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.
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.
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....)
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!
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.
--
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.
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.
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.
Who came up with combining a camera with a phone? The phone companies, that's who.
How can you flog your next "money spinner" product (MMS) if no one has either a.) a camera on their phone to take pics, or b.) a phone which is capable of receiving the pics.
The next step will see full video capabilities built in as standard in all phones (unlike just the top of the range ones at the moment) for the 3G money making.
All these gimmicks are in there because without them the phone companies would have no way of making more money. It is all as simple as that - and it is backed up by the fact that the phone companies make significant losses on these camera phones by subsidising them in the hope that they make it all back (and then some) by people sending thousands of MMS at 30p a shot or whatever it is.
So far the consumer is having the last laugh as MMS hasn't really taken off in any significant way, and so the phone companies are significantly out of pocket, but they are still hoping that they will soon reach a 'critical mass' and suddenly MMS will explode.
The bare fact is MMS is shit, expensive (when compared to SMS) and useless at anything other than having a laugh with your friends. SMS is so successful because it allows very effective, cheap, efficient communication - MMS is completely ineffective because you can communicate virtually nothing with a picture - does email work by us sending each other pictures? The media boys should go back to the drawing board and come up with genuinely useful products rather than trying to sell the consumers something which is virtually useless.
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.
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.
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 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.
Sometimes a phone is just a phone.
And we like it that way.
I'm not gonna argue with you. If that's what you really want, more power to you. But does this count? If all you want is a simple phone, why on earth does it need an oversized display? Why will you need to send "the odd text message"?
I think the real truth is that most people really do want more than "just a phone" but they're having a hard time understanding the phone they have or they're having a hard time understanding why it cost so much. This is not so much "just a phone" as it is a simpler and cheaper alternative... which, of course, have been available from just about every provider on earth for free for years.
Go to the web sites of Verizon, Cingular and Sprint. You'll see very simple phones available for free with a contract.
Go to Wal-mart. You'll see several variety of simple, no frills pay-as-you-go phones for about $50.
Why are people arguing that they want something simple? It's a non-argument because they're available all over the place. If what you really want is to just make phone calls, buy any phone, press the numbers for the friend you want to call and hit send. Neary every cell phone on the market will then proceed to place your call. What could be simpler than that? If, however, the real truth is that you really want all the other features, but they're too complicated to make efficient use of, then please complain about that instead. You're far more likely to get what you want if you complain about the right thing.
TW
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 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
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.
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.
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
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.
Well, no offence taken here, (even though you put my "reasons" in quote marks), but just to show you that I'm not as daft as you think I am: excess friperies can interfere with the primary functions - ignoring the less responsive interface that comes with feature creep (e.g. anti-aliased fonts, for Bob's sake), things like colour screens can indeed reduce battery life.
Regarding the cost issues, for one, I use pay as you go here in the UK as I did some quite extensive calculations in a spreadsheet to work out what was the best deal for my usage. Consequently, I bought my phone outright instead of getting it "free" with a package. This does indeed make the difference between phones noticable. Personally I would like to see phones getting cheaper and more reliable rather than more gimicks.
More than anything, I just get angry when choice is taken away from me. I can just about still find a basic phone but it's getting harder. You can't get them in the phone shops around here. I don't like the fashion side of the mobile phone industry. To me it's quite offensive when I see an Ad. over here that shows people slinking away in shame because they have an older model. I realize that this has now gone beyond the scope of what you were saying, but that's okay - this last paragraph is a general rant, not a reply to you.
-H.
Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
of course a qwerty keyboard is better for interacting with a shell, but T9 is better than nothing at all!
Do you reckon this is just a really good bit of marketing by Vodaphone? Ignoring the fact there are already several phones on the market which fit basically the same crtieria.
Mention the Lord of the Rings one more time and I'll more than likely kill you.