemnify you if it does?

    6. Re:Unsigned Code by Bishop · · Score: 2

      This threat has been a possibility ever since the first computer was hooked up to a modem. As always it should be up to the user to determine what code they wish to run.

    7. Re:Unsigned Code by sparkz · · Score: 2

      The SIM (not SIMS) card is, naturally, readable by any application you choose to run on your phone.

      On the other hand, the fact that the devices cannot even be told to run unsigned code makes life *really* hard for developers to test their code ... write it, get MS to sign it, get it back, test it, see it doesn't work, fix it, get MS to sign it, get it back test it, see it still doesn't work, ... etc ... etc ... etc. This would make development of a few months to last a few years!

      --
      Author, Shell Scripting : Expert Re
    8. Re:Unsigned Code by DJProtoss · · Score: 1

      Yes, code could cause the phone to dial up (and we will assume you don't notice / it figures out how to fiddle the status icons at the top) BUT it would be nice to choose to take the risks (As I have been doing with first the 9110 and now the 9210), or at least do something like the new nokias are doing and having (limited) Java support.
      Even microsoft let you do it (you can d/l the SDK for the phone off their site, and it is possible to buy non-locked SPV's (they are selling them in one of the scandinavian countries)...

      --
      "Success is based on knowing how far to go in going too far"
    9. Re:Unsigned Code by mcjulio · · Score: 3, Informative

      Developers use the Smartphone Development Kit, which comes with test certificates for dev purposes and with an emulator, in case you don't have a device.

    10. Re:Unsigned Code by Yer+Mum · · Score: 1

      With Java phones, Java is safely sectioned off from the phone part. Firstly to prevent what you mentioned. And secondly if Java goes down the phone carries on (or goes down in a controlled manner) - a badly configured phone can bring down the GSM network. Is it true that a program could e.g. make calls, send text messages, or mess around with the network on the Smartphone platform?

    11. Re:Unsigned Code by gorilla · · Score: 2

      Code signing is not a good defense. Most code signing schemes only prove that an app came from the supplier it says it did. There is nothing to prevent a malicious supplier putting in code to do these things. The only good defense would be an OS which prevented unauthorized apps from doing dangerous things. That's why all decent OS's built in say the last 40 years have had restrictions on what a program can do.

  8. sounds awful by chunkwhite86 · · Score: 5, Funny

    FWIW, I would never trust any 1st generation/iteration of Microsoft software. Remember Windows 95? NT 3? Ugg. I have a sinking feeling that this MS Smartphone has the same destiny...

    Besides... who wants some script kiddie hacking into their phone and delivering an Outlook virus? ;-)

    I can see it now...

    "If you'd like to make a call, please hang up and try agai... Fatal Exception 0F in module mscphone.dll"

    --
    I'd rather be a conservative nutjob than a liberal with no nuts and no job.
    1. Re:sounds awful by EverDense · · Score: 2

      Now we know where Clippy dissapeared to, he's gone cellular:
      "I see you are trying to call your Mother, would you like me to help you?"

      --
      http://jesus.everdense.com/
    2. Re:sounds awful by Locutus · · Score: 2

      how many companies will lose millions over this? Remember when Microsoft released Windows CE 5 or 6 years ago? Three years later more than halve of the WinCE device manufacturers killed their products and it was due almost entirely to the OS. Today, WinCE only has about 25% marketshare and it looks like Microsoft is paying these vendors to stay in business.

      If it's not a Wintel PC, only the foolish "partner" with Microsoft. Heck, even on Wintel, only the foolish "partner" with Microsoft.

      5 years from now when fuelcells are powering handhelds and chips have more than twice the current density, MAYBE a phone can actually be a phone AND run MS Windows. In the mean time, get a PDA with Bluetooth and one of those Erickson phones with Bluetooth. A phone should be a phone and a PDA a PDA. IMHO.

      LoB

      --
      "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
    3. Re:sounds awful by pnatural · · Score: 2

      there was no NT 3. the first release was 3.1, so named to align it with the most current (at the time) windows version number.

    4. Re:sounds awful by Fjord · · Score: 1

      I thought the reason so many WinCE devices were discontinued was because they kept changing the platform (i.e. the CPU), not anything to do inherently with the OS. With a framgemented architecture, there are going to be some devices that don't get as many programs released for that device as developers aren't willing to port or even just cross-compile. This causes those lines to eventually fail.

      --
      -no broken link
    5. Re:sounds awful by Locutus · · Score: 2

      I'm sure having too many architectures had something to do with it but hardly as much as the OS itself. Maybe they are getting closer today but a year ago a friend told me the company he worked for purchased 5 iPaqs so they were sure to have one working when it was demo time. He said it was the OS which prompted this since any crash would erase all the drivers installed and they'd have to be reloaded. Microsoft dictating what the screen format was didn't help either.

      The fact is that they've had over 5 years at this and still only have around 25% marketshare and lost loads of money still. If they tried to provide a product that filled the customers needs instead of building a product to protect Windows, they might have something. Instead, they keep hitting people over the head with their hammer saying, YOU WILL LIKE THIS, YOU WILL LIKE THIS.

      Maybe the Linux crowd is better at porting than the Windows crowd. Look at the Sharp Zaurus. It's been out for less than 8 months and there are hundreds( and maybe into the thousands ) of apps that have been ported or created for it. In two years, it'll be interesting to see what Linux/Qtopia is doing since vendors are allowed to use it how they see fit to solve problems.

      That's the difference between a closed system that's designed to protect a monopoly and an open one that's designed to solve problems.

      IMHO, WinCE failed because Microsoft designed the screen layout wrong and the OS was/is unstable. Now they've changed the screen format but the OS is still Windows under the hood.

      LoB

      --
      "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
  9. Check the return rates. by salimfadhley · · Score: 5, Informative

    Next time you upgrade with orange, ask the assistant to quote 'return / failure rates' on all the handsets available....

    I was thinking of upgrading - It would be cool to have a camera or the ability to run my own applications on my phone. Despite the cool new products available, I have decided not to buy for at least 6 more months because all of the phones currently available are even less reliable than my t68 (which is only just tolerable).

    According to Orange, there are problems with all the new generation of Camera / Organiser phones. Aparantly, the worst offender is the new Nokia camera phone - that had a more than 90% return rate due to hardware faults. I am sure this MS phone could be worse! My Ericsson T68 had to be swaped 4 times this year - I'm astonished that anything could be worse!

    As all the mobile phone companies seem to be rushing out new models in time for xmas - it seems the idea of waiting untill the product is right has been completely forgotten.

    By the way, if you ARE thinking of upgrading - a heavy user on Orange can usually blag a free handset. Rather than go through the upgrades line, go to the disconnection line and tell them you want to end your contract with orange because O2 or Vodaphone has offered your chouice of handset as a joining incentive.

    Orange will usually offer you a decent handset for free as an incentive to keep you to another year's contract. A heavy user should never have to pay for upgrades!

    1. Re:Check the return rates. by haunebu · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Aparantly, the worst offender is the new Nokia camera phone - that had a more than 90% return rate due to hardware faults.



      Bullshit. If any product had a 90% return rate, especially the Nokia 7650 which is based on the new Series 60 platform, it would be front page news on every telecoms publication. Got some references, or were you just pulling that bit out of your ass?

      --

      Blue skies, Barthy Burgers, girls...

    2. Re:Check the return rates. by jlanng · · Score: 1

      Quite right. I have one, my brother has one, my father and many of my colleagues have one. None of them have had any problems that I know of

    3. Re:Check the return rates. by splateagle · · Score: 1

      hmm, fair point about the return rates but I wouldn't trust the assistant to know what they're talking about, especially if they're network affiliated: it's a job I've done (selling people upgraded handsets) and I can tell you from first hand experience that *especially* this time of year many if not most of the people you're dealing with in buying a phone will be seasonal short-term-ers with little or no training - the one thing you can guarantee your assistant will have been trained to do, is to sound confident and knowledgeable, which in most cases translates as Bull S**ting like there's no tomorrow.

      if you want to check return-rates or reliability statistics, try the industry journals for some more objective figures but the bottom line is (at the risk of sounding old) that nobody builds things to last these days, and that statistics will never give you an accurate picture of how the individual handset you yourself buy will perform.

      The other thing to try (in the UK at least) is to find out which of your local Carphone Warehouse (no, I don't work for/have shares in them) stores is the area service centre, and go talk to them - usually these guys know about as much as anyone and are happy to talk tech for a while

    4. Re:Check the return rates. by nanoakron · · Score: 1

      I completely agree. My first ever (and just changed because it was stolen - from my closed bag inside a hospital operating theatre changing room, no less) cellphone was the Samsung SGH-600.

      And did that thing ever last! I had it for more than 3 years, and wasn't planning to change it out until Q1/2 2003 when the new 'Christmas Phones' had gotten over their teething troubles.

      But then it was stolen and I had to get reconnected. So, the best thing I could do was to stick with Voda and get a ten quid upgrade to a Nokia 6310i. And this machine looks like it's going the same way - so far so good. It has crashed once or twice, but nothing I cant put up with.

      I think any cellphone that has to be changed out within the year is not even worth laying your fingers on. It's not that far removed from that microwave oven you've had sat in your kitchen for the past 8 years...or perhaps that pager you've had lying around since the mid-90s. It's a few chips and a transmitter attached to an LCD. Simple, old technology - just queezed down and repackaged, that's all.

      And if a company can't make them last, they don't deserve your business. Personally, I'd have stuck with Samsung (don't work for them, btw) because my God are they reliable - from my printer, scanner, memory chips, screen, TV to my air conditioning unit - these things do not break! Unfortunately, when it comes to cellphones, the things they've been putting out recently really do suck. I was hoping they'd get away from the clamshell design, but so far no good.

      Anyway, just my 1.3p ($0.02)

      -Nano.

  10. Captain Scarlet by paulcammish · · Score: 1
    Werent the SPV's blue, tho?

    http://www.cloudster.com/Sets&Vehicles/SPV/SPVTop. htm

    And would'nt these be a little bit go use as phones too?

    Heh, I suppose they are models, tho...

    1. Re:Captain Scarlet by MonTemplar · · Score: 1

      Just pray the Microsoft don't announce a 'partnership' with the Mysterons... :)

      --
      -MT.
  11. smart phone? by funkmastermike · · Score: 5, Funny

    The smartest phone would be one that allows people to actually know how to drive while talking

    1. Re:smart phone? by ryman · · Score: 1

      Or that shuts down their engine when they make/answer a call. This might start some flaming...

      --
      "We are far too easily pleased." --C.S. Lewis
    2. Re:smart phone? by nadaou · · Score: 1
      The smartest phone would be one that allows people to actually know how to drive while talking


      smartphone:
      easy left
      easy right
      medium right
      mind the curb
      mind the mailbox
      mind the child
      mind the house
      mind the tv
      coverage low
      call ended
      --
      ~.~
      I'm a peripheral visionary.
  12. put it back in the oven by jptxs · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I think the reviewer says it all:

    This is a phone that has shipped before it's finished. Microsoft see their Smartphone OS as a way of stopping Symbian getting a hold of a platform that they don't yet control and for this reason they've rushed it out.

    Everything he says and I've heard from other points to this. It's actually nice to see M$ so scared that they're using their clout to scare companies into making bad moves like an early release of something so flawed. If they keep that up it will be all the more easy to watch the monopoly meltdown. not that I want to see them fail completely, but some real competition (read: some real reasons for quality user focused software) would be nice.

    --
    we speak the way we breathe --Fugazi
    1. Re:put it back in the oven by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they keep that up it will be all the more easy to watch the monopoly meltdown.
      Microsoft has no monopoly in phones. Of course. Are you a fucking troll or what?

    2. Re:put it back in the oven by napoleonin · · Score: 0, Insightful
      "...as a way of stopping Symbian getting a hold of a platform..."


      Oh get real. You must be really naive to think that Microsoft's actions are motivated by the specter of some Linux company most people have never even heard of. Face it, this is just another first generation product that sucked., just like Palm's first handheld or Microsoft Bob. The only reason this even made it onto Slashdot is because it was about Microsoft. If it was a Linux product the editors would have labeled it a "partial success", and another victory for open source.

    3. Re:put it back in the oven by TobiasSodergren · · Score: 1

      Well, beside the fact that Symbian is not Linux, there are companies out there that support it.

    4. Re:put it back in the oven by Locutus · · Score: 2

      I see this being very much like MS-Bob. Nobody really backed it in the industry so Microsoft went out and found well-known faces to help promote it. Ask any of those people now about their thoughts on MS-Bob and you'll be lucky if you don't get smacked.

      MS couldn't get any of the established phone companies to use their OS so they had to go out and find/pay someone to build a "Smart"phone. Too bad for that companies employees and shareholders. The reason I say this is because MS makes no money on anything which doesn't leverage their PC OS on the PC. They are all losers.

      LoB

      --
      "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
    5. Re:put it back in the oven by BitwizeGHC · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's actually nice to see M$ so scared that they're using their clout to scare companies into making bad moves like an early release of something so flawed.


      You say that now, but in five years, Microsoft will be on Smartphone 3.0 -- the version that actually works -- and Symbian will be on that F-word-company web site.
      --
      N4st0r, trixx0r h0bb1tz0rz! Th3y st0l3 0ur pr3c10uzz!
  13. Reasons why Sendo dropped their smartphone? by kawaichan · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I never really believed sendo dropped their phone when it was ready for launch. May be it's a combination of crappy speed, horrible UI that really ticked off the company. It also explains why not that many phone makers are signing up to MS's smartphone platform either.

    Also, have you noticed that most of the problems that the guy found in the MS smartphone DID NOT occur in symbian based phones (the SE T800, Nokia 7xxx (don't remember the model name))

    At the beginning, I thought MS's smartphone is an excellent idea, but then again, heavy, buggy, slow, horrible UI cannot be possibilly good for something that they have been designing for so damn long.

    --

    kawai
    1. Re:Reasons why Sendo dropped their smartphone? by mikerich · · Score: 2
      I never really believed sendo dropped their phone when it was ready for launch. May be it's a combination of crappy speed, horrible UI that really ticked off the company. It also explains why not that many phone makers are signing up to MS's smartphone platform either.

      Sendo was certainly planned to be MS's big partner in the UK. Now they've jumped ship to Symbian.

      Are there any other companies apart from Orange producing an MS phone for the European market?

      Best wishes,
      Mike.

    2. Re:Reasons why Sendo dropped their smartphone? by Yer+Mum · · Score: 1

      Orange isn't even producing it for the European market, it's for the UK market. They may release it for their network in other European countries, depending on how it goes in the UK.

  14. version 3 by hey · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Of course its junk no Microsoft product works util version 3.

    1. Re:version 3 by bstadil · · Score: 1
      I am taking your comment a bit serious. The problem for MS is that the industry does not want them. They are all afraid of of being commoditized with any value going to MS as happened in the PC space.

      Where would MS go with Version 2 and 3? They almost have to go into the business themselves like Xbox to get a shot at it now or use some minor far-east player.

      --
      Help fight continental drift.
  15. Well, actually... (OT) by Hollinger · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Completely off-topic, but my brother's Cell has a blue back light on a monochrome display. At some point, he managed to disconnect the LCD, so that when he pressed a button, all he got was a blue background w/ no pixels.

    His phone Blue Screened. *rimshot*

  16. Guinea Pigs/Bug Testors by core+plexus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I won't talk trash about people who are the first to rush out and buy the next, newest thing, for a couple of reasons: 1. The "First Buyers" reduce my cost later because they've paid for all the R&D, product launch, executive sweat (hoping that the product/service will fly), etc. etc. and... 2. The product/service will be greatly improved, or perhaps recalled or discarded (think "Beta v. VHS"). I appreciate all those who endure the hardships to bring me a better product/service. And before you whine, believe me brothers and sisters I have been (and still am from time to time) a beta-testor for software, and I feel your pains.

    1. Re:Guinea Pigs/Bug Testors by USC-MBA · · Score: 1
      My theory is that Microsoft has been gradually conditioning people to accept the fact that the initial release of one of their products (Windows 1.0, WIndows 95, etc.) will always be buggy and problem-riddled. That way, whenever a new Microsoft product turns out to be be buggy and problem-riddled, people just shrug it off rather than letting the event damage their image of the company: "Oh, that's just the way Microsoft is with a new product, I'll just wait for the next release".

      And the method to this madness? Simple: through this process, Microsoft has figured out a way not just to outsource a sizeable part of their product testing, but has convinced people to pay them for the privelege! Brilliant cost cutting strategy, if you think about it. No wonder the company is so profitable.

  17. SonyEricsson P800 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wow, i just looked up the info on this phone (the guy in the article was saying how he will switch to that phone) and was wondering if anyone knew what the MSRP on one of these bad boys costs?

    I just might not buy that Toshiba e335!

  18. Java-based phones similarly stupid by g4dget · · Score: 3, Insightful
    People putting out programmable phones seem greedy all around: for many Java-based phones, you also can't just download a Java application to the phone, you have to pay the service providers steep fees to make the software available.

    For some reason, companies seem to think that they have a right to control the phone you paid for. Think of it as "Palladium Light" and a bad sign of things to come.

    Your best bet: don't waste time or money on such phones. If it comes with such features, don't use them. If customers send a signal now that they want control of the digital devices they paid for, maybe this insanity can be nipped in the bud.

    (And if you know of any end-user programmable Java phones, please let me know.)

    1. Re:Java-based phones similarly stupid by Osty · · Score: 1

      For some reason, companies seem to think that they have a right to control the phone you paid for. Think of it as "Palladium Light" and a bad sign of things to come.

      Your best bet: don't waste time or money on such phones. If it comes with such features, don't use them. If customers send a signal now that they want control of the digital devices they paid for, maybe this insanity can be nipped in the bud.

      Chances are, you didn't pay for that cell phone you're using. Few people do. Handsets are heavily discounted to get people to buy into contracts, and I would wager that 90%+ of all cell phone-using people took advantage of that. So, as with your cable box (which you also didn't buy), you really don't own that phone at all.

      And before you jump in saying that you did buy your handset, let me just say that yes, you can do that. No, very few people ever do. You're not in the majority of consumers on that point.

    2. Re:Java-based phones similarly stupid by jaseuk · · Score: 1

      Most phones sold these days are of the pay-as-you-go variety. These are bought outright.

      Even under discount contracted phones the phone is yours, you are just under an obligation to stay connected to their service for 12 months. Either way the phone IS yours once your minimum contract is up.

      I get the feeling that the phone companies are not subsidising the true cost of the phones either, instead ridiculous prices are demanded from the manufacturers.

      Hence nearly everyone on the planet has a mobile phone, yet the phone manufacturers are struggling, and are always in need of a fad (ie. picture messaging) to get some upgrade sales.

      It sucks and the phone companies are the ones in control here.

      What will be interesting is that once the smart phone stuff develops it will be cheaper to buy a subsidised PDA with integrated phone, than a stand alone PDA.

      The futures bright, the blood red. The spilt blood of dead phone manufacturers.

      Jason

    3. Re:Java-based phones similarly stupid by jon_eaves · · Score: 5, Informative

      The Nokia 7650, the Nokia 7210, the Nokia 6310 and just about every other Java based mobile phone that I've used are all end-user programmable and not only that provide application suites to download the applications without doing OTA.

      You are confusing the phone capabilities with network capabilites.

      Yell at your moronic telco, not at the phone companies.

      I've used a Motorola i85s here in Australia as a Java "JVM" despite it not being able to be connected to the mobile network due to incompatibilities and lack of a SIM card. I've used a Siemens, an N7650, 6310 and 7210 all downloading applications via OTA and Infrared.

      Clearly you need to do some research before your particular rant, as you are quite wrong.

    4. Re:Java-based phones similarly stupid by g4dget · · Score: 2
      Handsets are heavily discounted to get people to buy into contracts,

      Which means that you do pay for it: agreeing to an extended contract is your payment.

    5. Re:Java-based phones similarly stupid by g4dget · · Score: 2
      Clearly you need to do some research before your particular rant, as you are quite wrong.

      Clearly, you are making some unwarranted assumptions: Australia is not the whole world. Still, it's good to hear that in Australia (and presumably Europe), end user programmability seems to be more widely available.

      However, there are very few Java-based phones available in the US yet, and phones are usually significantly modified for the US market and often even tied to a single service provider.

      When I talked to the major wireless providers in our area, they all told me that they do not permit end user programmability.

      Of the Java phones you mention, only the 7210 is nominally available in the US. It seems not to work with Verizon, but it does apparently work with T-Mobile. But even T-Mobile doesn't offer it for sale.

    6. Re:Java-based phones similarly stupid by jon_eaves · · Score: 2

      Well, I was just pissed at the "it doesn't work for me therefore it doesn't work anywhere" attitude.

      I wasn't the one basing my arguments on a fallacious assumption. You then turn around and claim that because it doesn't work in your environment then the whole idea is dumb. Well, the whole idea may be dumb, but that's not the reason.

      I agree 100% that it doesn't work for you. And guess what, the USA isn't the whole world, and there are plenty of Europeans and Asians using handsets that are user programmable.

      As for the USA, the Motorola i85s is an end-user programmable phone, (and i think there are a few other Motorola phones like the i90c).

      If you can't program them, that's a problem with the vendor of the phone, and the service provider, not with the underlying handset.

      Cheers,
      -- jon

    7. Re:Java-based phones similarly stupid by LiamQ · · Score: 2

      Probably the representatives of the major wireless providers that you talked to were clueless.

      In the U.S., you can choose from the LG 5350, Motorola A388/i85s/i55sr/i50sx/i80s/i90c/i95cl/T720, Nokia 9290 Communicator, RIM BlackBerry 5810/6710, Samsung SPH-A500/SPH-N400, Sanyo 4900, Sanyo 5300, and lots more that will soon be available if they're not already.

    8. Re:Java-based phones similarly stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We can't help it if the US are crap at catching up with the rest of the world.

    9. Re:Java-based phones similarly stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It already is cheaper to buy a phone/PDA than a phone :)

    10. Re:Java-based phones similarly stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's actually nothing wrong with the US in this case. The comment you replied to is complete bullshit.

    11. Re:Java-based phones similarly stupid by g4dget · · Score: 2
      You then turn around and claim that because it doesn't work in your environment then the whole idea is dumb.

      Huh? Why would I be asking for recommendations on Java-programmable phones if I thought the idea was dumb? I think Java-programmable phones would be great. Too bad nobody has yet identified one that's supported by a US provider.

      If you can't program them, that's a problem with the vendor of the phone, and the service provider, not with the underlying handset.

      Indeed. And it's the cell service providers that make this hard in the US. It's the attitude of the cellular companies that is the obstacle, not the handsets themselves. A programmable handset is no good if nobody supports it.

    12. Re:Java-based phones similarly stupid by g4dget · · Score: 2
      Look, there are plenty of Java-enabled phones. The question is: which US vendors support which phones, where do you get the necessary hardware to download software into them, and have the cellular providers altered them in some way that limits them to over-the-air programming only.

      Now, if you could point to some Java-enabled phones, their end-user programming information, and a US cellular service that supports it, that would be great; only one or two of those alone aren't really interesting since you need all three.

      In fact, I think in the long run, end-user Java programmable will make it even in the US, but so far, the only ones I have seen have been crippled (well, except for PalmOS and Symbian based PDA/phone combos that happen to run Java as well).

    13. Re:Java-based phones similarly stupid by LiamQ · · Score: 3, Informative

      What ones have you seen? As I said, I've never seen a Java-based phone that prevents developers from loading their own apps.

      You can get the LG 5350, Samsung SPH-A500, Samsung SPH-N400, Sanyo 4900, and Sanyo 5300 through Sprint PCS. There's a developer program at developer.sprintpcs.com.

      You can get the Motorola i85s, i50sx, i55sr, i80s, i90c, and i95cl through Nextel. There are developer programs from Nextel and Motorola.

      You can get the RIM BlackBerry 5810 from AT&T Wireless and T-Mobile. RIM has a developer's site with an SDK and simulator.

  19. treo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    One word - treo. I have had one since they were introduced. Everyting works as advertised including GPRS. They got it right.

    1. Re:Treo by VikingBrad · · Score: 2, Informative

      The Treo is indeed the best integrated phone/PDA on the market currently. Specifically the 270 or 300 have a nicely developed UI that allow most common features to be accessed quickly with minimal keystrokes. There is an on-screen keyboard usable with fingers or the built-in thumbboard works as well, the most easiest way is to select the numbers from the contact list. It also syncs to Outlook or other PIMs for contacts & diary entries. In the US, Sprint also has a great deal for bundled Data access including a specific Treo 300 phone. The GPRS upgrade has been approved by most GPRS carriers including all the Australian carriers where I live. Only limit is the 270 screen which washes out in direct sunlight. Also early versions had a bad backlight that could fail in the first few weeks of use. As in all things, these devices will get better but for the time being it is the best combination for somebody who doesn't want to carry 2 devices. Cheers VikingBrad

    2. Re:Treo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For phone use, the Kyocera 6035 is better than the Treo. It has a real phone keypad, for starters. And it can do everything the Treo can do. And the soon to be released Kyocera 7135 will blow all the other smartphones out of the water.

  20. I hope... by dirkdidit · · Score: 1

    they make a cherry phone, too!
    (ok go ahead and shoot me. I just couldn't resist)

  21. Sporange by MacAndrew · · Score: 5, Funny

    Sporange almost rhymes.

    Silver, purple, and month remain intractable problems for poets.

    But if you're rapping about cellphones, you have far more serious problems. Like an income.

    1. Re:Sporange by Hobbex · · Score: 2

      Silver, purple, and month remain intractable problems for poets.

      The poet, he laments: "Not a word rhymes with month,"
      "Not tho," says the lisper, "I thought of one onthe!"

    2. Re:Sporange by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To find a rhyme for silver,
      or any unrhymable rhyme, requires
      only will, verbosity and time.

      Or something similar, with apologies to whomever came up with it.

    3. Re:Sporange by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quiver
      River

      just two examples of assonance, or is that consonance.

      And of course, there is always Yurple.

  22. "Bondage" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    seems to rhyme, and it goes well with standard cell phone contractual terms.

  23. Treo Phones by g4dget · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I should mention, the Handspring Treos are, of course, programmable without restrictions. They are a similar form factor and a much better choice than the Microsoft-based Smartphones, IMO. Also, PalmOS is mature and has lots of applications for it.

    What I was wondering, though, is whether there are any phone form-factor Java-based phones that allow end-user programming.

    1. Re:Treo Phones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since you've never tried a Microsoft-based Smartphone, is your opinion really that useful?

    2. Re:Treo Phones by mlk · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes. Lots
      Most even if you have to pay for the abilty to download software OTA you can send it via IR, cable form your computer (Nokia 7650 does this) or Bluetooth.

      --
      Wow, I should not post when knackered.
    3. Re:Treo Phones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You've never shot yourself in the head with a deer rifle, so your opinions about suicide must not be realy that useful, either.

  24. Luckily enough ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it does not seem that the market is accepting PocketPC on those SmartPhones. Actually M$ is basically losing on every front on this topic ...

  25. he didn't mention the size of the fan by kraksmoka · · Score: 2, Funny

    c'mon, m$ shit always needs a fan, right?

    --
    "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste." - Rahm Emanuel
  26. you can download apps onto an i90c by eecue · · Score: 3, Informative


    the motorolla i90c is.

    it's a nextel phone.

    -eek

    --
    -- sigs suck --
  27. Heh - Philips fisio 820 is almost as bad.. by rixster · · Score: 5, Informative

    ... so bad in fact I started writing exactly what that dude wrote about his SPV. Unfortunately, I wanted to write too much and never finished the damn thing. There's two great features of the Philips I love - the "egg timer of death" (every now and then an egg timer just appears - the only way you get rid of it is to pull the battery) and the complete inability to remember the time and date if it crashes (see previous) and you have to pull the battery. Oh, and the THIRD thing I hate about it is that although it has xxx kb for storing background images, it can only store around 10 SMSs. Go figure that, eh ? Oh AND you just can't redial easily. AND it's got a really unfriendly keyboard lock / unlock feature. It's time for bed. I can't start this whinge now.

    --
    Two wrongs may not make a right, but three ....
  28. feature laden pda/phones.. liking it less and less by merc_sa · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Sound, Picture, Video sounds nice on paper but I can't imagine it would be too useful in practice.
    having grainy little pictures on 2 inch screens is just unbearable for any kind of useful application.
    The only reason I can think of to put a camera on a phone and email, is to get evidence when you get
    in a car crash. It's useless to view on PDA and horrible to be subjected to on a decent computer
    screen. Video is just a lame gimmick. Now, sound would seem to be promising.. but given I'm fairly
    used to decent quality of sound from cheapo discmans and ok quality from the current
    generation of mp3 players, listening to AM/FM quality mp3 on my phone gets less and less
    appealing. The only real use I've got out of wireless web at this point is checking short email
    messages, and checking movie times for a particular theatre if I overran on time and need
    to catch the next showing. It's simply too unpleasant to do too much websurfing on a phone
    simply because of the dimensions of the screen.
    Don't even get me started on web surfing on your phone savages the battery life.. And if you really
    feel the need to drool over porn on the 2" screen, I'd recommend putting yourself out of your misery.

    so my new list is down to:

    1. smaller dimension (anything bigger than my 270 will be junked, in fact, I wish it was 30% smaller)

    2. better sound quality for the phone

    3. longer battery life

    everything else would be treated like the damn hairclip help in office.. I'll ignore it until
    it gets in my way. once it does, it's gone.

    Given the average /.'er generally have a terminal case of gadgetitis, the PDA will need to do
    everything including cleaning the kitchen sink and run a solar power fusion generator. But I'm
    starting to wonder now that if we actually did get everything we wished for in a PDA, would we end up
    regretting it.. it's time to realize why the early Palm succeeded and the old Newton failed.
    simplicity, usability at a price we're willing to pay..

    --
    -- I have enough stupid gadgets to know that I can do without -- http://www.modestneeds.org
  29. rubbish by m.lemur · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Working for a mobile telecoms company, I had a chance to try one of these out last week.

    What can I say? The reviewer is correct, even the simplest task (i.e. making a call) is next to impossible and fraught with frustration.

    Wait for Symbian, only a sucker would pay for one of these.

    1. Re:rubbish by mlk · · Score: 1

      > Wait for Symbian, only a sucker would pay for one of these.

      Why wait? Nokia 7560 is out! Now, in shops, the only reason its not in my pocket is my g/f.

      Bah...

      --
      Wow, I should not post when knackered.
    2. Re:rubbish by mcjulio · · Score: 1

      Let's see. To make a phone call: start dialing, hit talk.

      Fraught with frustration...I understand. ???

    3. Re:rubbish by kobotronic · · Score: 1
      What a strange comment. Perhaps it is that you do not normally operate a mobile phone? You will find that most mobile phone users do not actually 'start dialing' very often; they find the contact they want from their directory, and press dial[talk].

      This is practical core telephony functionality which all handset makers [should] work hard to implement properly. Simple ergonomics; besides, a function used so often that if implemented poorly, it would annoy the user so much they would likely switch handset brands. It is also the very procedure which, according to several reviewers, proved impossible(!) to accomplish with the SPV, thus DEFEATING THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THE OUTLOOK CONTACT INTEGRATION:

      Although the SPV handset succesfully synchronized with Outlook and thus held in its memory a copy of all the contacts the user had on their desktop, the user could not just on the SPV find a contact and press talk. Doing so produced, according to Simon Perry's article, a continuous dead-line tone.

      All the other tacked on [non]functionality is basically irrelevant, you don't buy a cellphone to take great pictures, BUT YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO MAKE A F-ING PHONE CALL FROM A F-ING PHONE.

    4. Re:rubbish by Carima · · Score: 1

      A friend at work was one of those early adopters. Unfortunately he did through ignorance rather than anticipation of the new features. I've been playing around with it this morning and it really is as bad as the reviewer says. At first glance you think it might be a good version of PocketPC (Which I think has become pretty good now), but then it becomes obvious that the phone just isn't up to it. I think it further pushes the arguement for having two devices for this sort of thing. I PDA with a reasonble size screen, software for browsing and e-mail, and IrDA and/or Bluetooth along with a basic phone that makes calls and SMS but has GPRS and IrDA and/or Bluetooth. You can take both with you at work or when you go away, but you have a simple, small, reliable and cheap phone to take out in the evenings when you really don't need net connection and e-mail and want the battery to last you until you miss the last train and have to call a taxi. Make much more sense.

  30. In order to secure the market... by mtec · · Score: 5, Interesting

    it looks like MS FUD has evolved...past empty announcements to empty releases.

    Note: I just set up a doctor on a Treo phone and everything works great. Even syncing to a Mac.

    --
    Cake or Death? Cake Please!
    1. Re:In order to secure the market... by 3Bees · · Score: 1
      it looks like MS FUD has evolved...past empty announcements to empty releases.

      In business school they would call that "Playing to one's strengths"

      --
      "I think we should tax people who stand in water! " - Mr. Gumby
  31. the sad truth of it all by kraksmoka · · Score: 3, Interesting
    People who like the SPV like the implementation of the PocketPC functionality and the added gizmos, but frequently accept that the basic phone functionality lets it down. Which does kind of sound like a classic Microsoft product.

    this is actually quite sad. a once decent company has sunk to making devices that behave poorly. how much cash do you think they sunk into this? i'm sure it was a bundle. it really is a loss to the world, of course, today, m$ views that as a gain. oh well.

    think i'll find a miamiLuG and get a party together. . . . .

    --
    "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste." - Rahm Emanuel
  32. Well DUHH by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A MS product that doesn't work as advertised, that would have to be a first.

  33. We don't care about that shit by black+people · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Rhyme shmyme. it's all about breath control and how you ride the beats.

  34. Re:The same company? err the new story? by johnpaul191 · · Score: 2
    do you mean the story on the main page right now, or an older one?

    Apple Core sent a link to an article running in australia about apple fighting for their name with some little telco called Apple Communications. Well, they were called that. Now they are Green.


    if so i would guess.... no?
  35. Oh - I forgot... by mtec · · Score: 2

    Maybe SP in SPV stands for Special Prototype.

    --
    Cake or Death? Cake Please!
  36. Re:feature laden pda/phones.. liking it less and l by iCEBaLM · · Score: 2

    1. smaller dimension (anything bigger than my 270 will be junked, in fact, I wish it was 30% smaller)
    2. better sound quality for the phone
    3. longer battery life


    Your first wish completely removes and is converse to the second and third.

    You cannot have longer battery life if you make the battery smaller. Same with sound quality, to be better would require more space in the unit.

    People want everything, it isn't going to happen. You cannot have it all right now, you have to pick pros/cons and compromise, especially when it comes to battery technology as it is right now and will be for the near future.

    -- iCEBaLM

  37. Stinker what? by stewart.hector · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    who gives a fuck about MS Stinker?
    You'll need virus checkers etc to stop your phone from being hacked and stop these viruses from phoning premuim rate numbers.

    MS have little support for Stinker - FACT.

    Symbian is the way to go - Nokia et al are going to wipe Stinker across the floor.

    Symbian is extremely stable - just take Psion 3, 5 etc as examples.

    Symbian - the way to go.

    --
  38. The Economist on Nokia vs. Microsoft by eduardodude · · Score: 3, Informative

    http://economist.com/printedition/displayStory.cfm ?Story_ID=1454300

    Very insightful article, happily one of their free ones. Microsoft is in for a tough fight. They've gotten little licensing from major players, and are using alternate, less effective channels to gain a foothold.

    1. Re:The Economist on Nokia vs. Microsoft by eduardodude · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Hmm, the link I posted has a space in it so doesn't work.

      Try
      http://economist.com/printedition/displaySt ory.cfm ?Story_ID=1454300

      Their cover story is also related, and is as usual, excellent.

      http://economist.com/printedition/displayStory.c fm ?Story_ID=1454436

      Again, if either of these don't work, make sure there are no spaces when you paste into the browser.

    2. Re:The Economist on Nokia vs. Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Again, if either of these don't work, make sure there are no spaces when you paste into the browser Why not take 5 min and learn to figgin post a link.

    3. Re:The Economist on Nokia vs. Microsoft by avdp · · Score: 1

      FYI - in case you're wondering....

      Slashdot breaks long strings by inserting blank spaces in them.

      Next time, consider make an actual HTML link instead like this

  39. Re:Mobile Phone Review? by Gordonjcp · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Oh, fuck off. I'm sick of hearing the "Ooooh, that's hardly News for Nerds, Stuff that matters" from people.

    Piss off and wank to your Avril Lavigne cd cover.

  40. Re:The same company? err the new story? by EvanED · · Score: 2

    That story. The reason the company that Apple Computer sued chose Apple Comminucations for their name (the company that is now known as Green) is in response to another company that called itself Orange.

    But my guess would still be no.

  41. Please get a brain (transplant) by DAldredge · · Score: 1

    Symbian IS NOT a Linux company.

  42. Hard not to be biased by Chazmati · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As this is Microsoft we're talking about. And although the review sounds pretty awful, I have to say the picture didn't look *that* bad. Out of focus, to be sure, but it sounded as if he tried to get in real close to make the most of the low resolution. Probably operator error, although they probably could have designed in a better minimum focusing distance.

    Now the issues with the slow refresh and the delay between the shutter sound and the actual image capture, that would be extremely
    annoying, and it doesn't sound like a software update is going to fix the serious lack of processing power.

    But how does a product like this even get released? Is it the post-dot-com-bust competition, the "business at the speed of thought" mentality that is responsible for pushing out a product that can't even be a good phone first, and secondly has all these garbage features tacked on? Being a visionary is one thing, and there's a place for that (show us at Comdex or whatever) but delivering on the vision is completely another.

    I'm stumped as to how this thing made it out the door. Is it the market researchers? Did they ever put one of these phones in someone's hands? Or did they ask questions like "What would you like in a phone" and then screw up the consumer vision by sacrificing the most fundamental (and implicitly necessary) features?

    And does rushing this SPV phone out the door REALLY help them compete against Symbian?

    1. Re:Hard not to be biased by tftp · · Score: 1
      I have to say the picture didn't look *that* bad.

      It is bad. So out of focus that I couldn't look at it for more than few seconds! Colors are OK, though.

    2. Re:Hard not to be biased by Chazmati · · Score: 2

      That's what I'm saying, it's out of focus but you can't always blame the camera for that. The image looks smooth (low per-pixel noise) and the colors are okay.

      Now the 640x480 shots off my Sony camcorder look like ass. There are noticable jaggies and the S/N ratio is awful. Bright lighting helps with the S/N ratio, but it's a generally inferior image. The video looks great because you don't need the same level of quality for motion as for stills.

      Hard to say if the phone could turn out a decent image or not. Sounds like the guy had an axe to grind with Microsoft (but who doesn't). Maybe he took some pictures that had sharp focus and picked one of the bad ones to display and rant about.

    3. Re:Hard not to be biased by tftp · · Score: 1
      The image looks smooth (low per-pixel noise)

      That's because it is JPEG already. You can't have non-smooth jpegs :-)

      Hard to say if the phone could turn out a decent image or not.

      The phone needs to have a decent, preferrably adjustable lens to take sharp pictures. Such a lens will be a composite one, and it will cost more than the phone.

      My guess is that the lens is a fixed, cheap, plastic one, something that failed certification for webcam use. Fixed lens has the "infinity" distance quite close to the lens, maybe one meter, and everything past that is equally sharp (or equally blurred).

      However, this phone probably yields as good a picture as one can hope for, here and now. Anyone who honestly expects 5 megapixels and 10-element, autofocus lens with an iris diaphragm would be much better off buying something like this maybe with a lens like this...

    4. Re:Hard not to be biased by Tony-A · · Score: 2

      the "business at the speed of thought" mentality that is responsible for pushing out a product that can't even be a good phone first, and secondly has all these garbage features tacked on?
      Microsoft intends to take over the joint and believe they have the muscle to do so.
      delay between the shutter sound and the actual image capture
      That's almost as bad as getting a reply from a ping with the network cable disconnected! The culture that allows such to exist, much less get out the door, does a lot of them. Some of them will be subtle and deadly.

    5. Re:Hard not to be biased by 3Bees · · Score: 1
      I'm stumped as to how this thing made it out the door. Is it the market researchers? Did they ever put one of these phones in someone's hands? Or did they ask questions like "What would you like in a phone" and then screw up the consumer vision by sacrificing the most fundamental (and implicitly necessary) features?

      Remember the Simpsons episode where Homer designs the car for his brother Herb? :-) If only MS suffered the same fate....

      --
      "I think we should tax people who stand in water! " - Mr. Gumby
  43. T68 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've got a T68 (not i) and I love it. The battery life is great, especially compared to my friend's new PCS Vision Samsung flip phone. I've also got it connecting via IR to my Mac PowerBook and Palm, and I can beam contacts between Palm and T68 w/o any extra software too! The screen isn't that great, but your better off connecting the phone to something with a bigger screen anyway. It's a really great phone.

    1. Re:T68 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I have t68 too (with t68i ROM). The phone is horrible, bad reception, horrible plastic keys (especially Yes and No keys) and typing SMS works badly. It's quite ok when using bluetooth & GPRS, but otherwise... The joystick is also quite an annoyince, it sticks out and pressing it is interpret as Yes! So if you put it in your pocket without keylock, it's absolutely *guaranteed* to make a phonecall. :(

    2. Re:T68 by jlanng · · Score: 1

      Funny. Everyone I know who bought one hates it. Besides, it isn't so much a smartphone as a regular phone with a colour screen

    3. Re:T68 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bad reception you say? Warranty exchange the bitch. My first 2 had horrible reception, and I complained and they said they had been having lots of problems and they were bad phones. My third one worked great, perfect reception, but then the speaker died, and now I'm on my fourth one in 3 months.

      Phone is a good concept, but remember, it's Ericcson. I don't care if sony's name is on that thing, Ericsson made shitty phones in the past, and will likely make shitty phones for some time to come.

  44. Getting developers on board? by Dj_Unna · · Score: 0
    From the article:

    "...we at The Reg have difficulty believing that a company that's been so awesomely good at getting developers on board could screw up this badly of its own volition. Our every instinct tells us that this is far more likely to be linked to some benighted Orange money-making plan that will destroy developers' faith in Microsoft as collateral damage if it's not pulled instantly."

    wft? Is this supposed to be sarcastic? Since when have Microsoft been "awsomely good at getting developers on board"? How can they blame these software bugs they mention on Orange as a money-making plan? I'm confused...

    1. Re:Getting developers on board? by mlk · · Score: 1

      > "awsomely good at getting developers on board"?

      The .net dev stuff is free(Beer (crappy US beer, yuck!)), as is the dev stuff for WinCE (inc the source, not at all FSF-Open/Free or GNU-Open/Free, more Learn-From-And-We-Own-Your-Ball-Open/Free)

      > How can they blame these software bugs they
      > mention on Orange as a money-making plan?

      Orange (or MS, not too sure) has made it so only software which has been signed my MS ($600 per app) can run on this so-called SmartPhone (OT: hold on, don't Erricsons have a 'SmartPhone' running EPOC?).

      --
      Wow, I should not post when knackered.
  45. YES! Isn't this weird??? by xintegerx · · Score: 1

    Orange is a telecommunications company in Asia. The make a cell phone that uses Microsoft software.

    Apple Telecommunications is a telecommunications company in Asia. They were named Apple to emphasize they are competing against Orange. Apple Computers has scared Apple Telecommunications into changing their name to Green.

    The weird part is, both Apples compete against the other set!

    Apple Computers, although a partner with Microsoft, competes against it. Green compets with Orange. Today, we learn that a) the Microsoft/Orange set is working together, and b) the Apple/Apple(Green) bunch is disputing.

    Weird, huh?

    The next article posted today will say that Green is now being sold to Orange, a much larger company and partner of Microsoft--for the best revenge against Apple.

    Step 4, if there is a step four, is profit.

  46. Java-based phones NOT similarly stupid by LiamQ · · Score: 3, Informative

    I've never encountered a Java-based phone that didn't allow people to install their own apps for free.

    Here are some Java-based phones that I know allow developers to install their own apps:

    • LG 5350
    • Motorola A388
    • Motorola A830
    • Motorola Accompli 008
    • Motorola i85s
    • Motorola i55sr
    • Motorola i50sx
    • Motorola i80s
    • Motorola i90c
    • Motorola i95cl
    • Motorola T280i
    • Motorola T720
    • Motorola V60i
    • Motorola V66i
    • Nokia 3410
    • Nokia 3650
    • Nokia 6100
    • Nokia 6310i
    • Nokia 6610
    • Nokia 7210
    • Nokia 7650
    • Nokia 9210 Communicator
    • Nokia 9290 Communicator
    • RIM BlackBerry 5810, 5820
    • RIM BlackBerry 6710, 6720
    • Samsung SGH-S100
    • Samsung SPH-A500
    • Samsung SPH-N400
    • Sanyo 4900
    • Sanyo 5300
    • Siemens SL45i
    • Siemens M50
  47. Shouldn't use Windows anyway by Fnagaton · · Score: 3, Informative

    There is a technical reason why Windows should not be used for phones. The version of Windows used in the phones doesn't support full memory protection, making it easy to corrupt and use the phone hardware in any way you might like.
    Symbian for mobile devices on the other hand does protect memory using the hardware and as far as I can tell Symbian is not open to such great abuses as Windows.
    Symiab also operates faster than Windows as it does not have the huge amount of over engineering that Windows has.

    --
    Martin Piper
    Owner - ReplicaNet and RNLobby
    1. Re:Shouldn't use Windows anyway by Ben+Hutchings · · Score: 2

      Windows CE does prevent processes writing each others' memory, though I think reading may be permitted.

      Regardless of memory protection, though, the low levels of telephony are generally handled by a separate processor with a separate memory area. That should provide even better protection.

  48. I wish nokia would get the 3650 out already... by nate.sammons · · Score: 1
    Personally, I'm waiting for the Nokia 3650 to hit the states.

    Symbian 60 platform, Bluetooth, Java, etc, etc... As far as I'm concerned, Nokia is the only company who actually pays attention to the UI on a phone. I tries the Sony/Ericsson T68i and it couldn't even keep up with keystrokes while navigating menus. Sounds like the MS Phone is even worse. Maybe it would run better on a 3GHz P4 ;-)

    -nate

    PS - I don't work for Nokia and don't even own their stock... I've just had about 8 of their phones.

  49. Mod parent down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hello moderators. The parent comment is complete bullshit and yet is somehow at +5 right now. Please moderate appropriately.

  50. Fixed:The Economist on Nokia vs. Microsoft by eduardodude · · Score: 1

    Ok, link problems should be gone (Thanks avdp!)

    Nokia vs. Microsoft

    Very insightful article, happily one of their free ones. Microsoft is in for a tough fight. They've gotten little licensing from major players, and are using alternate, less effective channels to gain a foothold.

    Their cover story is also related, and is as usual, excellent.

    Computing's New Shape

  51. It did bluescreen, sorta by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From the review linked from the article:

    "In what people will call true Microsoft style, I've had the phone crash on me twice to the point where even holding the power button down will not allow it to turn off."

  52. Another Microsoft phone? by EvilStein · · Score: 2

    They made a household phone a few years back that was supposed to sync with Outlook and have other nifty features...

    I saw one at Fry's and laughed at it for a moment. I thought about buying one just for fun, but when I actually went back specifically looking for it several months later, the phone and any trace of it was gone.

    Oh well.

  53. Re:Sorry... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you have a little weenie so I had to bail...

  54. Re:More of the old MS bitching from Slashdot by inteller · · Score: 1

    no shit....you notice that they don't talk about the Toshiba 2032 or other Pocket PC Phone Editions which rule. Smartphone 2002 is just a bastardized OS that will go away once the PPC PE gets into a small enough form factor.

  55. Good God, I never thought of that! by twitter · · Score: 2
    Has anyone realized that if you allow the device to run unsigned code, you can effectively steal their access, cause them large phone bills, etc. It's VERY dangerous, much more than your typical virus.

    Holy Shit, Batman, that's true! Who would ever let Outlook have access to a pay by the minute service?! Sign me out!

    In the future, your 802.11M$ smartphone connects to any and all local computers with 802.11M$ running. Can you imagine a Beowolf Cluster of "I Love You" placing calls to XXX-hot-grits?

    Thanks for the warning. It's best to never ever alow anything M$ near a phone. Signed code, you make me laugh, AC. Must be a test bed for Paladium like Hotmail was a collector of Passports. SirCam didn't need any stinking passport or signature!

    OK, I lied. I have thought it would be a really bad idea to have an M$ phone. Funny they don't just promote voice over IP isn't it?

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  56. yep, try this Outlook killer by twitter · · Score: 2
    You say:

    Besides... who wants some script kiddie hacking into their phone and delivering an Outlook virus? ;-) I can see it now... "If you'd like to make a call, please hang up and try agai... Fatal Exception 0F in module mscphone.dll"

    What you should worry about is a smart virus. One that listens to the microphone to capture your voice, and plays it back on $5.00/minute phone sex calls at 2AM. IEEEE! It makes SirCam look like child's play and we can be sure that this buggy version of Outlook that can't place a phone call will have even more holes than the big one.

    Go MicroSoft! Away, that is.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

    1. Re:yep, try this Outlook killer by BeBoxer · · Score: 2

      One that listens to the microphone to capture your voice, and plays it back on $5.00/minute phone sex calls at 2AM.

      I don't know what you do around your computer, but I can guarantee that nobody is interested in paying $5.00/minute to hear what happens around my computer. Unfortunately.

  57. bad picture. by twitter · · Score: 2
    it sounded as if he tried to get in real close to make the most of the low resolution. Probably operator error, although they probably could have designed in a better minimum focusing distance.

    Umm no, that looks like any shitty quality 640x480 picture and it's just soooo M$ of you to blame the user. There is no focus in the background either. The overall balance/contrast failed and the sky is whited out. The color saturation is poor too, just look at those white cheeks. It looks like they bought the cheapest camera they could get and failed to help it out by using the computer that runs the phone. What on earth is that phone thinking about between the shutter noise and the actual image capture if it's not correcting all of the above faults? Is it generating a thumbnail for Bill?

    The camera's poor image quality is the least of your problems with this puppy. Can you imagine what an Outlook virus could do to your phone bill?

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  58. Okok by The+Pi-Guy · · Score: 1, Troll

    Insert mandatory troll about why the only reason this was posted on Slashdot was because it's bashing Microsoft... Sorry guys, sorry guys, I got here first, nyah nyah. *exit left*

    --j

  59. oh my, you missed it. by twitter · · Score: 2
    I don't know what you do around your computer, but I can guarantee that nobody is interested in paying $5.00/minute to hear what happens around my computer.

    You get to pay $5.00/minute for phone sex when you get the bill for calls your phone made at 2AM with your voice. That's on top of whatever connect fee you get to pay for cell phone service. See how you might not want Outlook and clippy working your phone?

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

    1. Re:oh my, you missed it. by BeBoxer · · Score: 2

      Damn, nobody gets my jokes around here. Too subtle perhaps. :-)

  60. Rhymes for Orange? by r3jjs · · Score: 1

    In the Scottish accent, "Door hinge" and "orange" actually do rhyme, coming more as "Dorange" with the accent heavy on the first syllable.

  61. I really don't get this at all by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Personally I don't get the craze for smartphones. I never have had a cell, though I considered it many times. I have a PDA and I primarily use it for contact info/scheduling (yes I spent the first several months reinstalling everything as I played with it until it broke over and over) I have a minidisk player for music, for anything else I have a desktop and pen & paper. I wouldn't want a phone that has a bazillion and one apps, I like my tech to be task specific, at least to an extent. If I want to make a phonecall I shouldn't have to worry about my phone crashing on me or taking a minute to boot up. We are talking about a phone here people, we are talking about technology. It is supposed to make our lives better and communicating more conveniant. I personally belive in seperate devices that can, perhaps, be connected but run independant of eachother and communicate through some common protocol--be it a physical link like iee1394 or a remote link such as bluetoot-- or the next generation of those technologies. Honestly, if I've been messing around with my PDA and crashed it it shouldn't kill my phone-call or my music or fry my camera. Device independance and interoperability are the keys, not combinations. That said I wouldn't object to a pda with a built in camera that could be detached and connected to a computer without the pda...if these things allready exist my apologies, but when school gets busy and one runs short of cash its easy to get behind. If you didn't like my rant, then you didn't need to read it.

    -Astronomers are the most excitable people, they think everything is a once in a lifetime event.

  62. End users can download Java apps from Handango.com by WhoDaresWins · · Score: 1

    Any end user can download Java phone apps from http://www.handango.com/Java.jsp. All you need to have is a browser in your phone that is MIDP (Java J2ME) compliant (and most Java phones are). After you buy an app there normally you'd get an SMS message with a download link. But you don't even need that for trying it out on your own. All you need is the URL to the .jad (MIDP file containing app info) that you can type into your browser and then you'll be able to download it into your phone. I've done this with my Sprint PCS Samsung A-500 phone. For example you can try this expr calc app on your phone http://wapindustrial.com/eval.jad (at your own risk I'm not responsible if it hangs your phone). In fact for any Java app all you need is a link to the .jad file which has valid link info for the app .jar file. You could even create your own apps and upload it to some website to download onto your phone.

  63. Re:YES! Isn't this weird??? by rakaz · · Score: 2, Informative

    Orange is a telecommunications company in Europe. They sell a cell phone that uses Microsoft software.

    Apple Telecommunications is a telecommunications company in Australia. They were named Apple to emphasize they are competing against Orange. Apple Computers has scared Apple Telecommunications into changing their name to Green.......

  64. Normal to take 60 seconds to connect to the net? by TecraMan · · Score: 1
    Sadly, it pretty much is with GSM/GPRS-based phones

    I don't know which GSM phone you've been using, but if I were you, I'd take it straight back! Seriously, I would be very unhappy if my mobile phone took more than a few seconds to connect. I've used pretty much the whole range of Ericsson and Nokia phones, all the time with European contracts, but roaming across Europe, Asia and the US, and have never seen this!

    DS

  65. over and over, and over again by kraksmoka · · Score: 1
    from simon perry's article:

    In what people will call true Microsoft style, I've had the phone crash on me twice to the point where even holding the power button down will not allow it to turn off.

    i have been harping on this point in my recent posts on this topic, but was really just making fun of windoze on the principle.

    to hear that m$ found a way to make a cellphone crash is just absurd. almost reminds me of those stupid five year old windoze humor mails that my family sends me once a month about what if m$ made a car, every time someone re-painted the lines on the road your car would crash!

    i'm sure m$ finds the situation less humorous than i do.

    seriously, how do you crash a cellphone? i've been using them for years, and even with java, and browsers, and GPS and everything Motorola can throw into a phone, its never stopped responding, frozen, crashed or even hesitated to do what i asked. even the nextel i1000 by Moto didn't like to keep calls going too long, but it never crashed on me.

    hey, i didn't notice if he said the reception was any good. first time i didn't see that in a phone review, guess he couldn't make phone calls. but those VGA pics sure looked almost in focus.

    --
    "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste." - Rahm Emanuel
  66. it's all about Imode in France by dario_moreno · · Score: 2


    Bouyges Telecom just licensed i-mode technology and released it in France last month, with phones that work (think several years of development in Japan) and a dozen of perfectly running applications (viamichelin, etc). I think Orange rushed the development and release of this alternative, non-working technology in order to have something to compete with for Christmas.

    --
    Google passes Turing test : see my journal
  67. The World vs. MicroSoft by RAMMS+EIN · · Score: 1

    Gee...the mobile phone companies must really hate MicroSoft; first Sendo defects to the enemy just before release, then Orange releases a product that shows why PC software on a handy is Bad and Wrong. That's gotta hurt!

    --
    Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
  68. One more reason to cancel my account... by Smoking · · Score: 1

    In Switzerland, they're running strange ads (half page) in the newspapers: Their ads are made to really look like an informative article, even using the same fonts for titles and body as the ones the paper uses.
    The ads really looks like an article (they even copy the global look of the paper). It's really strange and one of the first time I see such ads in swiss newspapers (They're more common in US papers...)

  69. MS has worked this way for over 10 years. by WebCowboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is very typical of Microsoft-based products--particularly when they see threatening competition on the horizon or must play catch-up(which is almost always). What is important for the Palm/Symbian camps is that they MUST NOT write off Microsoft because their offering is a big steaming pile of crap, or lose focus on their own products by fighting Microsoft's tactics.

    History has shown that as long as MS can limp along until the third major release of any given product, it has a much better than even chance of squishing the competition. Where are Go Computing and Netscape today? They were leaders/innovators and now they essentially don't exist--killed off because MS stepped up the FUD machine (like with the Win3.1 based PenWindows 10 years ago) and/or taking a loss financially (taking IE off the extra-cost "plus pack" and giving it away in the Win95 install CDs, selling XBboxes for less than they cost to make, etc).

    MS will be at the height of desperation if they start giving away the Smartphone OS to the phone makers (if they can get away with it--I think they'd acually pay phone makers to use Smartphone if the US DOJ lets them). There is little MS won't stoop to do if they really want a piece of the action in a given market--especially considering the scads of cash they are sitting on right now. If Smartphone isn't killed off quickly, look for MS to do something that drastic.

    It'll happen in other markets that MS plays in too. Remember MS only makes money off its OS and Office licenses--it uses that money and influence to leverage other products. Watch for it--MS might find Linux becoming more of a threat than it is comfortable with in the corporate server and workstation space. Biggest reason? Huge up-front costs in purchasing licenses (look at Content Management Server - US$43,000 per processor!? OS NOT included? Holy Crap! Think I'll just use Slashcode, Scoop, OpenACS etc to manage my site). Solution? MS can use bags of cash to set up their own leasing program a la GE capital to spread out the big $ hurt, or otherwise accelerate their move towards selling their "software as a service". It'll be ammunition against the argument that Linux has a lower implementation costs. Anything to make it easier to "invest" in Microsoft rather than any competition.

    If it all goes "right", MS will have it made--from the cellphone up to the big racks of servers, consumers and businesses will just get a monthly bill from Bill for anywhere from $100 or so up to thousands for corporations--just like the electric bill. Then Bill takes care (and control) of your gagets and computers to make sure all the ugrades and bugfixes are done, and that you aren't using any pesky little "non-authorised" apps and files. And the rest of us will have the honor and privlege to turn said devices on and "use as directed".

    1. Re:MS has worked this way for over 10 years. by passthecrackpipe · · Score: 2
      "Solution? MS can use bags of cash to set up their own leasing program a la GE capital to spread out the big $ hurt, or otherwise accelerate their move towards selling their "software as a service"."

      I'd be laughing my ass off when (when, not if) GE Capital & co. will start offering this with Linux.

      --
      People who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.
    2. Re:MS has worked this way for over 10 years. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its not just the $42,999. Below it lists "Required Software", of which Win2K costs $1,199 and $3,999 for Win2K Advanced Server per server. Also is SQL Server at $4,999 per server.

      So the cost comes to at least 49,197, almost 50 thousands dollars.

  70. The O2 XDA is almost as bad by scottme · · Score: 1

    The XDA from O2 - a combination Pocket PC PDA and GSM/GPRS phone manufactured by the Taiwanese company HTC and also offered by various other telcos around the world - similarly fails, in my view, to deliver on its promise.

    It's neither a good enough phone, nor a good enough PDA. The things it's best for in my view, are reading eBooks (MS Reader is very impressive), and MP3 playing, assuming you have a large enough SD card. But there are cheaper and better solutions for each of those things.

    Personally, I'd far rather have a two-box solution comprising a good, triband, GPRS-enabled cellphone with onboard Bluetooth such as the Nokia 6310i or Sony-Ericsson T68i, together with a Bluetooth enabled PDA like the Palm Tungsten T. That way you get a great phone and a great PDA that actually work together, as opposed to something that can't make up its mind what it is and doesn't do anything really well.

    1. Re:The O2 XDA is almost as bad by Goth+Biker+Babe · · Score: 1

      A compromise is the worst of all worlds. I've been interested in the Ericsson P800 but decided that it didn't do enough for what I wanted and once I bought a PDA it would have functionality I wouldn't use.

      I bought myself a T68i and I am very happy with it. I've tried the two box solution before (Psion 5 and Ericsson SH888) and it worked well. The T68i does everything I want and is stable. It cost me 30 GBP (~45 USD) for a neat little handsfree/MP3 player clip on for the phone that takes MMC.

      Now all I have to decide is whether I'll be happy with a Palm or pay the extra for an iPAQ.

    2. Re:The O2 XDA is almost as bad by GORby_ · · Score: 1

      Having both...

      go for the palm:
      + longer battery life
      + less prone to crashes
      + doesn't tend to run slowly after some time, needing a reset
      + fits in your pocket a lot easier
      + has a better user interface, and thus is a lot easier to use
      - lacks multimedia functions, but that helps the battery life, and you already have an mp3 player in your phone
      - the screen isn't so good (didn't get a chance to try a tungsten yet, should be about the same as iPaq, but little bit higher resolution)

      Just my personal opinion off course

  71. NOT TRUE Re:Unsigned Code by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Within the smartphone there are various "roles" which the software can run under depending on WHICH certificates it was signed with.

    The phones security policy controls which roles are required to perform which actions, and certain API calls are NOT available to applications signed with the wrong certificate.

    For instance an application with the wrong roles will not be able to instigate a phone call, but it could execute the phone-calling application to do this, but that won't make the call without first prompting the user.

    The implication here is that Orange could well have permitted running of easily signable (even unsigned I believe) applications which could be blocked access to the "phone" side of the device by the same mechanism they have now used to block all unsigned applications.

    The sad consequence is this just gives more people a vested interest in hacking their own property than if they could run unsigned applications.

  72. Start-up times by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Depends on what you mean by "start up and log on". When you turn it on, a GSM/GPRS phone will first scan for a network, and attempt to register with the network on the strongest cell it can find. After this, Circuit Switched (i.e. voice calls and "dial-up" data connections) are possible. This registration process may not take longer than 30 seconds (and is generally much quicker for most phones: around 5-10 seconds if the phone was previously registered on the same network).

    To be able to do GPRS data, the phone then has to perform both an "Attach" procedure, which is (approximately) the analogue of registration, but for Packet Data services. The Attach procedure typically also configures ciphering, so that data on the air interface is encrypted. The Attach procedure, depending on the network, can be quite slow, and for this reason is usually performed just after start-up. A poor implementation of GPRS may not allow Circuit Switched operation until the Attach operation has completed.

    Finally, a 'PDP context' must be activated. This can be seen as being the equivalent of getting an IP address via DHCP (indeed, at the upper layers, this is generally what happens). Since this is quite a fast operation, some phones/networks do not create this context until it is requested by the user (e.g. when a browser is opened).

    Sadly, some of the newer technologies may actually be slower in some scenarios: for example, a dual mode 3G/GSM phone has to scan both 3G and GSM bands to determine the 'best' cell on start-up.

    However, one very major area of improvement is that GPRS is not (at least in most current implementations) 'always on'. It is actually 'always on except when you are making a circuit switched call'. Most 3G technologies allow for simultaneous circuit switched voice and packet data.

  73. Typical Register article by adrian_hon · · Score: 3, Informative

    This is a typical Microsoft-bashing Register article, written by someone who hasn't even tried the phone. I have. I like it a lot - the phone can do full Internet browsing, and also has MSN Messenger. Synchronisation with Outlook has been perfect, and I nor any other users I've talked to have had any problems whatsoever with dialling or receiving messages.

    Of course you can't see everything on a web page, the screen is only 176x220 resolution; but if you visit pages optimised for mobile devices (and there are a lot of them) then there's no problem.

    The phone hasn't crashed for me yet. I've had it for two weeks and use it quite a lot. I guess YMMV, but others I've talked to have had similar crash-free experiences. It crashes about as much as any other new unpatched phone, such as the T68m (which you'll remember received a whole load of bugfixes before it worked well).

    I had no problems in using the camera - I don't know what this 'ten presses to take a picture' nonsense is. Plus, the camera quality is significantly better or at least as good as any other mobile camera out now; a simple comparison of photos, e.g. SPV vs. GX-10 will show this. And sheesh, it's only supposed to be a mobile camera, not a professional one!

    As for lag, yes, there is some. Certainly not '30 second lag times', I don't think I've ever had any more than 5 second lag. Most of the time it is on the scale of 1-2 seconds.

    There's a lot of talk about, 'Oh, I'll just wait until the Sony Ericsson P800 comes out'. Well, you can wait if you like, it's only been delayed for several months now. Plus, the P800 will cost at least £200 more than the SPV, so what use is there in comparing two products whose prices differ so greatly? (The SPV costs from free - with contract - to £100 for upgrade).

    Instead of basing your opinion on a single review, I suggest that you check out this forum about the Smartphone: http://modaco.com/smartphone/viewforum.php?f=2. The reports aren't all positive, by any means. The phone seems to provoke a love-hate relationship, but there are a lot of people who love the phone. Compared to my old Sony J70 phone, the SPV is incredibly better and lightyears ahead of my old Visor Deluxe PDA.

    1. Re:Typical Register article by gm_watson · · Score: 1

      i have also bought a spv recently and am happy with the results. it has replaced my old phone, pda and mp3 player for £100 - not bad when you stop and think.

      i have had zero performance issues.....the phone has exceeded my expectations - considering its a first of its type, i really was nervous what to expect but got it as i knew i would have 7 days to test it. a couple of moans 1) could do with more memory, i upgraded to 128mb. 2) slow to boot....

      i think some people commenting should really have a look at it before they make blinkered assumptions.....i can appreciate the apprehension regarding the ms os, working in ict!, but at the same time you should keep an open mind.....

  74. Re:YES! Isn't this weird??? by matthew.thompson · · Score: 2

    www.orange.com - Home page of Orange, Currently owned by France Telecom. Previously owned by Hutchison Whampoa and launced in the U.K. - if anything it's an Anglo French company hte most these days - not Asian.

    --
    Matt Thompson - Actuality - Insert product here.
  75. Re:YES! Isn't this weird??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I work fopr Orange. Correct we are in the UK. Here the nickname for the SPV is the "Stinker".

  76. Give the user control by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One solution would be to let the user/owner sign the code they want to be allowed to run.

  77. Bugger! Stuck with 1400 Smartphones! by Jacco+de+Leeuw · · Score: 2
    "Heathrow thieves steal 1,400 SPV Orange smartphones"

    With reviews like this the thiefs can use them only as paperweights!

    --
    -------
    Warning: Slashdot may contain traces of nuts.
  78. Another Independent Un-Biased Review From TheReg by Besty · · Score: 0


    this review is biased & concentrates too much on the bad aspects of the phone.

    sure it crashes but no more so than my old ericsson r320s.

    its a very powerful piece of kit but its not meant to be a PDA & while the p800 may have an operating system slicker than the SPV, lets face facts its a brick.

    * the phone (spv) can be obtained for FREE whereas the p800 is going to set you back at -least- £300
    * the screen is fantastic
    * it is bluetooth upgradable
    * i can stick a 256mb SD card in it & play black sabbath on the tube
    * it has an always on internet connection, you pay per mb.
    * you can take photographs via the free snap-in camera & send them to friends
    * the battery life is average
    * the games, while not my cup of tea are definatley on par graphics wise with my GB advance
    * you can hack around the certificates problem
    * the phone was built by the same people who make the IPAQ but build quality is average
    * the keypad buttons are too small
    * MSN messenger is excellent, friends can msg you as if you were at home on your broadband b0x
    * Sound quality from the headphone jack is as good as my old ipod using sony buds
    * reading slashdot on the phone is pleasing
    * the buttons are too small

    if anyone in the states wishes to check out the phone go to www.orange.co.uk/spv

  79. Phone Virus Future by henele · · Score: 1

    My phone recently failed and had to go for repair. When checking the (additional paid for) warrenty I noted it was *not* covered for any damages caused by computer viruses... A clause to protect themselves ('The Link' UK) for the future?

  80. Re:MS First to Market Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is clearly another Microsoft triumph in the making. Microsoft has always aimed at being "first to market" and damn any other considerations!

    Well, here they are again with a "first to market" product! How can they lose?

    But I hear somebody saying, "There are already some smart phones out there!".

    OK, Never mind, then.

    P.S.

    I guess that this explains the recent far fetched story about that other smart phone that was cancelled when it was "almost ready for market"!!!

  81. Oh! Ho! Ho! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do you mean that you actually own one of these monstrosities, and you are advertising that fact to the whole world (well, at least the entire net)?

    I now understand why that "other mobile phone company" cancelled their smart phone when it was "ready for release". I guess that you didn't!

  82. Series 60. by Ch_Omega · · Score: 2

    The Nokia 7650 is in my opinon, the best of the currently available smartphones. It has a stable, open OS, with a nice gui, 4mb ram, internal VGA camera, and a nice display(which is big enough for most PDA-uses while small enough to be economical power-wise). Nokia are even suplying a free Series 60 SDK.

    The 3650, which internaly is a triband 7650 with an added MMC memory-expansion port, will be released early 2003, and are in my opinion the best approach for smartphones yet. Ofcourse, some ppl will argue that the Sony Ericson P800 is a better aproach, but in my opinion, it's a souped up PDA with phone functionality, not a true smartphone.

    Reviews of the nokia 7650 here, and previews of the Nokia 3650 and the Sony Ericsson P800.

  83. Re:feature laden pda/phones.. liking it less and l by yivi · · Score: 1

    Sound, Picture, Video sounds nice on paper ...

    Beautiful. I haven't read something as funny in ages.

  84. Re:feature laden pda/phones.. liking it less and l by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So all you are saying is that the phone he wants requires better battery technology. Duh. It's not like that doesn't make his wish list true. We all want technology to improve. He said the goals he wants and you rag on him because you know why todays phones can't do it. You're so cool.

  85. Re:Another Independent Un-Biased Review From TheRe by Goth+Biker+Babe · · Score: 1

    So does my Ericsson T68i:

    * Great screen
    * GPRS so permanent net connection (pay by the Mb)
    * With the MP3 clip on I can listen to Sabbath on the bus and it's excellent quality. (It takes MMC).
    * Clip on camera allows me to send pictures by SMS, MMS or E-mail
    * Chat facility
    * Has bluetooth (no upgrade needed)
    * Sony/Ericsson so excellent build quality

    Small and compact with 13 days of standby on a single charge.

  86. Since when does...!!!!! by Palin · · Score: 1

    Since when does Email == MS Word Docs?

    From the article?
    "I think a glaring omission is that there is no viewer for Word or Excel files. It can read emails, why not other Word files."

    Does anyone else find this scary?

    --
    Palin...
  87. I bought one yesterday by beefness · · Score: 1

    After a week of trying to get hold of one, I finally got my SPV yesterday, I had my previous 6210 for just over a year and as such was entitled to £50 back if I upgraded it on my current contract.

    By being out of stock for a full 7 days Orange saved me £70, the RRP on the phone was £99.99 when I managed to get mine yesterday, so with the £50 trade in, I picked up my lovely new phone for £49.99, in my opinion a bargain!

    The reason I bought the phone as opposed to the others on offer was that I wanted to combine my devices, so far I have held off from buying an MP3 player, I avoided buying an iPAQ and my ageing Nokia 6210 had been attacked by my bosses dog (still worth £50 on trade in - thank you Orange!).

    People are quite quick to criticise MS on their new product, but lets not forget, they are a new entrant to this market and they are not the first manufacturer to release a phone with a few bugs (hey, if your an early adopter like me, you expect things to maybe not work straight away but to be resolved within a few months).

    One of my Previous phones was an Ericcson T18s, I have dreadfull memories of it as it used to crash all the time and turn itself off without warning while it was in my pocket.

    Let us not forget that Manufacturers like Nokia, Ericsson, Sagem and Siemens have all had quite a while to iron out any problems they had with their devices, Microsoft/Orange deserve to be given the same benefit of the doubt on their first products.

    In the end, consumer demand will dictate what applications appear on SmartPhone2002 and feedback from us early adopters will influence the development of MS SmartPhone devices.

    The battery on the SPV seems to be mostly affected by the GPRS feature, this doesn't suprise me as it keeps itself online all day, before I enabled the GPRS feature with orange the battery lasted alot longer. You can turn the feature off, but obviosuly you lose the always on MSN messenger feature and if you want to browse the net you need to turn it back on, or browse whats in the cache already.

    While the kaypad is small, I dont see it as much of an obstacle, in fact I prefer that it is small because it means that the screen in larger, increasing the keypad size would make the phone too bulky, although it certainly wouldn't have affected my buying decision if they had done this.

    The inclusion of the headphones/handsfree kit and the docking cradle are a nice feature, the camera attachment is tiny, which is ideal because it fits into the change compartment of my wallet (keep it in plastic to protect the lens) and it has a nice holster.

    I personally think that it is a well rounded product, with performance that I would expect from a first generation device of this size. And at £50 it's a bargain. If your after one yourself, I have seen them on www.scancom.com for 99p + monthly contract. All bells and whistles included, but they wont upgrade if your already on orange.

    1. Re:I bought one yesterday by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm with you on this one. I've had the phone for a week now and I'm definately glad I got it. Ok, so it's a bit slow around the menus and I have had it crash completely once but it's got so many features for the money. Is there any other phone where you can actually watch a whole simpsons episode on at reasonable quality? The internet works well on it, the slashdot palm site works without any problems. And then there's the MP3s, the games, msn messenger.

      Dan.

  88. Remember IE... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't think releasing too early will do any harm to MS, as they have been doing that for a long time now. Do you remember IE, first couple of versions sucked the big time, but version 3 and specially version 4 were a huge step.

  89. Re:Another Independent Un-Biased Review From TheRe by Besty · · Score: 0

    yeah the t68i is a good phone but i found it very laggy when typing stuff in. the build quality is indeed excellent & the screen is good. i think outlook & the general organiser abilities of the spv are the seller though. if you just need a phone with mp3 & a colour screen the t68i makes sense.

  90. sorry by twitter · · Score: 2

    I missed the joke because it's such a M$ troll thing to offer, "No one is interested in the mundane details of your life," as an excuse for poor security practices and privacy invasion. It's an insulting, selfish and contradictory statement designed to put the victim in a low self esteem sleep. I get tired of this "little people" argument and it affects my humor.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  91. Not really by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most M$FT products will sit happily in their boxes on the shelf without a fan. And that's probably the safest place to keep them.

    1. Re:Not really by kraksmoka · · Score: 1

      poor coward, good call. gs

      --
      "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste." - Rahm Emanuel
  92. Wrong - Re:Once More the Monopolist at Work! by jmcnamera · · Score: 1

    If you research this a bit, you'll find it is Orange, not MS, that is restricting access to the device.

    --
    this is not a sig
  93. Re:Another Independent Un-Biased Review From TheRe by Goth+Biker+Babe · · Score: 1

    I bought my phone to be part of a package. I agree that it has minimal organiser facilities but I intend getting a PDA for mobile browsing, storing data and the like. As for laggyness, it's better than the older Ericssons I have and generally find with T9 I can type ahead fairly successfully.

    My only moan is that you can e-mail attachments from the phone but can't view received attachments on the phone. This removes e-mail as one of the ways to get pictures on to the phone.

  94. Kyocera Smartphones by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 2

    I have to agree with wbm6k - I have a 6035 and I LOVE it.

    Unlike every other "smartphone" I've seen, phone functionality is not sacrificed. Phone/PDA integration is excellent.

    Yes, websurfing is a bit kludgy, but better than mose WinCE devices - They're STILL forcing people to pan left/right???? EudoraWeb (text-only) flattens everything vertically (a la Lynx), and the third-party image capable browsers (such as Handspring Blazer) also do the same flattening.

    As far as WAP browsing - For mobile-specific sites, the 6035 is a dream for WAP. Big screen, you can tap on links with the stylus, and enter text into forms using Graffiti.

    Don't forget PQAs - Probably my 10-15 PQAs are the most often used apps on my 6035.

    Upcoming 7135 adds a color screen, clamshell (a la StarTAC) design that is smaller overall, MP3 capability, an SDIO port, 16M RAM, PalmOS 4.1, with only a small sacrifice in battery life. (4-5 days instead of 5-6 days with the phone portion on. With phone off, it can go a month or two at least. Most phone-only devices like my Kyo 2035a only do 3-4 days phone standby.) The 7135 is due out Any Month Now - It's in advanced beta testing with Verizon. Sprint customers will have to wait longer.

    www.smartphonesource.com is an excellent user discussion board for the 6035/7135.

    The upcoming Samsung I500 should be nice too - Very similar to the 7135. Slightly smaller and quite a bit faster (66 MHz as opposed to 33, but who needs more than 33 with PalmOS unless you're running a GameBoy emulator?), but no expandability.

    --
    retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
  95. Re:feature laden pda/phones.. liking it less and l by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You cannot have longer battery life if you make the battery smaller.

    But you can make the phone more energy efficient.

    More importantly, you can make the code more efficient, which means you can downgrade to a slower CPU and save power while keeping the same performance! this is where Microsoft OS phones lose out.

  96. Kyocera 6035 by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 2

    I don't think the Treos are the best - I never liked the UI for their phone functionality.

    That said, they're one of the only viable PDA/phone combos I've seen, and come close to being the best. The best I've encountered so far is the Kyocera 6035.

    So far, I love my Kyocera - It is clearly designed as a phone first and not a PDA. I can dial the phone with a nice, big, easy to dial numeric keypad just like a normal cellphone without even opening up the flip of the phone. (The keypad is on the face of the flip, as opposed to being under the flip as in the Treos.

    The Treo is probably a bit better of a PDA, at least for now. Color screen, more recent PalmOS, faster CPU. The 6035 is admittedly aging, but as a phone, none of the other smartphones can beat it. PDA/phone integration is also excellent.

    The upcoming Kyo 7135 is going to be VERY nice. Color screen, OS 4.1, SDIO expansion slot, 16M RAM, MP3 capability, and 1xRTT (2.5G) data capability - Lack of 1xRTT is probably the 6035's biggest shortcoming these days, although on a PDA circuit-switched 14.4 data (2G data, which the 6035 does have) does pretty well.

    --
    retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
  97. Bzzt, wrong by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 2

    a) You can have longer battery life while making the battery smaller. Simply use less power by optimizing the electronics. Standby times given equivalent battery capacity have been constantly going up, as manufacturers squeeze more and more efficiency out of their circuitry. Also, you can reduce the size of the electronics, especially by integrating functionality provided by multiple ICs into one chip. This reduces cost and size, and often reduces overall power consumption too. (No need to drive long bus lines). As a result, you have more room left for the battery.

    Also, as time goes on and more people are using cellphones, providers will have to put up more towers. The side effect of this is that you'll be closer to the tower you're using on average, which allows the phone to transmit at a lower power.

    b) If more space is needed to make the phone sound better, then why are there plenty of smaller phones than the current smartphones that have better sound quality? It's primarily a matter of proper design planning, not of the phone's physical size. Yes, it's easier to get better quality out of a larger device, but it's still pretty easy to get good sound quality out of a small device (Like a StarTAC or those Motorola micro-phones)

    Some design decisions in form factor may increase volume while reducing the size perception of the phone to the user - Witness clamshell-style flip phones. Many of these are thicker, but are seen as smaller because the other two dimensions are smaller. (Motorola's micro-phone - I think it's one of the v-series phones is a good example of this. Thicker than a StarTAC, but overall smaller)

    --
    retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
  98. MS home phone. by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 2

    I've seen it. Actually, my lab partner for my microcontrollers class last year at school had one and loved it.

    Don't knock it just because it's Microsoft - While the overall majority of their products (especially software) are shit, they have some good products, esp. in the hardware arena. (Look at their input devices - MS does make great mice and joysticks)

    This might've been a different unit, but the one my friend had had no fancy graphical LCD or anything, it was just a plain cordless phone with a few extra buttons and a base station that could hook up to the computer.

    i.e. it didn't have some bastard version of Windows shoehorned into it.

    Most of MS's hardware products are pretty good as long as they don't include Windows in any way, shape, or form. As soon as Windows (PC version or CE) gets embedded, it's a whole different story...

    --
    retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
  99. Re:YES! Isn't this weird??? by xintegerx · · Score: 1

    Sorry about that. I got my facts about Orange being from Asia... from a slashdot post about Apple suing Apple. I should have known better :/

  100. Last Post! by alpg · · Score: 1

    Do not despair of life. You have no doubt force enough to overcome your
    obstacles. Think of the fox prowling through wood and field in a winter night
    for something to satisfy his hunger. Notwithstanding cold and hounds and
    traps, his race survives. I do not believe any of them ever committed suicide.
    -- Henry David Thoreau

    - this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...