Slashdot Mirror


Nokia Shows Off Megapixel Camera Phone

Anonymous Coward writes "According to PC World, the Nokia 7610 has been announced at Cebit in Germany - it boasts a megapixel camera (1152 x 864 pixels), 65,000 color screen, and 4x zoom, along with an MP3 music player and smart phone features that allow users to manage and edit digital images. It can also create short films of up to 10 minutes and with the Movie Director application users can add special effects and music to the video clips." Other readers point out a picture of the phone, which comes with the LifeBlog software "to help people organise the information they capture about their lives on handsets."

68 of 256 comments (clear)

  1. Wow by dolo666 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Locker rooms everwhere are in jeapordy, complete with automated pr0n-site deployment!

    1. Re:Wow by slim · · Score: 4, Informative

      Locker rooms everwhere are in jeapordy, complete with automated pr0n-site deployment!

      You joke, but municipal swimming pools in my county have banned camera phones from their changing rooms, for the stated reason that paedophiles might use them.

    2. Re:Wow by AxelBoldt · · Score: 2, Funny

      So now paedophiles can only watch but cannot record? That means they have to come back every afternoon.

  2. 4x digital zoom by erixtark · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I assume that's 4x digital zoom, not optical.

    1. Re:4x digital zoom by erixtark · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yepp, that's digital:
      http://www.nokia.com/nokia/0,8764,54962, 00.html

      Still no flash, though. Guess I'll stick with my Pentax Optio S4 for a while longer.

      I wonder when digital cameras will have bluetooth in them so I can take real pictures with a real camera and send them through the phone.

    2. Re:4x digital zoom by kryonD · · Score: 2, Funny

      Looks down at my D505i that I bought in Japan almost a year ago for $120 and sighs. It's now nothing better than a travel alarm with cool games.

      (D505i: 1.3MP digital camera(SVGA images), modified 16MB sony memory stick slot for easy storage and transfer of data, 8x digital zoom, 256,000 TFT display, full blown on phone email support [not this gay SMS text messsaging crap], Java powered with an open spec API so I could write my own stuff, all the features of my old Palm pilot, and kick @$$ games by Sqare Soft [The guys who write the Final Fantasy series])

      Yeah, Nokia really is breaking new ground here...and at a bargain price of $600. Why have we let America get so far behind? And why do we put up with this inferior crap?

      just my venting folks....be back in Japan in less than a year.

      --
      I've dirtied my hands writing poetry, for the sake of seduction; that is, for the sake of a useful cause. --Dostoevsky
    3. Re:4x digital zoom by *weasel · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Or, just have the phone use a general wireless device for storage. That way you could keep all your data (mp3s, digipics, pda, etc) in one place, and devices could leverage functionality.

      I'd really like to be able to use 1 data source for my phone/pda/camera/mp3 player. Convergence devices are cute, but impractical. Removing storage from each of those items listed would let them shrink to about the size of a sharpie (real digi camera excluded, but getting there), and would let me /add/ functionality (new devices) without worrying about swapping data around, or incompatible memory card formats and such.

      At the gym I like to have mp3s without the phone, and I'd like to not violate the 'ban' on digital cameras.

      Pictures I take with my real camera, I'd like to be able to email.

      Songs I get from iTunes i'd like to be able to email, or directly, wirelessly, share.

      contacts in my pda i'd like to have access to on my phone - but I really don't need/want the power drain of a palmOS or winCE just to make a phone call.

      --
      // "Can't clowns and pirates just -try- to get along?"
    4. Re:4x digital zoom by ozbon · · Score: 2, Informative

      The full spec is here http://www.nokia.com/nokia/0,,54665,00.html. Not a bad bit of kit at all.

      The rest of the Nokia kit from ceBIT is visible at http://www.nokia.com/cebit2004/new_releases.html

      --
      I say we take off and nuke it from orbit. It's the only way to be sure...
    5. Re:4x digital zoom by stiggle · · Score: 2, Informative

      Some digital cameras do have Bluetooth.
      My Sony digital video camera has it.

    6. Re:4x digital zoom by nlper · · Score: 2, Funny

      Why have we let America get so far behind?

      It's only a few time zones. What's the big deal?

      You do realize Nokia is based in Finland, right?

      Tyler

  3. short films? by wiggys · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I'm sure it can create short films of 10 minutes... that's if you don't mind a low resolution low framerate compressed-to-hell pixellated blob resembling vomit!

    Best stick with the mobile phone that's also a low-res video camera aspect I think instead of making wild marketing claims about how the phone can make you the next Steven Spielberg...

    --

    Sorry, but my karma just ran over your dogma.

    1. Re:short films? by NanoGator · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "I'm sure it can create short films of 10 minutes... that's if you don't mind a low resolution low framerate compressed-to-hell pixellated blob resembling vomit!"

      I have a Nokia 3650, and yeah it has a movie mode. Yeah it's postage stamp sized. Yeah it's pixellated. You know what? I have a video of my phone of my dog and cat playing together. It is low res and pixellated, yet you can still tell what's going on in the 'movie'. I captured a cute short-lived moment that would have been missed if I had run to the other end of the house to grab the DV cam.

      I guess my point is that it may be technologically disappointing, but that doesn't mean it isn't still interesting.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
  4. That's not a megapixel... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That's only 995328 pixels.

    1. Re:That's not a megapixel... by Tet · · Score: 2, Interesting
      That's only 995328 pixels.

      True. Workstation framebuffers always used to be 1152x900, which gave just over a million pixels (that resolution was chosen to maximize the display area for cards with 1MB of video memory). However, when the PC world finally caught up with workstation resolutions, they opted for 1152x864 instead, in order to preserve the 4:3 aspect ratio[1], thus it's slightly less than 1 million pixels.

      [1] No, I don't know why they did this either, as they were quite happy to use a different aspect ratio elsewhere (e.g., for 1280x1024).

      --
      "The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike." -- Delos B. McKown
  5. Crappy Lens by Brahmastra · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As the resolution of the sensor increases in cell-phone cameras, Image quality is going to suck even more because of the crappy little lens used in them.

    1. Re:Crappy Lens by Threni · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > As the resolution of the sensor increases in cell-phone cameras, Image quality
      > is going to suck even more because of the crappy little lens used in them.

      When that becomes a problem which will lose more sales than it generates I'm sure it'll be addressed. Until then, a camera on a phone is still just a bit of a giggle and better than nothing. The quality of pictures on my phone (SE T610) is great, considering what I paid for it, which is nothing!

    2. Re:Crappy Lens by Bender+Unit+22 · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's true that the image often is out of focus in different parts on camera phones and the colors are bleeding into each other, this is mostly because they use (cheap?)plastic lenses with poor optical qualities rather than the size.
      But you are correct the higher pixel counts is worth nothing unless they improve the lenses.

      The 640x480 I have in my old Nokia phone could have produced a good picture if they had installed a proper lens. I guess they thought that since it was so low resolution it didn't matter,but it does. (or it was just a proof-of-concept phone)

    3. Re:Crappy Lens by Threni · · Score: 2, Informative

      > It may be hidden in the price of the phone or the monthly fees, but it's there
      > someplace.

      I pay 15 UKP a month. For that I get 750 mins of off peak calls to any land line and T-Mobile (my supplier) mobile. I also get 50 text messages. I also get the phone, which is pretty neat (it supports java, has blue tooth, infrared, 65,000+ colour screen, camera, voice recorder, plays midi files etc). At the end of 12 months I sign up for another year and get another phone free (well, technically I've actually been getting 100 UKP off the cost of a new phone - its just that this phone has an `upgrade price` of 100 UKP).

      I can understand your `I just want a phone` attitude entirely, but it's not like these features are at the expense of a perfectly satisfactory phone. They are in addition to it. In fact, its exactly because the phone has so many good features that ensures people from multiple target groups (business people, kids who want games, women who want a sexy phone etc) want it and make it something that can be mass produced to keep the cost down. You think the phone would be much cheaper if it didn't have Java, or Bluetooth, or a camera? As long as it costs 100 UKP or less, I don't care what it costs! The price would only be an issue if I lost/had stolen this phone before a year is up and I'd have to get a phone to use for the duration of my 12 month contract. But I've already got 2 or 3 phones from previous contracts laying around that I could use.

    4. Re:Crappy Lens by SnappleMaster · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You're old. And so am I! (Kidding... :) )

      The price tag on this phone is $613. Uh... wtf? I make a very comfortable living but IMHO $613 for a phone is stupid. When I want to take pictures I'm not going to want to use a one megapixel camera. The images will look like absolute crap compared to any decent digital camera costing half as much, or less! Similarly I'd expect the other non-phone features to suffer drawbacks.

      Give me a solid, sexy little device that let's me talk to people and costs $30 and I'm a very happy camper. Strangely enough it's getting harder and harder to find such a beast!

      --
      Be happy. Nothing else matters.
  6. actually by fuck_this_shit · · Score: 5, Informative

    the 72MB are marketspeak for 8mb internal plus 64mb sd card.

    1. Re:actually by S3D · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Here full specification Comparing with Nokia 6600 8mb instead of 6mb and packged with 64mb card instead of 32mb. In fact some user alredy using 512mb card with Nokia 6600. The same OS version, so I guess the same RAM and CPU. Actually, if prices drop it may be a good time to pick up Nokia 6600. The only significant difference seems a camera.

  7. Megapixels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Megapixels is the most idiotic resolution measurement system ever. Quick, what resolution does 3 megapixel equal? 3.2? 4? 5? IF THE CAMERA HAS A RESOLUTION OF 1152x864, just fucking say so. I should make a camera with a resolution of 1x5000000 and call it a 5 megapixel camera just out of spite.

    1. Re:Megapixels by kraker · · Score: 3, Funny

      I always thought that "1 Megapixel" is just "one very big pixel". My camera has three very big pixels (well, 3.3 in fact.). I hope that's one for each primary colour... ;-) 1 Megapixel cannot convey colour information, not for each primary colour anyway.

    2. Re:Megapixels by Max+Romantschuk · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Megapixels is the most idiotic resolution measurement system ever. Quick, what resolution does 3 megapixel equal? 3.2? 4? 5? IF THE CAMERA HAS A RESOLUTION OF 1152x864, just fucking say so.

      Weight is the most idiotic dimension measurement system ever. Quick, what dimensions do 3 kg equal? 3.2? 4? 5? IF THE IRON SLAB HAS DIMESIONS OF 10x3x7 cm, just fucking say so.

      My point being: Absolute resolution is one thing, but megapixels are quite useful for a quick quality approximation. Just as you know that a 20 kg backpack will be a hell of a lot more back-breaking than a 5 kg one, megapixels can give you an idea of what to expect from a camera.

      I'm not saying megapixels tell you everything, though.

      PS. My appologies to the metricly challenged.

      --
      .: Max Romantschuk :: http://max.romantschuk.fi/
    3. Re:Megapixels by neur0maniak · · Score: 2, Funny

      You really shouldn't confuse your Masses with your Weights, not when you're putting other people down..

      Besides,
      Masses have Densities, What do megapixels have to compare with that?

    4. Re:Megapixels by binaryDigit · · Score: 2, Insightful

      IF THE CAMERA HAS A RESOLUTION OF 1152x864, just fucking say so.

      I suppose you'd also prefer if auto manufacturers told you that a cars engine was a 84x90 vs simply stating that it has a 3litre engine? Point is that most people don't give a crap if its 1152x864 or 1280x768, 1MP gives a more than close enough approximation.

    5. Re:Megapixels by Ozan · · Score: 3, Informative
      You had your chance to rant about camera pixel measurements and you blew it. 3 megapixel is equal to 3 million pixels, as 3 megawatt is equal to 3 million watt. Since the ratio of CCD-chips is 4/3 there is no ambiguity.

      The real annoying thing is the definition of pixel itself. Since sensors for 3 colors are needed most manufacturers count one sensor for one color as a whole pixel - although normaly three of them are needed to cover the whole colorspace. This is like tripling your monitor resolution by not counting pixels but phosphor/lcd fields for every color! Furthermore the sensors for every color are not lined up as on a monitor but arranged in a checkerboard pattern like this:
      red_blue__red_blue__red_blue_
      green_red_green_red _green_red
      red_blue__red_blue__red_blue_
      (I don't now anymore if the color used twice is red or blue. This increases the SNL for this color.)

      Now for each quadruple of sensors the data for one pixel is generated. There is no more information to get out of the CCD than this. After this the camera interpolates the data to increase the number of pixels used in the actual file the camera stores. What interpolation algorithm is used and how good it works is bound to the camera manufacturer.

      This will go on until multi-layered CCDs emerge on market. These use one spot on the chip to measure all three colors by layering the sensors. My guess is they will use marketing-speak as for example using 'triple' as prefix for everything.
    6. Re:Megapixels by joshwa1 · · Score: 2, Informative

      you mean the foveon sensor: http://www.foveon.com/X3_tech.html

  8. blah by zaunuz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I've had it with mobile-phones... when something new like this comes out, they cost like 2000$, and when the prices are low enhough for the average person to buy something new has been released. Im happy with my Ericson T65, and as long as it survives the daily beating i give it, i will keep it.

    --
    this is probably the most boring sig in the world
    1. Re:blah by matticus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      wow. have you ever heard of the early-adopter-penalty? How is this different from any other technology in the history of the world? Can you afford the highest-speed Pentium 4 or Athlon 64 or Dual G5? I can't. But remember, this phone coming out will make phones that came out 6 months ago cheaper. Remember this in a year when this phone is given away with every mobile phone contract. Until then, I'll be enjoying my 7250 I bought right after the price dropped. Small form factor, good keypad, everything I want in a phone, plus a crappy 352x288 camera that I have taken some good memories with when I didn't have my digicam on me. This phone cost $1200 when it came out, and I got it for a tenth of that. Now it's free with contract. Welcome to the real world.

  9. Er... by nuclear305 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well, that's great and all...seeing technology advance like this.

    But, honestly who buys a phone for the CAMERA? Now we're packing in video editing software and whatnot. Is this really necessary? The quality is usually so poor that it's not worth the small size...

    Yea, I own an LG-VX6000, and I tell you this...I bought it for the actual features it has as a phone and not the camera. I've taken a few pictures with the camera, and put simply...there can be no replacement for film and digital cameras anytime in the near future.

    If you want to take pictures..buy a camera! It will be a better investment of your money.

    1. Re:Er... by 10Ghz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Cameraphones are NOT meant to replace regural (digital)cameras! You wont take wedding-photos with camrea-phones. But the point is that you walk around with your camera very rarely, whereas most people carry their phones with them all the time (well, almost). If you happen to see something interesting, you can snap it's picture, since you will always have a camera (although a bit low-quality) with you.

      --
      Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
    2. Re:Er... by eraserewind · · Score: 5, Interesting
      But, honestly who buys a phone for the CAMERA?
      30% of the phone market if the Sony Ericsson are to be believed.

      The point of phones on cameras is that people bring their phone everywhere. People don't bring their camera everywhere, no matter how small it is. Of course a tiny fixed lens is going to be worse than one with real optical zoom, but it's plenty good enough for a lot of things.
      Yea, I own an LG-VX6000, and I tell you this...I bought it for the actual features it has as a phone and not the camera.
      As you should. It is after all primarily a phone.
      I've taken a few pictures with the camera, and put simply...there can be no replacement for film and digital cameras anytime in the near future.
      People said the same about digital cameras when they first arrived, but now you are including them with film to make your point. This Nokia phone has the same resolution as the Kodak that I bought 5 years ago. That's not such a long time really. Other manufacturers have already 2 and higher megapixel phones, and I can't see them stopping competing with each other anytime soon.
  10. That's a lot of features... by dealsites · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I can understand combining a phone, camera, and mp3 player since they are all features that fit into a nice small form factor. I think that this will put a lot of the mp3 players and lower-end digital cameras out of buisness. After all, everyone wants a cell phone, why not get an added feature for just a $$ more. Combining a hand-held game however doesn't really fit the profile though, as with the N-Gage.

    --
    Find real time deal updates from multiple sources

  11. yes, but... by elementik · · Score: 4, Funny

    Can I *CALL* people on the damn thing..!?

    --
    --- Stop the world! I want to get off!
    1. Re:yes, but... by vidnet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why do all these comments get modded up? Would you mod up someone who said "I don't want RAID support in Linux, I just want an OS that lets me read my mail"?

      "I don't want an arpanet with scifi mailing lists, I just want to exchange military information!"
      "I don't want a computer that plays pong and does spreadsheats, I just want to crack german codes!"
      "I don't want to melt rocks and make tools, I just want a nice heavy one to throw at my enemies!"

      For crying out loud...

    2. Re:yes, but... by geekster · · Score: 2, Funny

      Perhaps... if you can figure out those wierdly placed buttons...

    3. Re:yes, but... by 10Ghz · · Score: 2, Funny

      I have a Nokia 6600, a camera-phone. And (this may come as a shock to you) using it to call people is no shape or form more difficult than using my previous phone (Nokia 6310i which doesn't have a camera).

      --
      Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
  12. AAC Support! by Luckboy · · Score: 5, Informative

    Take a good look, iTunes users. This phone has AAC support. One of the few players outside the iPod to do it. Don't take that to mean you can play music from the iTunes Music Store, I doubt it supports the Fairplay DRM, but now you can use the smaller better (IMHO) format than MP3!

    http://www.mobitopia.com/20040317.html#155506

  13. Nokia and mobiles by Alioth · · Score: 5, Informative

    Nokia do make nice devices. Phones, though, are a compromise. I've had a look at things like the XDA (you look a real dork holding a big wide PDA to your ear when making a phone call, and it also runs Windows - I don't want MS bloatware in my pocket thanks). The Sony-Ericcson T800/T900 has a much nicer form factor, but you've still got to type with a stylus when you text someone or need to enter a URL.

    I bought a new phone less than a month ago, and I looked at all of these. Then I saw the Nokia 6820. It is the same size as my old cheap-o basic Nokia phone, so it fits easily in any pocket I care to put it in...but it folds out - with a full QWERTY keyboard. Although I had to compromise in screen size (standard mobile phone screen) to have a genuine pocket-sized phone, the fold-out keyboard more than makes up for it: texting is fast, if I'm waiting for a plane, I can go onto IRC (using a neat little open source J2ME IRC client), I can ssh into a server if I get the call saying there's trouble and do some basic troubleshooting all with a keyboard. I couldn't care less about cameras particularly.

    The camera in my 6820 is useful in case of emergency, or if I really need an image right now and to hell with the quality because it means I now always have a camera with me. If I get rear-ended at traffic lights, I can take some photos of the incident to supply with the insurance forms as an example.

    1. Re:Nokia and mobiles by TonkaTown · · Score: 2, Informative

      Virca is good for J2ME phones with socket support, but WirelessIRC is even better on phones like the Nokia 7610 (plus 7650, 3650, N-Gage, 6600, 6620, Siemens SX-1 and Sendo X), and SymIRC is nice on the P800 and P900.

  14. Product details with more pics by Danta · · Score: 4, Informative
  15. Driving by Mr.+Certainly · · Score: 2, Funny

    Finally, yet another discraction while driving... SMILE!

  16. Poor design... by WIAKywbfatw · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've personally owned four handsets in my time, and through work I've had the experience to use dozens of others, and when asked by others which manufacturer to go for when buying a phone I don't hesitate to say Nokia. But, having seen some of its recent designs, including this one, I can't help but think that the people in Nokia's design teams are losing it.

    Just look at the numeric keypad portion of this new handset. Then look at the numeric keypad of any handset you have to hand. Unless you own a quirky model, the odds are that your current numeric keypad is little different to that on a wired phone: four rows of three (1-2-3, 4-5-6, 7-8-9, *-0-#) arranged in a grid-like fashion with similar-shaped and -sized buttons.

    This traditional configuration is great, because it allows you to dial numbers easily by touch alone, even in very poor lighting or total darkness. Now tell me how you're meant to do that on this new handset? 3, 6, 9 and # are pretty well vertically aligned but 1, 4, 7 and * are pratically sloped at 45 degrees.

    Now I don't know about you, but if I was dialling without looking (something that's child's play on most phones) I'd expect the 7 to be two buttons directly below the 1, but on this handset, if you drop two buttons vertically down from 1 then you're hitting 8. Which means that to dial a number on this handset you're pretty much forced to look at the keypad as you dial. That's poor design.

    Sure, sure, it looks pretty enough. But if how a handset looks even comes in your top three criteria when buying a new phone (above, say, features/functions, battery life and size/weight) then you're a fool.

    The unwritten first rule of useability and ergonomics is "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". The traditional keypad layout works, and it works damn well: it looks like someone needs to remind Nokia of that.

    --

    "Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
    1. Re:Poor design... by briqui · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Change is not necessarily bad - ergonomics and design for human use have definitely made some things a lot better - but this does seem like a particularly poor change. In particular the right hand side of the keypad looks horrible to use.

      If you hold your currenly phone in you hand anything like me you dial with your thumb most of the time with the rest of your hand holding the phone. Now try pressing the '3' key on your current phone - by far the hardest key to hit on the whole keypad because of how you have to bend your thumb.

      Now look at the new design - a tiny, tiny 3 key right on the edge of the keypad.

      Ug.

      Do these people even use the phones they produce?

    2. Re:Poor design... by sysopd · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Amen. I have owned several handsets and played with hundreds more in my quest to find the right phone. One of the things I loved about my older phones (qualcomm and nokias) was the efficient button layout and ease of use without looking.

      Until recently it has taken me no time to get up and running with a new phone-- this has all changed. The samsung SCH-a310, for example, has a normal key layout but the tactile response is poor and its hard to feel the difference between keys when scanning with your fingers.

      Nokia has been making some terrible design choices with their key layouts lately.. the first one I remember trying was the 3600 and the 3650. Recently they've been marketing the 3200's like crazy, which look like 1993 pager technology, albeit with a camera. I tried this one out thinking it might be easy to use, but its neigh on impossible to know what key you're hitting, then you have to make sure you hit the right SIDE of the key to get the correct number.

      Now I know, after awhile you get used to it, and then when you get a new phone you need to unlearn what you have learned. But shouldn't the interface technology we use strive for ease of use and ergonomics instead of visual acceptance and clever button placement? I mean we could all be using Datahand ergonomic keyboards in the future, but somehow I doubt these new cell key layouts are for anything other than aesthetics.

  17. Convergence by Epistax · · Score: 3, Funny

    Phones are adding things. Watches are getting bigger. Let Phone(t) be a function defining a Phone at type t, likewise for Watch(t).

    Phone(t) = Watch(t) | t->infinity

    1. Re:Convergence by JollyFinn · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Phone(NOW)==Watch(NOW) Hey I know that lots of younger people don't wear any watches anymore in Finland. Mobilephone shows time always when on. While its not as convenient to take one from you pocket that check you wrist. Some just don't wan't to carry one more thing in their wrist, and there fore they use the thing they carry anyway. After I run out of batteries in my current whatch I might do same thing. Only reason I keep whatch that is convenient in sauna and when I'm in hurry.

      --
      Emacs is good operating system, but it has one flaw: Its text editor could be better.
  18. I apologise for luddism. by shic · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Since the early 1990s I've seen immense value in having a mobile phone - just to remain in contact. 1990s phones were temperamental, fragile, bulky and permanently approaching a flat battery. In the noughties things started to look up - phones designs started to become more robust (no aerial sticking out); came in conveniently small packages and battery life sufficient for a working week on standby.

    Britain recently passed drive-phoning laws - which bans using a hand-held phone while "driving" (including when stationary - say in a not-infrequent motorway hold up) and I decided a legal hands-free kit would be needed. Blue-tooth seemed to be the perfect answer to the problem - a simple system wired into my car so that whenever my engine is running, the in-car hands free kit takes control of any phone calls - allowing me to legally use my phone without taking it out of my pocket. Off I trooped to the mall now obscenely cluttered with mobile phone shops. To say I was surprised is an understatement!

    Phone size - if I want blue tooth then I must have a larger phone (very undesirable) but that it would have a camera in it (no use at all thanks - maybe even a hindrance as I might not be permitted to take it with me everywhere I go) and a snazzy colour screen (Why!?! I just want to make and receive calls!) and a dramatically reduced battery life to boot. As for wireless connectivity - the vendors advise it is normally turned off, and activated only for the duration I'm using a particular blue tooth service...( What's the point then!?!!! ) and that using blue tooth would dramatically reduce battery life again!

    Don't get me wrong I've been very impressed with my current Nokia 8310, but can't help feeling that more modern phones have become feature crazy and now neglect the primary requirement to make mobile telephone conversations convenient and reliable with minimum effort. Nokia - PLEASE - stop concentrating on the gimmicks and get back to making solid reliable phones for business use.

    1. Re:I apologise for luddism. by eraserewind · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You shouldn't complain about phones that are clearly not marketed towards you. Nokia, Sony Ericsson, Motorola, etc. have absolutely huge ranges of phones. They cater for just about every market niche you could concieve of. One consequence of that however it that many/most phones will have features that you have absolutely no interest in. Do you complain that trucks have way too many features, and are way too bulky, when all you want is something to pop down to the shops in? No you don't (I hope!). This is exactly the same thing however. Does this phone look like it is trying to be a solid reliable business phone? Does it look like it even knows what a solid reliable business phone is? No, but plenty of other models do.

    2. Re:I apologise for luddism. by shic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > ... plenty of other models do.

      My observations have been different... while the 2-3 year old design works well, I would have hoped that a phone company would have extended an excellent design such as the 8310 to provide robust wireless integration to motor vehicles. It seems that developments in mobile phones these days have become more concerned with style than substance. The reply about the 6310i is interesting but still makes me compromise on size - and leaves me wondering about issues relating to "always-on" Bluetooth. Surely it should not be a problem to listen for Bluetooth messages from my car without seriously adversely affecting battery life?

      I'm not complaining about this phone per-se, but I am complaining that all mobile phone makers seem to have abandoned the idea that functionality improvements in core features will drive sales - especially considering the substantial demand.

  19. Re:AAC Support! by Danta · · Score: 2, Informative

    AAC support on Nokia mobiles is nothing new--the Nokia 3300 and the already discontinued Nokia 5510 have supported AAC for quite some time already.

  20. Non-slashdotted picture of the phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative
  21. Re:Nokia have fallen behind the times by Kristoph · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The phone you reference is from Japan which has had superior phone technology for many years. It is fair to say a phone that comes out in Japan today will take at least two years to have a US/European competitor.

    Nokia is not so much behind the times but, much as every other vendor, is is behind Japanese phone technology.

    ]{

  22. Who cares as long as the quality sucks. by TEB_78 · · Score: 3, Informative

    It really doesn't matter what Nokia put into their phones as long as they don't know how to make quality.
    Here in Norway clerks in several stores where asked if they would recommend Nokia to their customers and almost everyone said no! They have too much customer complaints on Nokia phones. Every third Nokia phone sold in Norway has to get service within 6 months...
    The most recommended phones where Siemens and Sony Ericson. They only have to have one out of ten phones into services within 6 months.

  23. What happened to cell phones?!!? by wobedraggled · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I just want to make a damn call from the thing, but the keypad is not very well designed for punching up a phone number. Cell phone keypads have become an ugly mess as of late. I don't need it to do anything but make calls, and have a phone book. I don't need a camera and I have a gameboy. geeze.

    --
    Ubuntu- Linux for human beings.
  24. Only 1 megapixel? by achurch · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I guess now would not be the time to mention that Japan is already up to two megapixel phones . . .

  25. Camera phones are old news by coachvince · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Phones with additional features will always be a compromise, between packing all the features in, keeping the size manageable, and trying to make it fit in the hand like a phone should (does anybody really like using those matchbox sized phones?). As it is, in the US and UK, you really need a hands-free device. That could easily be connected to a wristwatch with the same features. Maybe we could even use the cord running between as an aerial, and improve the signal. Then, it becomes an all-purpose device, with less concern about the fit in the hand. With Hitachi's new mini hard drive coming out, it'll be the camera/watch (and/or phone). If you think it's annoying not being able to have your cell phone in a locker room, wait til you can't have your wristwatch in there, because it can store hours of DV. Phones with additional features will always be a compromise, between packing all the features in, keeping the size manageable, and trying to make it fit in the hand like a phone should. As it is, in the US and UK, you really need a hands-free device. That could easily be connected to a wristwatch with the same features. Maybe we could even use the cord running between as an aerial, and improve the signal. Then, it becomes an all-purpose device, with less concern about the fit in the hand. A+ certified, and just as proud of being potty-trained

    --
  26. Camera phones are a terminatible offense by hacker · · Score: 4, Informative
    My fiance works for the biggest pharmaceutical in the world, and they just recently sent out a company-wide communication that said that any employee, friend-of-employee, visitor, contractor, or vendor found onsite using, carrying, or possessing a cellular phone with a camera will be immediately terminated, no questions asked.

    For the employee friends, visitors, vendors and contractors, this means they are immediately banned from any and all sites for a duration of 3 years. The employee who has friends onsite using a cameraphone is immediately terminated.

    They are being very harsh, but these are the rules. Having someone walking around with a miniature camera in their hands inside labs, through buildings, etc. is an ENORMOUS risk to them.

    Check with your employer first, before you invest in one of these phones, or you could find yourself out on the curb without a job.

    Cellphone vendors need to be very careful with their product lines, and includes phones that do NOT include these features, so that they can continue to sell product. Don't just cater to the teenagers who think having a camera and a phone is "cool". Cater to the people who actually have to pay for those cellphone bills... the parents, and the businesspersons who actually use the devices for what they are.. a phone.

  27. Exporting pictures by slim · · Score: 4, Informative

    Careful if you're buying a camera phone. They're rather good fun, but you need to know upfront whether you're going to be able to transfer pictures onto a PC directly.

    I know a number of people who have to send a costly email/photomessage for every picture they want to move off their phone, because their network operator (from whom they bought the phone) has disabled the functionality to transfer a picture over a wire/bluetooth/IR.

  28. For better or for worse? by lhpineapple · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'll admit that the functionality and versitility of these new phones sound great, but it really begs the question, how much is too much?

    It's hard enough to pry some people off a computer and make them, oh let's say, take a walk outside. I don't know if I could handle seeing every other person sitting at a park bench "appreciating" the scenery by listening to an mp3, taking pictures, and posting them in their blog.

    It's probably inevitable. I just hope we don't let technology govern what little part of our everyday life that we have left that isn't affected by technology.

  29. Megapixel rating is on entire sensor, not output by blorg · · Score: 4, Informative
    That's not a megapixel... That's only 995328 pixels.

    Actually, it's standard for digital camera manufacturers to quote the megapixel rating based on the entire sensor, rather than the output resolution. The sides of the sensor are blacked out, for calibration, and don't appear in the final image.

    1600x1200, for example, is the standard 2.0 megapixel resolution (but 1600x1200 is actually only 192k pixels).

  30. The Phone Event Horizon by mccalli · · Score: 4, Funny
    Douglas Adams was wrong. There's is no Shoe Event Horizon, instead make way for the Phone Event Horizon.

    I mean, it fits the pattern. Every second store on the high street is a phone store. Phones are made increasingly more difficult to use, and are replaced more and more frequently until eventually it becomes uneconomic to open anything other than a phone shop.

    I warned you. Don't say I didn't warn you when the Phone Warriors are sent in. Relax and enjoy your phones. They are very stylish and fashionable...

    Cheers,
    Ian

  31. Phone Calls? by bailout911 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Wow, this sounds great, but how does this PHONE do with making PHONE CALLS? You know, the thing you use your phone for 90% of the time? I'd bet that most people who have camera/mp3/video/whatever capabilities in their phones probably use those for about 3 days until the "look, it's cool" factor wears off, then they just talk on their phone like normal people.

    --
    --Stupid Sig Here--
  32. this was SOOOOOO 2002... by andrewleung · · Score: 2, Informative

    sony had this out in 2002... and it did work through a bluethooth phone...

    Sony Cyber-Shot DSC-FX77

    A pretty sweet camera... great design... i'm STILL using the earlier model with the same design...

  33. Whilst in Japan ... by phoebe · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Sony Ericsson have a 1.3 MegaPixel 1280 x 960 16x zoom called SO505iS.

  34. Design for right handed people? by pdjohe · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Let me try to explain...

    If you move your right thumb up and down like you were dialing a number, it can be somewhat natural to move down and to the left at the same time. I think the keypad shape reflects this movement. It might be more natural than expected to dial numbers with the distorted keypad shape.

    Guess I gotta go to a shop and try it out first.

  35. Nokia keypad design... by juhaz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Nokia seems to have this weird fixation of pushing more and more weird keypads to their phones one after another. Not that they are the only ones, something like Siemens SX1 is even worse, but still...

    What's wrong with the good old squarish design with all numeric keys being at least approximately same size & shape?