Slashdot Mirror
Just a Phone?
LiquidCoooled writes "Vodafone in the UK have released a mobile phone which caters to those people craving a simple handset. For far too long we have been overpowered by extras we don't need; this looks to be a very nice solution. These phones feature a large format screen and buttons and a simple interface making this phone more accessible to a larger audience." I'd sure prefer better sound and simpler menus to the useless camera and gimmicks built into my current phone.
I'd sure prefer less editorializing and fewer dupes in my current Slashdot, but I guess we don't always get what we want.
it also has a large form factor, not unlike cell phones of yore (ala a Motorola V60). Not attractive.
NO CARRIER
This probably sounds a bit hypocrytical coming from someone who has written java apps for phones, but one thing that does annoy me about the modern handsets is the sluggish interface due to the anti-aliased true-type fonts, animation, heavy operating system overhead (relative to the CPU), colour menus and other crap that gets in the way when you just want to make a quick call. I've lost cound of the number of times I've called directory enquiries, got a number and tried to type it in before forgetting it, (I'm too lazy to use a pen) and after tapping away, realise it's missed the first one or two digits. My 7 year old wireless home phone handset can take the digits as fast as I can punch them in, so why can't a mobile costing 300-400 pounds?
While I'm at it, am I the only one who wishes that directory enquiries could beam a number to your phone in a specific format, so that you could just call by viewing the text message and using a "convert to number" type option (in the UK we do get a text message, but it's a case of reading the message, remembering the number, backing out back to the main interface and typing it in)? Maybe other countries do this?
Back to the topic, why not have "Advanced user", "Normal user" and "Dimwit" settings. Default to "Dimwit", mode which would have by default two menu options "stored numbers" and "settings". If stored numbers was picked, it would show a list of 9 numbers (maximum, or whatever will fit on the display) and a prompt text telling the user to just press key 1-9 to call, or 0 to cancel. If from the main menu the user starts typing in a number, the two options are "Store number", or "Cancel". The settings menu for the "Dimwit" user would only allow a change to another user type. Probably best not to use the word "Dimwit" in the option list though I guess...
Really, it's not rocket surgery, using a phone though, and as long as the extras don't get in the way of normal functionality, who cares how many bells and whistles there are? If you don't want to use them, then don't. You wouldn't decide not to buy a car simply because it had too many gadgets, would you? Defaulting to predictive text is one of my pet hates though I hate predictive text, and always disable it, but plenty of handsets make doing so difficult or at least non-obvious.
Code, Hardware, stuff like that.
I already have just a phone...it was the cheap one available from Verizon...I wish mine were more than just a phone...
we are backwards in the UK.
It's about time someone put an end to hardware feature creep on cellphones!
I don't need cameras, a million different ringtones, games, instant messenger, etc on my cellphone. All I ask of it is that it make reliable calls, have a somewhat long battery life, and be easy to read (I have a hell of a time reading the text on my LG) and use.
Cellphone companies in America, please take note.
"Think about how stupid the average person is, then realize that half of 'em are stupider than that!" - George Carlin.
Sometimes a phone is just a phone.
And we like it that way.
No unauthorized use. Trespassers will be shot. Survivors will be shot again.
speak for yourself; i for one am quite glad to be able to run midpSSH anywhere there's a tower within range!
I don't know about that one. I don't know how many times I've gotten a call from someone who has his phone in his pocket and it presses the key that is speed dial to my phone. I'm not sure emergency services wants to hear people's drive-thru orders. (Please tell me I'm not the only one that happens to....)
I hate all the extra crap going into phones now, my Nokia 3390 was the best phone I've ever had. I then went to some motorola piece of crap offered by Cricket and now I'm using a Samsung A650, but I still prefer my old Nokia.
Yes, I am a smart ass; it's better than the alternative.
Cause that would be just plain silly. :-)
...I've yet to see one cell phone with decent coverage. If they can fix that, I don't care whether it has a lot of fancy features or not. If there's no coverage, why bother either way?
Paleotechnologist and connoisseur of pretty shiny things.
Pity, they seem to be pitching these phones to older customers. I would like a phone with legible text and an easy-to-navigate menu, but I can live without features like a "HELP! I've fallen and I can't get up!" button and alarm popups reminding me when it's time to take my metamucil...
0 1 - just my two bits
For £80, why bother? You can get phones with features for this price. Maybe if it was cheaper, then I would buy one, but what's the point of just stripping all the features away then charging essentially the same amount?
I have always wondered who came up with combining a camera and a phone. It is not a totally ridiculous combination, like say, sub-woofers and a vacuum cleaner. I can see the combination of transmitting visual and audio data through the same device. But still, why combine two items into one shoddy piece of equipment when you can have a two seperate high-quality devices?
So the marketing message here is that this is a phone than can be used even by complete morons?
seems strange to pay more for a phone thats lacking less stuff. sometimes these features are useful anyway. i always thought a camera phone was pointless then i lost my existing camera on a holiday, at least i had a backup handy!
as a telephone to talk to people. I don't use my landline much, but haven't dropped it yet.
as a text pager. My system monitors and trouble report mail addresses all route to my phone.
tetris on the shitter
Raise your children as if you were teaching them to raise your grandchildren, because you are.
Ya but mine makes a mean cappuccino. Some extras are hard to live without. Tough keeping the foam out of the buttons. Maybe the next model?
It would be great if users could choose what features they wanted on their phones rather than just having to choose from some standard models.
Users must be allowed to select what they really need and nothing else.
I, for one, am heartily sick and tired of the technology industry catering to the ill-informed desires of children rather than to the real needs of the adults who actually pay the bills.
I have no need or desire for a camera in my phone. I do not have the time to waste on text messaging through a cramped interface. I think that video on a cell phone is idiotic. I don't need a game on my cell phone to exercise my brain. I don't need my cell phone to play music.
What i need is:
1. A phone that is comfortable to use.
2. A phone that can be operated easily with one hand.
3. A vibrating ringer that doesn't disturb others.
4. A speakerphone for when my hands aren't free.
5. High speed IP access (preferably via a wireless connection like Bluetooth) for my PDA and laptop.
6. A simple interface.
7. Long battery life.
8. Conservative, modern styling
9. Worldwide coverage.
10. Macintosh compatibility.
11. Good customer service.
12. and a reasonable price.
Everything else is unecessary and unwanted. I'm a business person, and I want a tool that helps me do my job and stays out of my way. I'm not a child with ADHD that needs to be constantly entertained.
£80 for prepay? Vodafone already sell phones cheaper, which are just as easy to use, like the nokia 1100, last time I checked they were selling for about £20-25.
--
Those phones look pretty big, which is probably desirable for many people, such as the elderly. I would like something along the same lines, but in a very small form factor, so it doesn't take up much room in my pocket. Why should I shell out for a bunch of features I never use in order to get something so small?
I'm not one who enjoys a phone that just lets me call people (I have used and enjoy all the extra features my phone has) but I would think the people who just want a phone for calling still care about the look of the phone. Those are the two ugliest phones I've ever seen. Usually when something is that ugly it makes up for it with all the extra things it can do. I can't imagine these two phones selling well at all, and why can't there be a flip phone? It's nice having a large screen, but at least a flip phone can protect that screen from scratches/dust and whatever might be in your pocket when you stick the phone there.
Kyocera released the Tu-kaSa very simple phone in Japan and it proved to be very successful. But the thing I find strange about this story is that Vodafone are basically selling a phone with features equivalent to a nokia 3310 for £80! You can get a NEW pay as you go phone on Amazon.co.uk for £20.
Why would anyone buy the £80 phone from Vodafone?
This looks like a quite good idea.
r ience/Conceptual/OSXHIGuidelines/XHIGIntro/chapter _1_section_1.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP30000894
c es-active.php
The target audience it is aimed at has no need for the more advanced features, and so the manufacturer has ditched them in favour of focusing more on the user interface.
No offense intended to those who have earnt their years, but i have found through my tech supporting that after a certain point, as age increases technical ability decreases.
From an HCI view point having dedicated buttons for specific tasks is a great idea. It helps increase predictability, which is often a recommended key point in most style guides;
such as apple's
http://developer.apple.com/documentation/UserExpe
Added to that it looks reasonably pretty, which helps users come away from it with a positive experience. There was a study where two usability equivalent ATM machines were tested by users. they came back and said that the prettier one was easier to use - even though they were designed in the exact same way, bar aesthetics. I can't remember the exact link but it can be found off one of the links here:
http://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/~rxb/Teaching/HCI/resour
provided they've actually pulled this off well, then i see it as a very good thing.
- Alan
Just wanted to let slashdotters know since it took me time to adjust to refering to it as a "cell phone" after comming to the USA.
In my experience (front-line support for a mobile phone company), the thing that confuses most people who can't work a phone is the whole concept of a softkey, particularly the elderly I find.
Notice that both these simple phones use them. 4-way navigation is bad too.
Good call getting R&J to endorse them though, both phone and mindless talk show are aimed at the same Daily Mail reading audience.
The extra features can get in the way if the menus aren't designed properly. I don't know why phone makers generally can't design a good menu, but oh well. At least I can figure things out, but there seems to be a needless number of button clicks to do basic tasks.
As an American, I have no problem understand what a "mobile phone" is, even if I may use "cell phone" as my default for describing it. Still having trouble with flashing/torch and elevator/lift?
If I were to carry a cellphone, aside from being able to use it as a telephone, the only "feature" I would want on it would be the ability to plug in a ring tone. Something about the Flintphone ringing on my hip just reeks of "cool".
This sig no verb.
But is it because older people can't learn as quickly and are set in their ways, or is it because they are older and wiser and refuse to be fished in to subscription and usage fees for gimmicky services of dubious usefulness? I have noticed that the young people who are keen to fiddle with every silly bell and whistle are also more likely to fall for crap like "Forward this email to everyone you know and Bill Gates will pay you $100 for every address because he is testing out his new email system."
Sometimes you just want to be able to pick up something and use without having to study a manual and remember sequences of buttons. Imagine what life would be like if the same so-called level of innovation was applied to common household items like the kitchen faucet or the toilet.
I'm actually surprised somebody is doing this, but I am so glad. I am sick of phones with all this crap on them.
Now, just need an iDen version.
Those phones are nice... As a Radio Shack associate who sells cell phones all the time, I agree with the statement in the article that mentions the "older crowd"... I get practically cussed out half the time because a career or middle age adult comes in to buy a phone, and they are incensed that most phones have cameras and camcorders and mp3 downloads and picture messaging. Sprint PCS (my personal carrier) has gone back to the basics with a new line of Sanyo phones. One model has speaker phone with no external LCD, one has a 1 line external LCD with speaker phone, and one has an internal antenna and no external screen; while all of those are flip phones, to me they represent a fundamental shift in the marketing target of the cellular industry. The cameras and frills nailed the younger audience, and now they are attempting to increase their base to include the older generation. The shift has become such that phone service at home is becoming obsolete slowly but surely.
Sniper's Motto: One shot, One kill- If you run, you'll only die tired.
There's one feature I think all phones should have: if anyone selects a ringtone with that @#$% frog in it, the phone should detonate the battery and spray acid in their face.
I'm scared of numbers that can't be written as a fraction. It's an irrational fear.
seems strange to pay more for a phone thats lacking less stuff
This phone doesn't have as many features as most. "lacking less stuff" means that it has more features, not less.
Please don't not learn proper grammar.
I still have an old crappy Nokia 3210.
It looks like it had been run over a few times (by a small car) but I sort of like it.
The battery can go for about a week, the display is big and clear enough to read messages, it has 10 ringtones -- which is exactly 9 more than I need.
Plus, it cost me $2 to buy it (oh, and another 2 bucks for new battery).
Clearly, it has most of things I expect from a cell phone.
So why buy new ones when you can get the simple (maybe used even, if you like) cell phones for a price of a lunch.
OK, I know I sound like a curmudeon here, but how about a phone that actually *rings*? I don't need to hear a stupid off-tone rendition of anything, and the last thing I want to hear is some damn Britney Spears wannabe.
If it weren't for the size factor, I'd take one of these any day.
What's the price? I have two phones from before when they added all the extra crap. I can text and phone with them just fine. Why would I want to buy a new one when mines worked fine for 5 years or so..
I like muppets.
Everytime a cell phone is discussed on slashdot we get cries of everyone going "I wish they'd just have a phone you could call people on! wa wa wa camera wa wa wa ring tones wa wa wa...."
These comments are usually brought up because the poster thinks they are being witty, pointing out something that does not exist, while in fact, they are WRONG.
Almost every carrier offers a base model phone, usually for free, for becoming a new customer. Sometimes these free phones still come with extra features which may upset the "simple phone denizens". Shame on the carriers for trying to give you more for free! They will surely pay for this!
Thats where carriers who allow you to use whatever phone you want with their SIM card come into play. I know Cingular in the US does this and I"m sure countless others do. Then you can buy whatever old phone from 1995 you want that only makes phone calls.
Even still, modern carriers still offer bare bones phones. Sure, they don't put them on the front page of their websites but they exist. I just found this phone in about 3 seconds on nokia.com and Cingular is even offering a plan with it.
http://www.nokiausa.com/phones/1261
This phone came out years ago, this whole "bare bones" phone thing is NOT NEWS. You really think the first cell phones were bloated with features? I remember using a Motorola Startac, and that didn't even have an LCD. So stop your whining and actually look at the products available.
you are missing the point. We are all capable of not using features, but incoporating them makes the phone more difficult to use, because the interface is more complex, the manual huge, and the speed of the phone is slower. Im sure my first cellphone didnt have a concept of a 'boot time', you just turned it on and dialed. These days its like waiting for Windows XP to load.
I think this is a great idea, hopefully the start of a long overdue backlash against feature creep in all electronics. I have a combined DVD/Video player, and despite working as a programmer, I have no idea how to do simple tasks like set the timer. The remote control has about 100 buttons, including multiple different methods for fast forwarding (when DVDs allow it...grrrr).
The thing that bugs me is the implication that a bare-bones phone is just for 'old people'. Believe it or not there are people of all ages who want a phone, but dont need it to have more features than a PC operating system. Some people just arent geek-obsessed about phones...
DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
My little LG Vx 3100 (may it rest in peace) was the perfect little phone until that unfortunate cement mixer incident. Too bad that LG doesn't make them any more.
Its about time that someone was able to make a plain phone that works as a... wait for it... a phone!!
1) Connects well to the tower
2) Long Battery life
3) Fits in my pocket
4) Quick button response time
5) That's it! Nothing else!
Is that too much to ask? They could charge me more for such a device and I would not care.
But seriously, now they just need to take this one by Vodafone out back and beat the ugly out of it until it looks good again.
These basic models of Nokia are very popular in India. And these are absolutely cheap (approx USD 65). In fact, considering the huge market for such cheap phone Motorola is coming up with a phone which costs only USD 40.
Try telling that to emergency room staff who have to remove vibrating mobile phones from people's asses...
People say I'm crazy, I got diamonds on the soles of my shoes...
[i]I'd sure prefer better sound and simpler menus to the useless camera and gimmicks built into my current phone.[/i]
How about longer battery life and increased coverage from service providers.
...my Ericsson r520m. The big diff between it and my phone is that I doubt this one has Bluetooth.
Another market for basic phones like these are people who can't carry cameraphones at work. I have friends who work at Lockheed Martin, for example, and cameraphones are strictly verboten there.
I like mine because it's simple and it does the job. I also got mine for free, first when I signed up with T-Mobile, then the second one when I re-upped. My technology-scorning musician husband has one now, with a prepaid account. It's simple enough not to frustrate him, which is always a concern.
I like devices that do one thing and do it well. That way, when they fail, (and they will!) you don't lose other things you use it for. I have a separate PDA, a separate digital camera, and a separate phone. I suspect I will probably get a stand-alone GPS when I get one of those.
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
I'd like to see a Bluetooth earpiece that's "just a phone", with an "answer" button, and a speeddial scroller that says each name, then calls. With all the other functions, like PIM, internet, display, texting, etc, all in the phone carried in my pocket (or nerdbelt). Make it a stereo earset, and I'll feel like everything has converged in my ear, effortlessly. A pocket mainframe, with Bluetooth terminals and 3G WAN, is right where I want to be.
--
make install -not war
Works great, unless you work someplace where, let's say, cameras are forbidden.
Les Miserables Volume 1 now up with my reading of
What frustrates me is that nobody makes a phone you can CUSTOMIZE the features on, like when you order it.
You can do this with computers, why not phones? I'd be all over the company that let me pick the phone OS, form factor and goodies.
Hmm, so, dreamphone? SonyEricsson T637 sized, Symbian with MIDP2, GPS, full length touchscreen (no stylus pad, no buttons), 2MP cam, Bluetooth and WiFi enabled with a 4GB microdrive. Since it's a dream, 10 hours actual talk/use time. (Hey, Jack Bauer can get like 18 hours talk time, why not me!)
R(k)
I think they have the right idea but I also want a small form factor in my pocket and the lightest, non metal case available. I think other than a clunky interface and the metal case. the Motorola V60 was the best phone made. When mine broke I went with the V710 with its crippled bluetooth and crummy camera and bigger size and weight and hate it. I do like the iTAP text message interface though
http://www.aarp.org/international/agingadvances/un ivdesign/Articles/item803919288.html
Actually I find camera on my phone quite useful for quickly making images of notes or paper messages that I would have to copy by hand otherwise. I often use it in library saving time and money on making a xerocopy.
It is useless if you want to make some fine photos of course.
I was asking for this for awhile, but people seem to not be able to *just* make a new phone that lets me make calls without also trying to push cameras, IM, texting and other stuff. So now someone says they're responding to consumer demand, but put it in a prepaid only option. Why is this still so hard to get?
The other big issue with cell phones is that NO ONE will sell you a new phone at a decent price without signing multi-year contracts. Even for people like me who've been with the same company for years (7 with sprint), they treat you like dirt.
All major companies adopting the same anti-consumer behaviour seems to be acceptable, but it feels to me somewhat like collusion. Obviously I can't prove this, but I can easily imagine major companies all agreeing to push the same multi-year contract terms at people. If they all do it, there won't be anywhere for pissed off customers to go, except to prepaid, which is also a pricey proposition as far as I can tell.
argh!
creation science book
The people they are aiming this product at, the 50+, those still in work are pretty senior, their time is hideously expensive. In short if you break it down to like £40 handset, £40 "not having to shop around, be sure you are getting what you want first time, no wasting time learning a difficult user interface, peace of mind" it makes more sense I think. For younger people, sure, a day's effort is probably worth less than 40 quid to them, but as one gets older that situation reverses pretty swiftly.
From a marketing POV btw, thats the great thing about the "Grey Pound"; they'll pay for "service" as it surrounds the furnishing of physical products. They care about the experience a lot more than the base cost.
My old phone quit on me finally after almost two years (and after falling down a stair case while flipped open), and the only cheap solution comparable to my original ended up being a camera phone. First small problem I have with it is its bulkiness (granted the old phone was tiny), which is no doubt due to there being dual color screens and a camera. Second, I got a flip phone for a reason: flippy part covers all the buttons so none get pressed when phone is in pocket, saving me the hassle of turning on and off the keyguard every time I use it. Right? Nope, there's a camera button on the side of the phone that works when the phone is closed, so since I haven't bothered to delete them, the 20 or so photos stored on my phone are pictures of my pocket. (I'll admit I did take a few others, most to check out the functionality, and one of a tour bus of the bus line "Lamers."). Then, as you stated, "there seems to be a needless number of button clicks to do basic tasks" such that the keyguard is the 8th menu choice of the 9th menu option of the 10th menu. I'm sure it's not trying to hide there or anything.
It astounds me how many members of the Slashdot crowd (usually quick to jump on the new and more-featured) appreciate a simple phone.
Maybe some Slashdotters' lives are already too complicated. Maybe they already have dedicated PDAs and digital cameras. Maybe they only use their phones to order pizza from their moms' basements.
Complexity is not without costs. The extra, unused, features do interfere. Longer and deeper menus take more user time and effort to navigate. Also, the phones with more features are also the one's that are slower to respond, causing missed digits and navigation errors (e.g. I can enter the sequence to add a new phonebook # quickly and without looking, but sometimes my phones stalls, and then I end up in some different menu when I finally look down).
And as the code bloats, bugs are more likely to creep in (why the heck do I have to reboot my phone 2-3 times a month?!) and more hardware and battery power are required. In mechnical engineering, there's the idea that (everything else being equal) the better design is the one with fewer parts.
Hopefully it will have more features than version 1.
People who think that smaller=better (in electronics) really bug me.
Look at hand held microphones. As electronic components got smaller and smaller so did mics until many were silver sticks some the size of a pencil. It took years for many people to realize that we should design mics around the users hand, and not just make them as small as possible.
For some people current cell sizes are just right. But for the MAJORITY of people they have already gotten too small.
and isn't the V60 a flip phone? how is this like that?
Perhaps for them it makes sense to have bigger phone, and fill the extra space with batteries. Wouldn't it be great if it only needed charging every two weeks? A bigger phone is also easier to hold in between the shoulder and neck to allow brief handsfree use.
Nokia 9210. A bit of a brick but I always have the information I need with me. Plus I can plug it into a Sun box as a console should i need to.
Deleted
There are buttons along the side of the phone that cancel the call. You go and grab the phone to answer it and sometimes you cancel the call. Good phone otherwise.
God spoke to me.
Mass produce a phone with a vga screen, fold out extra keyboard (like nokia 6800 keys) and a proper operating system that can be configured.
The 'i want a simple phone' crowd can glue the extra key panel closed when they have disabled all the fancy schmancy gadgets to prolong battery life.
Old geezers can run big fonts.
Spotty kids in hoodies can add even more games, ringtones and crap.
Geeks can put Linux on it.
They whose government reduces their essential liberties for temporary security, receive neither liberty nor security.
The thing has a huge screen, menus, and text messaging; it is definitely not "just a phone".
"Just a phone" would have 12 keys (0-9, *, #), a one-line display, a call button, and a hang-up button. Well, maybe a mechanical switch to turn off the ringer.
Artists and architects talk about the concept of "negative space". An English professor of my acquaintance actually wrote a book (not yet published) with a subtitle of "Absences, gaps, and other sexy spaces".
Let me give you an example: my mom hates sunroofs/moonroofs on cars. I don't know why, but she does. When she bought a new car a few years ago, it worked out that there were two nearly identical models, one with the sunroof and one without for the same price. She chose the one without, because for her, not having a sunroof was a feature.
That's the point of this phone. The two phones I've had in the past three years both have features that clutter the interface. The feature I really want is fewer features. For that, I would be willing to pay a premium.
If it's not one thing it's your mother.
One useful function resulting from the camera-phone combo is fighting crime:
In Japan, an 18-year-old woman took a photo of a 38-year-old man who was fondling her on a commuter train, and police arrested him at the next stop. In Sweden, a convenience store owner took a picture of a robber that was used to help identify and arrest the criminal. - Crime & Cameras
You never know how useful an object is, until you need it in extraordinary situations.
A cellular morse communicator?
a wrist phone. !
they've discovered a way to create old technology! groundbreaking!
seriously though, there have always been cheap generic cellphones that don't have cameras or color screens. what's the big deal?
next we'll see an article on the frontpage announcing that kia is going to make cars without powerlock, powerwindow, or a CD player--because sometimes all you need is a car!
Why can't they make a phone that's 100% dust proof, basic functions and buttons big enough to be usable wearing work gloves. My phones usually gets stuffed with magnetic dust in the microphone and the speaker. Well it's nice that some of them are water and shock resistant. But when you can't clean the speaker cavity with compressed air they're not for me.
I got this one huge Ericsson R250pro. Rugged phone that you could rinse under water and open access to the speaker, unfortunately the speaker couldn't stand shocks (the permanent magnet slipped sideways locking the membrane coil). Ericsson wouldn't admit that they screwed that one up.
Since my current phone (S-E T310) has trouble sending to the cell tower, I might look into ear protectors with Bluetooth to go with my next one or go looking for a "shark fin".
I don't need camera since some of my customers have camera bans in place on their sites. Mp3? I've got a Ipod for that.
You can put a better user interface on a device with a high-quality color display. Many monochrome displays have poor contrast and are hard to read if your eyesight isn't good.
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
That's cool. I've been waiting for somebody to come up with a phone for fat people like myself.
That's not a minmalist phone at all. Throw away text messaging and that screen, have a single row display that just displays the number you're dialling . Oh, and junk the menu navigation key too. There's no menu needed, there's just one option and that's "dial". Now that's minimalist. Half the size, still has a nice big keypad, and probably has better battery life.
Once cellphones using a Microsoft OS become common and cellphone botnets start pumping out text message spam, you'll wish you had a phone like that...
I want a computer that does only one thing. Let's see, which one thing should that be.
*) Just edit text files
*) Just playback music
*) Just playback video
*) Just browse the web
*) Just edit music
*) Just edit videos
*) Just run a spreadsheet
*) Just view images
*) Just edit images
*) Just burn CDs
*) Just play games
*) Just allow me to program
*) Just run a database
*) Just do my bills
Why the _ would I want a comptuer that does just one thing? I wouldn't and neither do I want my phone to do only one thing, which actually happens to BE a computer far more powerful than my Apple 2 or Commodore 64 or probably even my Fat Mac or 8086 PC.
There's very little reason to believe that phones won't eventually replace computers for the majority of people. They'll figure out how to project a display in mid air or onto some sunglasses you can put on when you want to see a full display and they'll come up with a virutal projected keyboard or other input system.
I tried to help my 65+ year old father find a new phone recently. He doesn't care about technology, he just wants to make phone calls.
... I couldn't find a thing. We finally found him a used Kyocera 6035, which he loves.
He needs large, separated buttons and large fonts on the screen. He doesn't care about the size (up to a point).
I searched the web, the stores
Considering the number of older people in the US, Europe and Japan, I was amazed that all the phones were designed for someone in their 20s.
I've been using the Sanyo SCP-6200 and SCP-6400 since late 2002. I'm stuck with Sprint and they discontinued the models. This is the closest thing to what a basic phone *should* be like. The phone is teeny... With a good battery, I'd get reception EVERYWHERE. The battery life was good (initially...), but there aren't any quality replacement batteries available. I was forced to buy a new old-stock phone on eBay because Sprint's new offerings weren't any better. I've beat the new phone enough that it's time for replacement again.... I'm not sure what to do. I don't need a camera. I don't like flip-phones. I want something small. I don't even need a color screen. Are there any real options? I'd switch providers if I could find a good high-quality phone.
Edmund White
http://flickr.com/ewwhite
I have 4000 thin clients at hand. I'd like to turn them into telephones.
My idea is use Gnomemeeting with Cisco telephony equipment we use. Those devices, running Linux, would start Gnomemeeting at boot -- even without (or in spite of) an user being logged on.
My main two problems are:
a) convince telephony people to give me time from their ultra-busy workload, cause I really don't have the information to make a PC recognized as a VoIP phone branch;
b) the handset itself -- I thought about:
b.1) fitting a small microphone and mono headset in a normal handset and
b.2) patching Linux to use an extra keypad to dial numbers directly to Gnomemeeting.
There is "sound mini-jacks" to RJ-11 converters, which would make possible to use conventional telephones (very cheap!), but I don't know if they're available in my country; I don't know also whether they can use the phone's keys.
Any suggestion?
(I know this is almost an "Ask Slashdot" by itself...)
Voice dialing, too.
I'd like a phone with more voice-activated features and less (or no) screen stuff. Orange offered this using the Wildfire service for years, but they've recently shut down Wildfire and forced everyone back to dumb voicemail.
nuff said ;)
http://alternatives.rzero.com/
I want a phone that does what I want (talking to people in other cities) with least use of my time and money. Everything else is a waste of my life. Both the parent and TFA refer to dumbed-down modes. They aren't dumb, they are (or should be) inobtrusive, efficient, and worth a lot more than a camera with basic functionality bogged down with SMS, Top 10 ringtones, and a crappy digital camera. I would gladly pay double for a phone that does just what I want, and does it well. Well, double nothing ain't much, but you get the idea.
This is all I ask for - a tiny, lightweight phone with Bluetooth. I don't want a camera, no large color screen, email, etc - I just simply would like something I can stick in my pocket and forget about it, then just optionally use a bluetooth headset when making calls. I could even do without a keypad, and just use voice recognition or a scroll wheel for dialing. The Nokia 7280is the closest thing I've seen to what I'm looking for, but its waaay too expensive and has gadgets I don't want (FM tuner, camera). I bet there's a large market for this kind of phone.
If you own or know about another simple phone like this (but hopefully not as ugly), please post here in this thread the name and model!
I am sure I'm not the only one in the market for a new phone that's JUST A GOOD PHONE. P.S. If your phone has a small plastic lens built into it, don't even think about it.
a phone that let me store the last say 30 seconds of the conversatition... I.e I'm talking to someone while driving and they give me some information I need later, I could hit a button and the past say 30 seconds was stored semi-permanently so i could play it back once I'm in a position to take notes.
If you mod me down, I *will* introduce you to my sister!
The biggest feature I want is battery life. I require at least 5 hours talk time between charges and 7 days standby with a large keypad, I've got big fingers and always hit 2-3 buttons at same time. I also want a simple bright screen with large fonts and easy for tired eyes to read. High Contrast anyone? I do find multiple ring tones handy but I want something that only takes a single button to shut off the ringer and Oh yea. Make it water proof. I've dropped too many of em into pools.
I'm still not completely sure why it became so trendy to bash any phone with lots of "gadgets and gizmos" and long for the day where phones were just phones.
I realize that the gadgets on phones haven't yet been too the level of quality that stand alone gadgets have, but surely it isn't lost on the Slashdot masses that the time of high quality gadgets is coming?
I currently have a Nokia 3660, one of those "rediculous" gadget laden phones that contains features like an incredibly low quality video camera. But with my eyes open I've found that the mythological "convergence" of hand held gadgets is getting close.
Do I like to have photographs of fun and memorable events with my friends? Of course! But I loathe the idea of carrying around a digital camera with me everywhere I go. Sure they have very small digital cameras now, but the hassle is just... bleh. Instead the 3660 has a digital camera that will take 640x480 images of moderate quality. It's not ideal, but it definitely enough for a random shot at the (hopefully well lit) bar now and then.
The address book is full synced with the Address Book on my PowerBook, and I can even text search on my phone for contacts in the list (instead of having to go just by the first letter or something). I'm hit with an interface that allows me to sent text messages with great ease, because there are tons of ways to get to the same functionality, not unlike the interfaces I'm used to on my computer. (Send a text message from the contact list when you see the number you want to sent to, or from the inbox on a reply, or from a "new message" in the messaging application.)
The predictive text input is getting really nice, and even remembers all of the words I spell myself in a custom dictionary for future use. (Good when a person wants to use words like "shit","heh","blog" on a regular basis that aren't standard) My previous phone would predictive text, but never remember custom spellings.
Even that crappy video recorder has made for some hilarious 20 second video clips from parties and stuff. Real solid memories that I would have just lost if I would have had to run to my room to grab my digital camera.
A great example would be just last week when I was stranded at O'Hare for the night and wanted to get a little internet. There were no hot spots convienent, and I had just reinstalled with Tiger so I didn't have my ISP's regular dial up number handy. I fired up Agile Messenger, hopped on AIM/MSN/ICQ/Yahoo/Jabber, found a computer literate friend online immediately (a young cousin), and had him look up the dial up number for me. I've found the ability to run Agile Messenger to be vastly superior to the lame clients that come with phones and use provider proxies.
The point is, most of us geeks can see the value in having a cell phone, a PDA, a digital camera, and a music player. There are great products in each category that are certainly better than any "convergence" product. But I'm just not going to carry around a cell phone, a PDA, a digital camera, and a music player all at the same damn time, all the time.
My cell phone is with me all the freaking time anyway, and I love when the functionality of the other devices is worked into it.
I just can't wait until these "convergence" phones get really high quality on all fronts, instead of containing the shitty category-busting features that apparently the slashdot psyche is too cool for. The nice thing is I can see it coming down the pike now, and my phone (Nokia 3660) isn't that far off. Here's my wishlist:
* Better digital camera. (648x480 is nice, but not quite enough. Maybe 1024x768)
* A Flash! (I'll give up the battery, I don't care. Too many dark bars.)
* Better iCal support (Multiple calenders like in iCal, so using the phone as a first class calendering device is actually feasible.)
* an iPod built-in. (I realize that the interface for the iPod is really what makes it work, and this is a non-trivial request. But I be
I wonder how come every cell-phone article about more advanced phones raises a cry for simpler phones in part of the audience -- and the corresponding cheer when a simple phone is announced?
There are plenty of simple phones already: take a Nokia 1100 for instance, less than 60 Euros in Finland for just the phone, with up to 400 hours of stand-by time in battery. That's what my mother uses, but she doesn't read Slashdot.
The key to success is in simplicity without sacrificing features. Being a geek and a programmer, I want dual core Opteron performance in my phone with the same 400 hour battery or more! The current complexity in advanced phones in most cases is just a lack of design finesse, or in some cases a lack of CPU power.
http://bacademy.com/http://bacademy.com/
There was an article, years ago, where the inventer of the cell phone said that he was happy to see cell phones so widely used, but that there was too much money being poured into options and not into service. I wish more companies would take a stand, like this one, and concentrate on the quality of their service and not ring tones.
"Man, I am so unbelievably stupid."
it's HUGE. (comparatively) You would think without all the fluff, they could make it a little cleaner and smaller. I haven't upgraded from my Moto V66 yet 'cause I can't seem to find a new phone in a similar size. No, it isn't great or feature rich, but it's small and it rings.
I hate these little tiny cell phones with all the bells and gadgets.
I'm a purist - a phone should be a phone though I do appreciate some of the value of SMS. My current phone is a rather dated Audiovox unit that has one feature that I do like, voice dialing. But other than that the buttons are too damned small.
Give me a phone like my first one, a Motorola MicroTac. That was easy to use and did exactly what I wanted it to do.
I simply need to make calls, remember a few numbers and turn off the ringer occasionally.
I don't need email or games or photos or movies, but I would like one of those Swiss phones with a small pair of scissors and a toothpick.
I only want a couple of features in a mobile phone. It should act as a telephone, and also be a shoe. How is it that they had shoephones on TV in the 1960s, but I still can't buy one? Come to think of it, a Cone of Silence would also come in very handy when talking in busy places.
... and then they built the supercollider.
... and for me, that is the SonyEricsson SEM100 / T100 / T105:
e r=4000&template=pp1_loader&php=php1_10002&zone=pp& lm=pp1&pid=10002
... lacking "focus").
http://www.sonyericsson.com/spg.jsp?cc=gb&lc=en&v
It does exactly what it is supposed to do; it is robust, it is extremely light - if only it supported GSM on 1900 MHz and 850 MHz too... Price? 60 Euro at the moment.
I actually prefer this phone to my other phone, the hugely popular Nokia 6230 (which is not bad, just
The 1100 is cheap, small, reliable, nice-looking, easy to use - and an easy to replace, dirt cheap changeable cover protects the lcd display. Guess it's kinda old and low tech by now, but it's working really well, so no complains on the phone part of the phone.
The built-in games, however... Snake II is nothing special, and Space Impact must be the shittiest Moon Patrol wannabe ever. Tetris would have been much better. Still, a good phone.
Circumcision is child abuse.
Once this maneuver is performed, EVERYTHING is easier to see/read...not just your phone!
Plus, your health care most likely will pay for most of the cost!
Blar.
seems strange to pay more for a phone thats lacking less stuff.
Seems perfectly normal to me... :)
Just a little something to add to the rant list. I agree that from time to time I just want to have a plain old cellphone. Nothing fancy just the phone. I have a old Nokia 30something even after: PUK unlocking, it droping litterly 7 stories getting run over by a truck (twice) and kicked. not a scrach. none. It still worked. I droped my "better' treo 600 4 mabie five feet, shattered the antena. Suficed to say I use a Treo 270 cause it works, and when I need to be a "pro" a p900 . I still prefer the engineering on the old Treo. Yes when I use it for a web browser its battery life is miserable. If I don't I get 7 DAYS using it fairly heavily. The POS palm got mabie 9 HOURS, 10 if I turned it completely off.
Yeh, my old Nokia "bar" phone was the best cellphone I ever had. But they changed carriers at work and I had to go with them...
With a screen this large, they should just have just had a basic 10 key dialer, and single "other stuff" button. Press that, and it activates the display in touch-screen mode. Simple menus could walk you through accessing other PIM-like tools. Simplicity isn't about what's on the phone, but how easy or difficult it is to use.
A back to basics phone, which still makes my phone look bad :(
I like my Treo 650 (well, mostly). Granted alot of phones have things I don't care about. Like, mine has a camera. Now, I'd love a camera on my phone, but it's a VGA camera, and if it's not going to be a decent camera, I'd just as soon go without.
But, again, I like all my features. Of course I probably do have AADD. But having all my most used information and needs in one place is convenient. Shopping lists, calendar (that has alerts), contacts list with pretty much everything I need to know about the people, ability to connect to my PC or mac in case I forgot a file (great if you forgot to bring your homework etc), voice recognition dialing (as opposed to ordinary voice dialing which I hate), internet along with all its uses like email. I use alot of the features on my phone and very few of them do I use just for play. (I don't have any games on my phone actually, though I do have mp3s on the sd card.)
I don't need the phone to last days on a charge, as I have no problem plugging it in every night. I just want it to last 20 hours during heavy usage.
But I do see the minimilists point of view too. I don't care about cameras unless they're of reasonable quality, so I'd take my camera out for a price cut. And, I do think people are so obsessed with adding new things that they forget to improve what's already there. The primary feature of the phone is voice communication; if it can't do that well, it sucks.
I wish they'd improve bluetooth technology on phones (or use a different one perhaps). Bluetooth 2.0 is out and 1.2 has been out, yet still even high end phones come with 1.1. How about ditching the crappy camera and giving me bluetooth 2.0 since it's something that's actually useful (more bandwidth, better reception, AND better battery life)? It seems they're so feature conscious, they put in inferior versions of features, because they're essentially living beyond their means.
I'd rather have a good camera and good phone than a crappy camera/phone combination etc. But, I'd prefer to either of those a great camera/phone/etc combination, and I'd be willing to pay for it. To me, this is what's missing from cell phones these days. I also would be up for a bluetooth headset that is the phone with no other features.
I've yet to buy any cell-phone, but one that's actually creeping up on my good side is the N-Gage QD. Although it's still ridiculously bloated and overpriced, they're beginning to get it all more pared down. It's really the antithesis of what this company's trying to do. However...I like lots of features. This is all coming from a guy who browses the 'net and reads manga on his PSP, though.
Blah.
http://www.tu-ka-kansai.co.jp/lineup/tu-kaS.html
Here is a Kyocera phone that is really designed for simplicity. It is marketed at the senior citizen age group in Japan who are fed up with all the bells and whistles of most phones.
I need only 0-9 keys and one Phone/Hang-up button.
If I have that, I'll probably have a phone 50% of the size of the phone in the FA.
Slashdot: stuff for news, nerds that matter, matter for news, stuff that nerd
GSM is still something "alien" to you, right ?
Slashdot: stuff for news, nerds that matter, matter for news, stuff that nerd
in South Korea.
"Orthodoxy means not thinking--not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness." --Eric Blair
OMG, it's not just ME that wants a cell phone. And ONLY a cell phone? My personal cell phone died years ago -- and I never got another one -- went back to a pager which is _only_ ever contacted directly by computer systems. People can call and leave a message, if properly "alerted" then the computer will page me. Otherwise, you're talking on a VoIP line (of course :) with me or my voice mail.
:). The reason her phone hasn't been replaced (and only barely works while plugged in -- batteries are shot again)? Because it is one of those "old" (2000 I think) brick style Nextel phones with a two line display to make and receive calls with. Only calls. We both love it (when it works :) and have been looking for a good replacement with great disappointment.
... and I just don't get it. I *HATE* all these new cell phones. For years I've been looking for a simple CELL PHONE to make and receive calls.
:). A solid 3 watts of power and a 1 pound battery that would last for days. I could use that thing in the middle of nowhere (fishing) and it would always "just work".
... "can you hear me now?"
Spinning a dial and pushing a couple of buttons (typically just forward) on the iPod while driving is enough. Actually, I find that I'm MUCH happier with the tunes cranked to deal with traffic and not trying to deal with the traffic and whatever headache may be calling me now.
I also can't count the times I've almost been in an accident due some cellular talking driver, but I digress.
My wife's cell phone has been dying a loooong sloooow death for years now. Still active unlike my ditched brain cancer machine (our "family" cell phone -- I never use it
Both our parents all have camera type phones with games and address books with messaging that nobody understands or really uses. Ok, I'm in my mid 30's and Mr. Tech geeky (it's my living) to boot
To this day I still miss my old "bag phone". A REAL handset which felt like a real phone, had nice normal big sized buttons, and had the most crisp calls I ever do remember wirelessly (barring my wireless Internet VoIP connection
Hey, Verizon
mod: redundant
"it's lame to be proud of being lame." - Bart Simpson, 3F07
Grow the fuck up. What is it with not beeing able to grok cell phones? Is it a gene defect responsible for not understanding? Why are there amoebas on Saturn that understands cell phones better than you?
Cellphones are for communicating; camera,txting,contact lists and other crucial elements are terrific.
,games, millions of colors and fonts (WTF) etc.
...farm, where they are crossing phones, TV, camcorders, Mac and a dodge;=)
But things turn terrible when you throw in the `extras` including but not limited to databases, wordprocessing, FM/XM radio, TV
What matters most is,
1. MX Functionality.
2. MX Reliability.
3. MX Aesthetics.
I heard theres a firm somewhere....sorry
How about nice large high contrast letters and numbers for those of us with less than perfect vision. Maybe more of us would use advanced features if we could read the displays and keys.
For some reason hardware people seem to think that grey letters on a grey background make thier products look l337. But if you've ever watched someone squinting at their handset, you know they don't look very l337.
Don't relegate simplicity to a senior citizen issue. I'm young and hate every cell phone I've ever used. I don't have the time or patience to wade through a million menus with features I don't want and will never use. I would love to use a cell phone that is only a phone.
That's what I use and oh boy it's really good.
... it's not braodband speed, but I can ssh and vnc to my servers. And of course email, web, IM. No I'm not replying from my treo, but it happened before. ...) it can go up to 10 days. Honestly I plug it every 2-3 days.
The coverage and sound quality is MUCH better than my old Samsung c225.
Man this was the worst phone ever. Bad bad bad coverage, and after a year the phone decided to call on it's own. Even if sitting on a table it would call people at random.
I use treo 650 to check my email, even more often than with my laptop. I can do yahoo maps and check the traffic.
1 - yes 650 is quite comfortable, maybe a bit bulky for a phone, but small if you look at most other smart phones.
2 - no problem there, only using one hand most of the time.
3 - there is a switch on top of the treo for silent/vibrate mode, great great feature.
4 - speakerphone mode works just fine, I'm using it while I drive if I don't have the headset on.
5 - I have unlimited internet access
6 - PalmOS it's still a reference as a simple interface for mobile computing.
7 - Depending on what you enable/disable (blue tooth, email syncing,
8 - not sure what you mean, but the 650 is good looking
9 - quad band GSM, works in ANY country in the world, as far as I know
10 - I use iSync on my powerbook, no problem
11 - palmOne customer service is really good
12 - Ok it's not really working here as the unlocked GSM version is $700, but you can get it for about $300 with a plan (I think).
I have to say as a phone the Treo 650 is great, and as a bonus it's a (low quality, but good for a phone) digital camera, and a PDA. It can record and play video, music. I too think it does it poorly, but sometimes you don't need quality, just something available. I don't carry my canon SD-300 with me all the time, and I only listen to music on iTunes (mp3 radios).
I see that they're introducing a mobile phone in Britain that lets you watch tv, ferchrissakes.
They don't mention whether it comes with a Fresnel lens to magnify it so that you can SEE ANYTHING. Hell, mine lets me browse the Web. WHY WOULD I WANT TO? I couldn't *read* anything, on a screen 1.5"x2".
But then, having worked for Ameritech, let me assure that they literally have a department with dozens of people coming up with calling plans, so I don't imagine that part of the marketing department is any different.
Give me a plain voice phone that *works*, without the idiot bells and whistles sold to the teenage kids....
mark