Slashdot Mirror


First Picture of new Motorola iTunes Phone?

swissfondue writes "macprime.ch. is reporting a link to a pdf presentation by Motorola's North Asia manager Michael Tatelman, VP and GM Mobile devices, made on 21 June 2005 to analysts of Morgan Stanley in Beijing. Page 15 of the presentation shows a picture of a yet unknown Motorola phone playing iTunes visualizer, with the usual Apple logo. The silhouette of the phone is not in RAZR style, but in PEBL. It seems to also be featuring a scroll wheel."

264 comments

  1. So... by ch-chuck · · Score: 5, Funny

    if you get put on hold you can listen to your own music instead of theirs?

    --
    try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
    1. Re:So... by eclectro · · Score: 1

      if you get put on hold you can listen to your own music instead of theirs?

      Damn. I'm gonna patent that.

      --
      Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
    2. Re:So... by GauteL · · Score: 1

      It is mostly moderated funny, but it is actually a very interesting feature idea. I would love it if I could avoid the horrible pan pipe music normally infesting my ears when calling any big company.

    3. Re:So... by PierceLabs · · Score: 1

      Trademark it. You'd waste 5K trying to patent it :)

  2. Re:Public Danger... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I dont mind people talking and listening to music while driving. I just wish I could watch TV... or maybe it would be better to read /. while driving. Yes insurance indeed.

  3. Kind of ugly IMO by alvinrod · · Score: 4, Insightful
    That doesn't really look like any kind of phone that I'd want to be carrying around.

    Perhaps this is Apple's answer to people saying cell phones are poised to serve as MP3 players and music downloading devices. Since Apple isn't in the mobile phone business, this might be a way to get their brand name out there even more and to keep some of their market dominance.

    1. Re:Kind of ugly IMO by Adrilla · · Score: 1

      The design is decent, but the color is ass ugly, maybe they'll come out in a variety of colors or skins. I doubt that black and green is the first choice of many customers. Motorola and especially Apple should know that. Which is why I think that wont be the only color available.

      --

      "Plans are for fools! Oglethorpe, the plutonian (Aqua Teen Hunger Force)
    2. Re:Kind of ugly IMO by alex_guy_CA · · Score: 1

      I think it's ugly too. looks more like a mouse than a phone.

    3. Re:Kind of ugly IMO by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      A one button phone?

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  4. An iTunes phone would be great... by Unloaded · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...but the carriers won't sell it because they all want the content piece of the revenue stream. They're convinced that they can get you to buy into a plan that has you downloading songs from their service, while they charge you airtime for browsing and downloading, on top of the price per song.

    No thanks.

    1. Re:An iTunes phone would be great... by garcia · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They're convinced that they can get you to buy into a plan that has you downloading songs from their service, while they charge you airtime for browsing and downloading, on top of the price per song.

      They're convinced because people do it. Ringtones, applications, and stupid games for mobile phones is a billion+ dollar a year industry.

      For 30 second ringtones with crappy quality, T-mobile gets to charge $1.25+ each and people buy into it!

      I'll be more worried when they realize that they could make even more money by charging you to put your phone on buzz.

    2. Re:An iTunes phone would be great... by eclectro · · Score: 1

      Agreed. I think this thing is primarily for kids who get bored easy and want to be entertained by their phone. While their parents probably foot the bill.

      --
      Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
    3. Re:An iTunes phone would be great... by DaHat · · Score: 2, Informative

      And Verizon locks out your memory card (ala V710), preventing you from transferring custom ringtones from your PC to encourage you to send them via their network as an attachment... gaining them 25 cents a pop.

    4. Re:An iTunes phone would be great... by BewireNomali · · Score: 1

      that's exactly it. IIRC, telecom companies has been resistant to the idea of an itunes phone because they get cut out of the revenue stream. Additional surcharges diminish the appeal of itunes, so hence the impasse.

      Ringtones are a market in which the telecoms are making a killing. I think the worldwide market for ringtones was valued at around 4 billion. They also sell ringtones for 3 bucks, whereas you can get an entire song for a dollar with apple. so there are some issues about cannibalizing revenue streams when dealing with itunes. less apparent is the upside. Since telecoms subsidize units for usage contracts, a best selling unit won't necessarily translate to the bottom line.

      Also, I'd be interested in buying a song i heard at a concert or show with my phone and bluetoothing it to my ipod on the fly.

      --
      un burrito me trampeó.
    5. Re:An iTunes phone would be great... by Panaphonix · · Score: 2, Informative
    6. Re:An iTunes phone would be great... by SocietyoftheFist · · Score: 1

      The companies already do charge you for putting your phone on buzz, it is built in to the cost. Different feature sets have different costs. I've purchased 2 rintones, and found them both worth the total $4.00 I paid. That is chump change for me but you get a 100+ million to want to customize their ringer and you have a nice little chunk of change. My car/home insurance company just added a $1/month fee for direct deposit. I doubt they are being charged a $1/month more, but it is something I can overlook and they get an extra $1*number_of_direct_deposit_subscribers boost. I'm more annoyed by the "fee" for my insurance but it is so small I won't bother to switch to mail in payments.

    7. Re:An iTunes phone would be great... by MouseR · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Anyone who purchases a song via a phone, given carrier restrictions & fees, ought to be aligned against a wall ans slapped (or microwaved).

      But the point of this phone is to merge your phone and music device in one. As a die-hard Mac fan as I can be, I still dont own an iPod because I feel the product lacks features. I mean, it's a portable drive that plays music. Oh wait, you can *view* contacts and limited calendar entries, buut that's it. My phone does all that, better, minus the music playback and disk mode.

      Given this "iPhone" can sync with a Mac (and a peesea) and work in disk mode, I have an iPod Shuffle -class player PLUS color screen and the full gadgetry of a typical cell phone.

      presumably (given the latest release), synching will be handled through iTunes ratter than iSync, wich makes some sense given iTines is available on both Macs and peeseas.

      Show me this iPhone thing and I'm an instant buyer (and will have a phone to sell), regardless of who makes it.

    8. Re:An iTunes phone would be great... by dwbryson · · Score: 1


      They're convinced because people do it. Ringtones, applications, and stupid games for mobile phones is a billion+ dollar a year industry.

      For 30 second ringtones with crappy quality, T-mobile gets to charge $1.25+ each and people buy into it!


      *stands up*
      Yeah that's me, I admit it I paid $2.00 for a stupid ringtone. Mostly because it's hilarious when my phone starts playing ACDC's Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap and I explain that it's my girlfriends ringtone.

      --
      - "Never let a computer tell me shit." - DelTron Zero
    9. Re:An iTunes phone would be great... by bkr1_2k · · Score: 1

      "I'll be more worried when they realize that they could make even more money by charging you to put your phone on buzz."

      Just out of curiousity, how would they do that, as that's generally a feature of the hardware, not the service.

      --
      "Growing old is inevitable; growing up is optional."
    10. Re:An iTunes phone would be great... by bonehead · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Simple, they have the hardware manufacturer include a "feature" to notify the network whenever vibrate mode is enabled, then bill you accordingly.

      Considering the degree to which the carriers have managed to get Bluetooth (a hardware feature) crippled, it's not too much of a stretch to imagine them getting the manufacturers to add this functionality to the hardware.

    11. Re:An iTunes phone would be great... by Overzeetop · · Score: 2, Insightful

      My Motorola 810 has the ability to synch with my computer via software from Motorola. Alsthough certain models allow the trasnfer of multimedeia, it is a disabled function on the v810. Why? According to Motorola, the vendor (US Cellular) requested that the data be unavailable so that all photos taken and any multimedeia apps be transferred through their EasyEdge(tm) service.

      I have a camera phone which can take pictures, but which cannot send them anywhere to be viewed/transferred/printed without a $0.25/image fee, in addition to the $5.95 per month EasyEdge service fee. All because US Cellular is greedy.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    12. Re:An iTunes phone would be great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wow, who cares? most people wouldn't recognize the song anyway, so you just get lumped in with the people that have annoying ringtones. what a waste of money.

    13. Re:An iTunes phone would be great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While I have a similar ringtone for a similar reason (beyonce, naughty girl) I sure as hell didn't pay for it. I made the ringtone myself using the qualcom tools and uploaded it via the data cable that I got off ebay for $6 bucks. It doesn't work with every phone of course, but bitpim is your friend if you have a CDMA phone. Oh, and this is directly modifying the phones filesystem so it could break your phone irreversibly, but I'd still rather take that chance than pay what the carriers want for them.

  5. Famous sayings? by nharmon · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "I will never combine an iPod with a cell phone" - Steve Jobs.

    "There will never be unions in my plants" - Henry Ford.

    1. Re:Famous sayings? by generic-man · · Score: 1

      "Nobody buys flash MP3 players; everyone who has one just puts it in a drawer and never uses it" - Steve Jobs (paraphrased), upon launching the iPod mini

      --
      For more information, click here.
    2. Re:Famous sayings? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nooooobody expected a Spanish Inquisition!

    3. Re:Famous sayings? by fanblade · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, technically he's got a way out. This isn't an iPod. It's a cell phone that sports a mobile version of iTunes (iPods don't run iTunes).

    4. Re:Famous sayings? by KillerDeathRobot · · Score: 1

      If Jobs said that, he hasn't been proven wrong really. I'm sure he'd just say "... until we released the iPod branded flash MP3 players."

      --
      Thinkin' Lincoln - a web comic of presidential proportions
    5. Re:Famous sayings? by Reverberant · · Score: 2

      When did Jobs say that? Link?

    6. Re:Famous sayings? by generic-man · · Score: 1

      Right. He was trying to claim that Apple wouldn't make a flash player because nobody ever likes flash players. Remember how the $250 iPod mini was supposed to steal the $100 flash player market?

      The iPod Shuffle, meanwhile, is the same player feature-for-feature as the Creative MuVo that was released three years ago. It's just riding the coattails of the iPod brand.

      --
      For more information, click here.
    7. Re:Famous sayings? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, I think he proved himself right: they sold a bunch of shuffles and no one wears them anymore. Flash players are a fad, but I see tons of disk-based iPods around.

    8. Re:Famous sayings? by Captain+Nitpick · · Score: 1
      "I will never combine an iPod with a cell phone" - Steve Jobs.

      Looks like the story says "Motorola" to me.

      --
      But then again, I could be wrong.
    9. Re:Famous sayings? by stewby18 · · Score: 1

      The iPod Shuffle, meanwhile, is the same player feature-for-feature as the Creative MuVo that was released three years ago.

      Really? Including great software for managing playlists and seamless integration with the largest online music store? iPods are about more than just the hardware; many users like having an end-to-end experience.

    10. Re:Famous sayings? by EvilFrog · · Score: 1

      Yeah, what really makes the Shuffle better than the competitors doesn't have anything to do with the iPod brand or the Shuffle itself- it's the autofill feature built into iTunes. Without that feature it would be worthless even if it did have a screen.

    11. Re:Famous sayings? by TimTheFoolMan · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't know... mine rests underneath my shirtsleeve on my armband, and I'm able to easily switch tracks, pause, and adjust volume without even thinking about it. The variation of the scroll wheel is *very* simple to use.

      In contrast, I see people all over the gym dorking around with other players, and not just so they can try to read the tiny displays.

      Tim

  6. Microsoft's Prediction... by LegendOfLink · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Didn't Bill Gates predict the fall of the iPod with an MP3-enabled phone?

    Looks like Apple is going to beat them to the punch once again.

    1. Re:Microsoft's Prediction... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You did know that Steve Jobs got up on stage and announced an iTunes enabled phone was coming from Motorola over a year ago right?

    2. Re:Microsoft's Prediction... by jacksonj04 · · Score: 1

      My phone played MP3s well before I got my iPod, and I still carry both.

      --
      How many people can read hex if only you and dead people can read hex?
    3. Re:Microsoft's Prediction... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, because Apple only allows music you buy from iTMS to play on your iPod or your computer, but not both...ass...

    4. Re:Microsoft's Prediction... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Grandparent was commenting on the fact that Apple likes to control the music you have, and doesn't let you do everything with it. Of course, Apple can do no wrong, Mr. Zealot, so I guess that means you win.

  7. Engadget by Chess_the_cat · · Score: 5, Informative

    Engadget reported the same thing yesterday with a pic and it's even in English.

    --
    Support the First Amendment. Read at -1
    1. Re:Engadget by Adrilla · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but half the fun of pages that aren't english is seeing what crap you end up with when you run it through "the fish"

      --

      "Plans are for fools! Oglethorpe, the plutonian (Aqua Teen Hunger Force)
  8. Talk about a stretch.... by Evangelion · · Score: 0, Flamebait


    That's a shitty looking phone that someone cut and pasted a screenshot onto in photoshop for a corporate presentation.

    It's scary that this is all it takes to get a mac rumour going.

    1. Re:Talk about a stretch.... by Concerned+Onlooker · · Score: 2, Insightful
      It's scary that this is all it takes to get a mac rumour going.

      Maybe. But perhaps it's just sad that Microsoft users don't get nearly as excited by the latest offerings from Redmond. Apple delivers cool stuff and people get excited about that.

      --
      http://www.rootstrikers.org/
  9. Re:Public Danger... by daniil · · Score: 3, Funny
    --
    Man is a slave because freedom is difficult, whereas slavery is easy.
  10. No Games by ChrisDKK · · Score: 0

    Wait, how do I dial a phone that only has one butan?

    1. Re:No Games by savagedome · · Score: 4, Funny

      >> Wait, how do I dial a phone that only has one butan?

      Don't worry. It's a special Apple BUTAN. All you have to do is to hold down the button and think of the person you are dialing. The BUTAN does it for you. All bow to the BUTAN!

    2. Re:No Games by Iriel · · Score: 2, Funny

      But Motorola will making the phone, won't that make it a BUTN?

      --
      Perfecting Discordia
      www.stevenvansickle.com
    3. Re:No Games by Adrilla · · Score: 1

      You have to look closely, there's a button grid and menu buttons surrounding and above the click wheel, there's just no printing on it. Very camouflaged.

      --

      "Plans are for fools! Oglethorpe, the plutonian (Aqua Teen Hunger Force)
    4. Re:No Games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, the phone functions normally until you put it into ipod mode. Then, the "wheel" lights up behind the keypad and works just like the wheel on an ipod.

    5. Re:No Games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think what he meant to say was: How can we live in a world with only one bhutan. It's a question I've frequently asked myself. Geez, next time pay more attention, will you?

    6. Re:No Games by Jackmon · · Score: 2, Funny

      >> Wait, how do I dial a phone that only has one butan?

      Hmmm... if only there were a way for a phone to choose a number using only a dial.

  11. Yeah, but you'll need... by Yjam · · Score: 1, Funny

    at least 3 truck bateries by your side.

    Or you'll just be able to phone 2 minutes and listen to 1 mp3 :)

    1. Re:Yeah, but you'll need... by eclectro · · Score: 1

      at least 3 truck bateries by your side.

      Or an extension cord. Apple will give it funky colors.

      It'll sell.

      --
      Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
  12. Pricing... by Arthur+B. · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I thought they did not want to do that because full songs are currently charged $1 on itune and shitty excerpts are currently being charged >$3 on cell phones...

    --
    \u262D = \u5350
  13. Also on AppleInsider by deepstephen · · Score: 2, Informative

    It's also on AppleInsider.

    --

    --
    Karma: Chameleon (you come and go)
  14. A scroll wheel? by mcc · · Score: 4, Funny

    So... in other words it's... a rotary phone?

    :O

    1. Re:A scroll wheel? by mrchaotica · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Hey, don't knock it -- that might actually work better, since a lot of calls are made by scrolling through an address book instead of punching in numbers.

      Plus, it'd be cool. : D

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    2. Re:A scroll wheel? by daviddennis · · Score: 1

      Actually, I guess it is.

      It has no numeric pad so no number buttons. So I guess you have to use the scroll wheel to dial, which I think might be a bit of a mistake.

      Why are designers so allergic to making these things larger, anyway? I like my phone big enough so it's harder to lose than the micro-phones we have nowadays.

      D

    3. Re:A scroll wheel? by Khuffie · · Score: 1

      the sony ericsson p910 has a scroll wheel. pretty darn nifty.

    4. Re:A scroll wheel? by takotech · · Score: 3, Informative

      http://www.nokia.com/nokia/0,,62356,00.html

      Sorry about the flash. This phone has no digits, only a scroll wheel. $600.

    5. Re:A scroll wheel? by xpherion · · Score: 1

      This is not a new news. I don't understand why people posting old news here.

    6. Re:A scroll wheel? by Durf · · Score: 1

      Mine already is. Sort of. That dial is quite handy for scrolling through phone numbers or email . . . or for playing Arkanoid.

  15. Geek Candy Bars by DanielMarkham · · Score: 2, Interesting

    In the middle of the presentation there's a slide titled "Changing the Game in Candy Bars" with some cool phones in the background.
    These are some really hot products. I wish I had these guys on-board last time I did a demo to a client! But I wonder if cell phones are the new candy bars for geeks?
    Candy bars, I would guess, are a fairly stable commodity. A Mars bar last year is going to be the same as this year. Eye candy, sure, but not candy bars.
    Will all that consumer production value, it makes you wonder how much these companies actually pay product designers to keep new stuff churning out. There's got to be a lot of money in that business. Everybody's getting into it.

    Love Boat Meets Santa's Workshop?

    1. Re:Geek Candy Bars by Otter · · Score: 4, Informative

      "Candy bar" refers to a non-folding phone design.

    2. Re:Geek Candy Bars by AKAImBatman · · Score: 0

      In the middle of the presentation there's a slide titled "Changing the Game in Candy Bars" with some cool phones in the background. [...]
      Candy bars, I would guess, are a fairly stable commodity. A Mars bar last year is going to be the same as this year. Eye candy, sure, but not candy bars.


      That has got to be one of the dumbest attempts at setting marketting goals that I have ever heard. Candy Bars are consumables. You buy it, eat it, then you don't have it any more. You don't eat your cellphone. (Unless that's what they're trying to fix. ;-)) A cell phone is a device with an expected lifespan, value, and deprecation schedule. There's no way you can compare the two.

      BTW, I love all the "Wow!"s and "Whoa!"s in the background. It just further emphasizes how little content is actually in this presentation. ;-)

    3. Re:Geek Candy Bars by radish · · Score: 3, Informative

      "Candy Bar" is the term used in the industry for phones which don't fold or bend or twist or anything else, like most Nokias.

      --

      ---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"

    4. Re:Geek Candy Bars by c4miles · · Score: 1

      Candy Bar is a form factor. The other major form factor is Clamshell. A candy bar phone (like the nokia 6600) is one that has the screen and keypad on one side, and is about the same size as a candy bar.

    5. Re:Geek Candy Bars by AKAImBatman · · Score: 1

      Now you tell me. ;-)

      Surprisingly, there's only one flip phone I've ever wanted to get. It was this Nokia model that was like a "Candy Bar" phone on the outside, but would flip open to reveal a full keyboard and joystick. Plus it had a built in FM radio (although it was really the keyboard that had me interested). Unfortunately, I need a tri-mode phone because of the areas I travel through, so the phone I *really* wanted wasn't an option. :-(

      Ah, here it is.

    6. Re:Geek Candy Bars by DigitalVolume · · Score: 1

      Realistically speaking a presentation shouldn't have a lot of content on the slides. A presentation should accentuate what you're talking about by listing the major talking points. By placing entire paragraphs on a slide, or crowding one slide with too much information, you're dooming your audience to boredom by signaling their brains to turn off. Nobody wants to read that much, especially while someone is on 'the stage' speaking. Steve Jobs' presentations always go over well because he knows how to make a good presentation. Little visual content, only there to accentuate what he is going to say. He keeps the flow steady, and pauses at the right time, like a radio announcer would, or a good comedian. Not to mention, he almost always has something good to say, and somehting up his sleeve.

      --
      Chris Giddings President, Ripple LLC
    7. Re:Geek Candy Bars by Kiryat+Malachi · · Score: 1

      Motorola A630. Quad-band, though if you need analog, you're still out of luck. No joystick, but a full keyboard, currently available through T-Mobile.

      (Technically the A630 and that Nokia are still considered to be candy bars, not flips.)

      --

      ---
      Mod me down, you fucking twits. Go ahead. I dare you.
      (I read with sigs off.)
  16. Looks real but... by RavenChild · · Score: 2, Insightful

    All it might be is a phone with a circle drawn and a vis from iTunes slapped onto the screen. Also notice the placement on the keypad, it lacks numbers and also the placement of the wheel might hinder the use of the keys.

    1. Re:Looks real but... by squiggleslash · · Score: 1
      While it doesn't look it at first, it's not impossible this is some kind of long flip phone (the shape, well, width to length ratio, isn't that far off my closed T720), with the keys on the inside. That would explain the apparent thickness.

      Or it could be that you dial using the scrollwheel. Goodness help us if that's the case, as I've used iPod Linux before which has a similar scheme, and it's horrible.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    2. Re:Looks real but... by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Actually it looks to me like it does have number buttons; they're just unlabeled. If you look closely you can see the seams between them. Oddly, it looks like the green scroll wheel-like thingy is superimposed on them (works for photoshop; not sure how they would do that in real life).

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    3. Re:Looks real but... by squiggleslash · · Score: 1
      Actually looking at the close up, it is a flip phone, the top edge is clearly hinged in the enlarged portion below it.

      Suddenly makes sense to me.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    4. Re:Looks real but... by pizen · · Score: 1

      Or it could be that you dial using the scrollwheel. Goodness help us if that's the case, as I've used iPod Linux before which has a similar scheme, and it's horrible.

      My grandmother has a phone that you dial using a scrollwheel and I actually kinda like using it.

    5. Re:Looks real but... by varmittang · · Score: 1

      The red phone that is in the same picture frame as the iTunes phone is not the same phone. The flip phone in the frame with the iTunes phone is the one that is down at the bottom. So there is no flipping on the iTunes phone. I do notice a switch in the bottom left, which might be a switch between being iTunes and phone. Flipping it turns off the colored green area, and the numbers light up. The whole thing might be touch sensitive too. http://img172.echo.cx/img172/338/phone17vd.jpg

      --
      -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
      12345
      -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
    6. Re:Looks real but... by squiggleslash · · Score: 1
      It's not the same phone but it is part of the same family. (Ok, I should mention that someone's suggested fairly convincing evidence it's a fake, so I feel silly continuing here, but, in the name of science, or at least stupidity, let me do so.) Motorola appears to be using the document to suggest they're building out three "new" families of phone: RAZR, PEBL, and SLVR. The first RAZR phone has been released, the V3. Motorola has announced a PEBL V6. Without commentary, it's not certain what the presenter/hoaxer was saying for definite, but one assumes they're saying the iTunes phone is a PEBL model.

      If (and it's a big if) the iTunes phone is in the PEBL family, then it's a flip phone. The only reason it'd be on the slide by the other PEBL phones is if this is the case. So, in the world of the presentation, that's what we're looking at.

      Whether the presentation is, in fact, real, is another debate.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    7. Re:Looks real but... by RavenChild · · Score: 1


      on the keypad, it lacks numbers

      If you had read, I said nothing about a lack of "buttons" but a lack of numbers. The whole reason I mentioned that was to bring about the keys existing but not being numbered.

  17. This babelfish translation sums it up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The configurations and remaining data of the mobile phone only this picture and no data are just as unclear are present there."

  18. Design language focused to win? Yeah, baby! by QuatermassX · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Just thinking of running my fingers around that 'continuous radii' gets my intellectual juices flowing! Actually, it's the same shape as Apple's optical mouse ... curious ...

    The whole thing looks a bit so-so to me. Did St. Ive have a hand in the product design?

    "Purity with a purpose - and profits" Hell, yes! I don't see why a mobile run off of an iTunes-like interface that sports similar controls shouldn't work brilliantly ... but the devil is in the deets ... it's the software/hardware integration that will sell me on the device more than the swish swoop of the product itself.

  19. What happened to basic phones? by strongmace · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I know I, my family, and many of my friends, do not need these super tricked out phones. We do not need games, dozens of ringtones, video playback, cameras, or mp3 players in our phones.

    All we need is a very basic phone, that has a phone book, maybe voice activated dialing, and voicemail.

    It is getting pretty difficult to find basic cell phones as it is. All the vendors try to press all these phones with extra features that I will never use. Damnit, I dont need my phone to be able to play mp3s. /me grumbles

    --
    "If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominos will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate." -Zapp Brannigan
    1. Re:What happened to basic phones? by snorklewacker · · Score: 1

      Speaking of voice dialing, I'd like voice dialing that let you navigate through phonebooks and let you speak numbers, which are pretty hard for most VRU's to actually get wrong (9 and 5 if things are noisy, but that's it). Something like:

      Me: "Call Fred"

      Phone: "Did you mean ``Call Ted Smith'' (press or say 1), ``Call Fred Jones'' (press or say 2), ``Call Jeb Bush'' (press or say 3) ...'

      Me: "two"

      Phone: Calling Fred Jones...

      Add the ability to go to manual dial as well. Mostly I'm thinking this would be useful from a bluetooth headset, from which I can never get voice dial to actually work.

      Of course adding this feature will probably add another 20 seconds to my phone's boot time. God I hate having to wait for my phone to boot (it's symbian). I actually miss my old phone that was relatively feature free, but was ready from off to talk in three seconds.

      --
      I am no longer wasting my time with slashdot
    2. Re:What happened to basic phones? by mlk · · Score: 2, Informative

      This comes up on every bloody time. Why? So you don't want it, I like my VNC client and pictures of my 'ickle sis.

      Most phone makers to a "basic" phone (i've no idea how you think of Voice dialing as basic? and voice mail is normally done "serverside").

      However as every monthly offer normally throws in a free phone better than the basic models. So just don't use what you don't like on the free phone.
      Or if its a PAYG, go with the ~£25 Nokia 1100.

      --
      Wow, I should not post when knackered.
    3. Re:What happened to basic phones? by brontus3927 · · Score: 1

      Get yourself an old Motorola StarTAC 7868. Mine is something like a decade old and still going strong. No voice dialing, but I consider that an unneccessay feature.

    4. Re:What happened to basic phones? by BenjyD · · Score: 1

      Hmm. Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

    5. Re:What happened to basic phones? by pi42 · · Score: 1

      I know I, my family, and many of my friends, do not need these super tricked out computers. We do not need games, high quality audio, video playback, cameras and image support, or mp3 players in our computers.

      All we need is a very basic computer, that has a word processor, maybe a spreadsheet, and a 2400 baud modem to get email.

      It is getting pretty difficult to find basic computers as it is. All the vendors try to press all these computers with extra features that I will never use. Damnit, I dont need my computer to be able to play mp3s. /me grumbles

      (As in, maybe pushing the envelope with cell phones isn't a bad thing. Just because camera/high speed data/high quality ringtone phones haven't found their killer app yet doesn't mean it's time to write them off as bloated and useless.)

    6. Re:What happened to basic phones? by desolation+angel · · Score: 4, Informative
      What like this one?

      A back-to-basics mobile launched

      --
      This time I could be arsed.
    7. Re:What happened to basic phones? by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      The only trouble is that "basic" phones also tend to suck in terms of style, size, battery life, etc. Why can't I have a phone that's stylish like the RAZR (for example) but without the screen and camera and whatnot? Why can't I just have a phone that looks like a tiny, thin pocket calculator (complete with 7-segment LCD)? Why can't I have a cellular PCMCIA modem with buttons, a display, and a battery?

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    8. Re:What happened to basic phones? by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 2, Interesting

      However as every monthly offer normally throws in a free phone better than the basic models. So just don't use what you don't like on the free phone.

      Actually, I agree with the grandparent poster. It is hard to find a simple phone and even if you don't use the functions of a complex phone, it is still harder to use than a basic phone. For example. My last (fairly basic) phone finally died so I bought the simplest and cheapest phone my provider offered. It is a piece of poorly designed crap, and the complexity of unneeded features makes it hard to use. I think this is at least partially intentional.

      The one thing I do more than anything else in my phone is open the phonebook, select an entry, and dial it. On my old phone this was 3 key-presses, two of which were the same key. On my new phone it is nine key-presses, most of which are different keys. The easiest thing to do on my new phone is download new ringtones/color schemes/and pictures all of which cost money and none of which I'm interested in. In fact dropping something on my phone could download a random online item. Maybe this is unintentional, but I doubt it.

      Not using the added features is not a good option if I still have to navigate through a dozen menus to get to the one or two basic features I do use. And anyone will tell you that pushing 9 keys while navigating through a bunch of menus is harder than pushing 3.

      Remember this is the most basic phone still offered by my provider. They don't offer a simple phone not because there is no demand, but because they are hoping to sell you more crap. For the same reason they will not sell itunes phones when released. They already charge a dollar for a crappy midi songs that last 30 seconds. They sure don't want prices for high quality songs to be only a dollar and transferable from your computer because then they would not be able to gouge people who have foolishly become their customers. If only there was a phone provider that was not evil and greedy.

    9. Re:What happened to basic phones? by GauteL · · Score: 5, Insightful

      For every news story about a new mobile phone:

      1. Complain that there is no more basic phones
      2. Get moderated +4 Insightful
      3. Profit!

      Come on, this is the same thing every bleeding time a new phone is announced. Get over it already.

      The fact is that it is cheaper for the manufacturers to make a limited selection of models at the same time.

      Features sell phones, so the minimum number of features will always go up.

      For every 1 user that only needs a phone book and voicemail, there is probably 20 that also wants polyphonic ringtones, 10 that wants a colour display and a 100 users that also need text messaging.

      It does not make sense to make every single combination of these phones, so you will either have a phone that is underfeatured or overfeatured.

      If it is underfeatured you will have lost most of your customers. If it is overfeatured the people that need less will still buy it.

    10. Re:What happened to basic phones? by argent · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Most phone makers to a "basic" phone

      The LG phone I've got is about the most basic one on the list the carrier offered for our area. It's too damn fancy and complex and even if you don't USE the features you're still paying for them in reduced battery life.

      go with the ~£25 Nokia 1100.

      Oh, a pom.

      That explains everything. Look, sunshine, you're in bloody cellphone heaven. Here in the US it's like the third world, except the third bloody world generally has better cellphone service than the US. You don't get a choice of phones when you sign up, you don't usually get to buy a phone and use it with your service because everyone's phones are locked... and not what you guys think of as locked either: there's like four different cellular protocols and most of them don't have any concept of phone portability like GSM does.

      So people who are frustrated by crappy cellphones, they probably don't have any of the options you're talking about. Even PAYG isn't PAYG as you know it.

    11. Re:What happened to basic phones? by argent · · Score: 5, Insightful

      For every 1 user that only needs a phone book and voicemail, there is probably 20 that also wants polyphonic ringtones, 10 that wants a colour display and a 100 users that also need text messaging.

      You have the numbers backwards.

      For every 1 user that needs polyphonic ringtones or a a color display, there's 10 who just want a bloody phone. And EVERYONE benefits from longer battery life.

      Text messaging? That's just software. You don't need to build a fancy phone to get text. OK, OK, you can't get text on a 7 segment LED, but that's a bit primitive even for us puritans.

    12. Re:What happened to basic phones? by argent · · Score: 1

      Yeh, particularly the one with the monochrome display.

    13. Re:What happened to basic phones? by Ced_Ex · · Score: 1

      That explains everything. Look, sunshine, you're in bloody cellphone heaven. Here in the US it's like the third world, except the third bloody world generally has better cellphone service than the US. You don't get a choice of phones when you sign up, you don't usually get to buy a phone and use it with your service because everyone's phones are locked... and not what you guys think of as locked either: there's like four different cellular protocols and most of them don't have any concept of phone portability like GSM does.

      So people who are frustrated by crappy cellphones, they probably don't have any of the options you're talking about. Even PAYG isn't PAYG as you know it.


      Amen brother!

      Four protocols totally blow.

      --
      Live forever, or die trying.
    14. Re:What happened to basic phones? by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      What a horrible analogy! With a [new] computer, yes, you get fast and capable hardware. However, you can still run DOS or Windows 3.1 or Linux with only Emacs on it, if that's all you want to use, and the interface is still just as simple as it was on your old 286. And there's no downside because (depending on which computer you get), it won't be any bigger or louder, or use more electricity than an old one.

      With the new phones, however, fast and featureful is not good, because you can't turn it off. A new multimedia phone cannot act like an old 7-segment-display cellphone from 10 years ago. If you could really choose not to use the features then yes, that would be great, but you can't. You're absolutely stuck with the color screen (and resulting battery suckage) and horrible menus, even if you never use more than one of their options.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    15. Re:What happened to basic phones? by sekicho · · Score: 1

      Tu-Ka in Japan is now selling a mobile phone that's ultra-basic: the Tu-Ka S. No display, no phone book, no nothing. A keypad, a talk and hangup button, a power switch. The marketing is aimed at old folks.

    16. Re:What happened to basic phones? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      whinge whinge whinge

    17. Re:What happened to basic phones? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please mod parent +5 FearfulOfTechnology

      Ya that might be a bit harsh, but yesh, I'm glad the cell phone companies don't listen to only you. I much prefer my Treo over a Gameboy, MP3 Player, Cellphone, PDA straped to my waist (And yes, I do use the Treo for all those features just fine thank you, although games are a bit crappy)

      Frankly if you don't want a feature DONT USE IT... I'd much rather have a device that does something I don't need, then have a device that doesn't do what I need.

    18. Re:What happened to basic phones? by CptNerd · · Score: 1

      Plus, no one is saying that they shouldn't sell these complicated phone computers, it's just that it would be nice to have the option of simplicity.

      The main problem with the "just don't use the features" response is that the complicated phones can break more easily, due to so many more things that can break. And if the functions are interrelated somehow, losing one "feature" could actually disable many others at the same time.

      KISS is not just a rock band, but the phone companies don't seem to care.

      --
      By the taping of my glasses, something geeky this way passes
    19. Re:What happened to basic phones? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "On my old phone this was 3 key-presses, two of which were the same key. On my new phone it is nine key-presses, most of which are different keys."

      What phone do you have? I've never heard of a phone that didn't let you get to the phonebook in 1 keypress (usually down). I'm pissed because T-Mobile just replaced my lost t68i with a Motorola a630. Sure, the a630 is worth way more, but now I have to hit 2 buttons to get to the phonebook. I think I'd throw it out the window if it took 3, let alone 9(!).

    20. Re:What happened to basic phones? by Kiryat+Malachi · · Score: 1

      A630: you can quite easily reassign one of your two softkeys to be "phonebook", as well as being able to assign any of the 4-way pad buttons to phonebook. One keypress.

      --

      ---
      Mod me down, you fucking twits. Go ahead. I dare you.
      (I read with sigs off.)
    21. Re:What happened to basic phones? by I_can_not_believe_I_ · · Score: 1


      Even worse are those of us who require just a few of the high end features. I want my phone as a phone, and that's pretty much it, but because I need quad-band service and bluetooth, I was forced into one of Motorola's phones that has a built in camera, video camera, and who knows what else. I've heard that there is an option from Sony-Ericsson that would meet my needs now, but it wasn't out when I upgraded.

      One real problem I now run into is that because my phone has the stupid (and quite honestly useless) camera in it, I can't take my cell phone half the places I go (industrial environments worried about espionage, the gym), try explaining to people that you're unavailable because of un-needed gadgets in your phone.

    22. Re:What happened to basic phones? by argent · · Score: 1

      I'm glad the cell phone companies don't listen to only you.

      Brother, you have it backwards. They don't listen to us at all. For that matter, you're not listening either. When someone says "I want to buy a smple phone", you apparently hear "I want everyone to be stuck with a simple phone".

      I'd much rather have a device that does something I don't need, then have a device that doesn't do what I need.

      I need a phone that I can carry for a long weekend without having to keep track of where the recharging cable is, or even bother packing it for a weekend trip.

      Features I don't use, and the extra memory and faster processor that goes along with them, keep me from having that phone.

    23. Re:What happened to basic phones? by bonehead · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually, as much as I despise the Moto V710, I do have to admit that it has AMAZING voice recognition.

      No training, completely speaker independant. It does exactly what you describe. You pick it up, tap a button, say "Call Bob", and it calls Bob.

      In pretty much all other aspects it's a lousy product not deserving of the hype it recieved. Interesting that the one thing it does very well (voice rec) never got any hype at all.

    24. Re:What happened to basic phones? by beeblebrox87 · · Score: 1

      Here in the US it's like the third world, except the third bloody world generally has better cellphone service than the US.

      I live in Tanzania, which is pretty certainly "third world," and mobile phone service here is MUCH better than in the US. You purchase an unlocked, sim-free phone of your choice (big simple US$40 phillips phones available, fancy new US$600 nokia 6680s available) and then buy a prepaid simcard for about $6. Caller always pays, calls are about 40 US cents a minute and SMS about 10 US cents. You have to get way out in the bush before coverage drops much.

      I was in the US last summer, at it was horrible! Just to buy a simcard cost $50 (from T-mobile, other providers wanted more). Thankfully my phone from Tanzania was triband, so it worked okay. I bought $10 worth of prepaid minutes, which lasts me two months in Tanzania, but I received a couple calls from family back in home and suddenly I was out of minutes. I went to another town to visit relatives and found that, in a town of 100,000 people, T-mobile had no coverage. Why do Americans put up with these overpriced, low-quality carriers, with ridiculous monthly plans, restrictive contracts, and very limited coverage?

    25. Re:What happened to basic phones? by bonehead · · Score: 1

      Because there's not enough of a market for them to make it profitable to produce them.

    26. Re:What happened to basic phones? by zieroh · · Score: 1

      I bought the simplest and cheapest phone my provider offered. It is a piece of poorly designed crap, and the complexity of unneeded features makes it hard to use.

      Perhaps your phone is a "poorly designed piece of crap" precisely because it was "the cheapest phone my provider offered"?

      Generally, design isn't free. Not good design, anyway. Often, the things that are better designed and easier to use cost more. Not always, but often. Maybe by spending more on a phone, you might be able to get one that is easier to use despite the additional features?

      --
      People who say "sheeple" have about as much sophistication as an AOL user, and in fact are probably actually AOL users.
    27. Re:What happened to basic phones? by zalt · · Score: 1

      My family will never need these.. automobiles. We've been using horses and carts forever, and they will forever be usable. As long as there is hay, there is transport!

      No, but seriously. I agree with you. A while ago i was checking out new cellphones and i thought, hey, i never actually play slow, crappy javagames on my phone. I never use the camera. I don't want the latest popchart hit-single as as my ringtone. All i want is a phone that 1. looks good, 2. has a good menu system, 3. doesn't annoy me and 4. isn't 3x the price because of features i don't even want.

      I found one by Samsung but apparently they still have the flaws from their older models. (Can't have vibrator+ringtone on at the same time, it beeps everytime it has completed something etc). But their aim was right - to take a nice, modern phone, strip all the excessive features out of it and sell it for a cheaper price.

    28. Re:What happened to basic phones? by kurokaze · · Score: 1

      I'm with you, I'd rather have a simple phone that did its job well (maybe they can use all of that extra space they'll have when they strip out all of the junk to put in a bigger atennae or a better transceiver) than one that did alot of stuff but all mediocorely.

      Heck, get rid of the fluff, give me a phone that can make/recieve calls anywhere, has call display, call waiting, an address book and make it able to withstand a fall from 3 feet without a scratch.

    29. Re:What happened to basic phones? by argent · · Score: 1

      I wrote: the third bloody world generally has better cellphone service than the US.

      You wrote: I live in Tanzania, which is pretty certainly "third world," and mobile phone service here is MUCH better than in the US.

      I think we pretty much agree on that.

      Why do Americans put up with these overpriced, low-quality carriers, with ridiculous monthly plans, restrictive contracts, and very limited coverage?

      Because Americans are so bloody proud of having their beady eyes on the traditional home of generally and specifically oppressive buttheads and having "government under control" that they neglected to consider that the problem is said buttheads and not the arena they're operating from... so instead of nurturing a population of government buttheads to counter private sector buttheads, they let the private sector buttheads run wild. They've even granted collections of buttheads some of the same right as individuals, so they can go around excersizing those rights without the buttheads that are actually responsible for whatever it is they're doing being held accountable for any of the resulting messes.

    30. Re:What happened to basic phones? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Heck, get rid of the fluff, give me a phone that can make/recieve calls anywhere, has call display, call waiting, an address book and make it able to withstand a fall from 3 feet without a scratch.

      Siemens used to do this on a few models....
      the batteries kept crapping out

    31. Re:What happened to basic phones? by argent · · Score: 1

      Often, the things that are better designed and easier to use cost more.

      And often they don't. I bought an iPod Mini and when I went to the store to get an iPod Shuffle for my daughter... I decided I'd bought the wrong iPod, gave *her* the Mini, and "settled" for the Shuffle.

      And the Shuffle actually cost less than any of the other flash MP3 players in the store, even the ones with no more memory (hell, even the ones with less memory).

      How can this be?

      Because features inherently cost money. They cost money to pay for a faster processor, they cost money to pay for extra hardware, they cost money to pay for more RAM, they cost money to pay for a more powerful and larger battery (or they cost money by using up a smaller batter faster so it doesn't last as long) because the faster processor and extra RAM uses up power faster. And these costs go into every phone, they're fixed per-unit costs, not sunk costs.

      The shuffle does one thing. It plays music. That's it. It doesn't even TRY to do more. It just does what it does as well as it can.

      That's the kind of phone I want. And I don't see why I should have to pay for features I don't want just to get something that isn't as good, doesn't last as long, and is inevitably harder to use (no matter how it's designed), just because there's no market (in the snse of a free and competitive one) for cellphones.

    32. Re:What happened to basic phones? by mlk · · Score: 1

      You can get "complex" phones that are easy to use[1], my J2ME-enabled wiz-bang, yet cheap (£50 PAYG) phone (sans camera, not by choice) (Sendo M570) is very simple to use as just-a-phone. Might I recomend you actually have a play with the phone before you buy it?

      [1] In the UK at lest, I'm getting the feeling the US is a tad different.

      Haha ;P

      --
      Wow, I should not post when knackered.
    33. Re:What happened to basic phones? by mlk · · Score: 1

      Ahh, OK, that explains it. It does seam (to me anyway) very odd that things are that bad state-side, and a quick check on Amazon brings up the Motorola V120C and the Nokia 2285. Both look to be very simple phones, mono screen, no camera, no MMS etc on pre-pay for under $30.

      --
      Wow, I should not post when knackered.
    34. Re:What happened to basic phones? by zieroh · · Score: 1

      Because features inherently cost money

      I don't think I'm arguing that point. I'm saying that design costs money as well.

      I don't see why I should have to pay for features I don't want just to get something that isn't as good, doesn't last as long, and is inevitably harder to use (no matter how it's designed)

      Isn't as good as what? Seeing as how the phone you want (and we're talking about phones here, not iPods) doesn't exist, you don't really have any basis for comparison.

      The reason you do have to pay for features you don't want is because because phone makers are in an arms race, each of them trying to distinguish themselves from each other in areas of design, performance, and features. Why? Because the market is saturated with handsets, both in terms of availability and also the fact that nearly everyone already has a cell phone. In order to compel people to buy a new phone, features are being invented and styling is being constantly changed. If people stuck with their existing phone, the manufacturers wouldn't make any money.

      I'm not saying it's right, I'm just explaining the obvious reality of things.

      Now, if the makers put all (or even some) of their design effort into low-cost, indistinguishable, simple phones, the kinds that are "given away" with a cell phone service contract, then they would be pouring money into what is essentially a commodity market with very low margins. In other words, they'd be throwing money down the toilet unless they could sell bazillions of them. With this market saturation, this seems unlikely.

      So basically, you're asking for the cell phone manufacturers to spend good money making a simple phone for you that won't sell very well, all because you don't feel you should have to spend money on features you don't want.

      The cell phone makers see things differently.

      My advice is: put some money into a better phone or quit bitching. Nobody is obligated to give you something for nothing.

      --
      People who say "sheeple" have about as much sophistication as an AOL user, and in fact are probably actually AOL users.
    35. Re:What happened to basic phones? by argent · · Score: 1

      I'm saying that design costs money as well.

      The "design" we're talking about is the menu structure of the user interface. That's something you only have to do once, that you can use on the cheapest phones you make just as easily as on the most expensive ones you make, and that can be changed literally with a tap of the button.

      You're talking about "design" as if it's something that costs ten dollars a phone. It's not.

      Isn't as good as what?

      Any phone with a longer battery life.

      Seeing as how the phone you want (and we're talking about phones here, not iPods) doesn't exist

      The phone I want does exist. It's just been dropped from the selection of phones available to me, because the carrier is the one who decides what phones are available... not the manufacturer.

      My advice is: put some money into a better phone or quit bitching.

      The more money I put into the phone, the more features it has, and the shorter its battery life is. Putting more money into the phone won't get me a better phone, it will get me a worse one.

    36. Re:What happened to basic phones? by MacGod · · Score: 1

      Actually, it's not the manufacturers that are pushing over-featured phones, it's the carriers. My cousin designs phone software for Siemens in Germany and he says that they are basically Vodaphone's bitch.

      Remember, almost everyone gets their phone from their carrier, not direct from the manufacturer or whatnot. Thus it is the carriers who are really the customers for the manufacturers, not the end users.

      The carriers want to push over-featured phones, because they charge for the extras. They charge for ringtones, wallpaper, games, text and video messaging etc. So the carriers tell the manufacturers "we will only buy phones that support these features" and the manufacturers have to comply, or be out of business. The carriers then have a complete lineup of colour video-java-ringtone phones, and the end user has no choice but to accept that.

      So don't blame Motorola, Nokia, Siemens etc for the overly-full-featured phones. Blame Rogers, Telus, AT&T, Vodaphone, T-Mobile and the others!

      --
      "Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one " -Albert Einstein
    37. Re:What happened to basic phones? by zieroh · · Score: 1

      The "design" we're talking about is the menu structure of the user interface. That's something you only have to do once, that you can use on the cheapest phones you make just as easily as on the most expensive ones you make, and that can be changed literally with a tap of the button.

      That's naive at best and disingenuous at worst. You obviously have no idea what putting together a product, especially a hardware product, entails.

      The phone I want does exist. It's just been dropped from the selection of phones available to me, because the carrier is the one who decides what phones are available... not the manufacturer.

      Wait, let me get this straight -- you're pining for a phone that the carrier doesn't carry anymore? Have you tried eBay? Just a thought. I'm not trying to start an argument, I'm just trying to understand what it is you want. Many slashdotters have a propensity to diss any new phone with new features because it costs more, does too much, etcetera. If the phone you want already exists, why not just go and find one instead of bitching about how overfeatured some new phone is? In other words, what point does it serve to complain about a phone that you don't want in the first place?

      The more money I put into the phone, the more features it has, and the shorter its battery life is.

      This is a gross oversimplification. Not all features require more battery life (although some do) and not all features increase the basic complexity of a phone (although some do). Battery life has improved quite a bit since I bought my first cell phone, and I'm reasonably happy with my current one, despite the fact that it's got a lot of features.

      Putting more money into the phone won't get me a better phone, it will get me a worse one.

      Again, a gross oversimplification, but ultimately a moot point because:
      a) You're unhappy with the "free" phone given you by your service
      b) You believe the more expensive ones are even worse (although I believe you're just being stubborn here to make a point, which you've utterly failed to make), and
      c) The phone you want exists, but you don't have it and won't go find it.

      I guess you're stuck in a quagmire of your own making, then. I offered you a way out and you refused to even consider the possibility based on some poor reasoning (i.e. more $$ == worse phone). Sucks to be you.

      Have a nice day!

      --
      People who say "sheeple" have about as much sophistication as an AOL user, and in fact are probably actually AOL users.
    38. Re:What happened to basic phones? by argent · · Score: 1

      You're unhappy with the "free" phone given you by your service

      No. Absolutely not. You are making things up or you are putting someone else's words in my mouth, because I have at NO TIME said anything that should have even suggested that I am using the cheapest (so-called free) phone.

      You believe the more expensive ones are even worse

      Based on both manufacturers specs and reviews, the more expensive phones have a shorter battery life. That is an absolute deal killer for me.

      The phone you want exists, but you don't have it and won't go find it.

      I already owned the phone I wanted, I could not continue to use it because it's not compatible after the service change.

    39. Re:What happened to basic phones? by zieroh · · Score: 1

      I already owned the phone I wanted, I could not continue to use it because it's not compatible after the service change.

      Like I said, sucks to be you.

      --
      People who say "sheeple" have about as much sophistication as an AOL user, and in fact are probably actually AOL users.
    40. Re:What happened to basic phones? by barnaclebarnes · · Score: 1

      Vodafone just released their Simply phone. I just got one for my mum and even she can use it. This is her third mobile phone and the only one that she has been able to use properly.

      --
      [Please type your sig here.]
  20. Bah by Khuffie · · Score: 5, Funny
    PEBL? RAZR? SLVR?

    Does no one at Motorola have spell check turned on?

    1. Re:Bah by Rolan · · Score: 3, Funny

      They're just trying to be 1337.

      --
      - AMW
    2. Re:Bah by beef+curtains · · Score: 1

      Clearly someone drew a green circle over the picture of a real phone...if you look closely, you can see the outline of a standard keypad & some sort of joystick-style control through the fake scroll wheel.

      Any guesses on which existing Motorola phone was photoshopped for that stupid fake picture? I think it sorta looks like an E1000.

      In other news, the "SLVR" looks pretty cool. Anyone know the ETA for that thing?

      --
      Just once I'd like someone to call me 'Sir' without adding 'You're making a scene.'
    3. Re:Bah by mchappee · · Score: 1



      > PEBL? RAZR? SLVR?

      Motorola, buy a vowel.

      Matthew

      --
      /. finds me to be 20% Troll, 80% Funny
    4. Re:Bah by Durandal64 · · Score: 1

      They did. Notice the "E" in "PEBL". I guess that's all they budgeted for though.

    5. Re:Bah by cakesy · · Score: 1

      What about all the MOTO words marketing speak, just go to the website to check it out. MOTOTALK, MOTOMESSAGE, MOTOJOKE, MOTOREALLYHATEMARKETINGSHIT

    6. Re:Bah by karnal · · Score: 1

      Interesting how you also missed the "A" in "RAZR".

      They've got a bigger budget than you think.

      --
      Karnal
    7. Re:Bah by FrankDrebin · · Score: 1

      CMON EBDY LVES SHTY FLTR NMES

      --
      Anybody want a peanut?
    8. Re:Bah by nacturation · · Score: 2, Funny

      Plus the "A" in "RAZR" was donated by Apple.

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    9. Re:Bah by Iriel · · Score: 1

      Is it just me, or do these all look like programming acronyms?

      --
      Perfecting Discordia
      www.stevenvansickle.com
    10. Re:Bah by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      Drppng evry othr vowl gts annying.

      I think it is annoying that Motorola is doing this. They do this so they can trademark a name, trademarking dictionary words, even in association with very strict product definitions, is becoming harder to do and harder to defend.

      But with the irritating naming scheme (IMO worse than iProductname), and my experiences with Motorola phones, I will avoid this product, at least for the time being. The Motorolas I have seen/borrowed/used in the last several years had poor reception, bad sound quality, horrible battery life and fragility. In contrast, my Sanyo from Sprint "just works".

    11. Re:Bah by hoborocks · · Score: 1

      It is getting harder to trademark things. Henceforth, the following are my trademarks:

      Bttfckr
      Shthd
      Slshdt
      Flmbt
      Mtrl

      --
      AccountKiller
    12. Re:Bah by PureCreditor · · Score: 1

      following the same trend as RAZR and PEBL, motorola can DEFINITELY have a strong-selling model in the middle east if it's named BSHT :-)

    13. Re:Bah by rsborg · · Score: 1
      PEBL? RAZR? SLVR?

      Does no one at Motorola have spell check turned on?

      More likely: they want the product trademark to have name recognition of a dictionary word (think: "windows"), but without the downsides (ie, loss of trademark status due to common usage). Besides, I think it's at least different than coming up with a pseudo-word as a product name like many car names (think: "Integra"), and you'll have your own search keyword (ie, RAZR won't compete with razor vendors on google results).

      --
      Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
    14. Re:Bah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does no one at Motorola have spell check turned on?

      I work at Motorola and the hip 4-letter name for the project I am currenty working on was recently changed to a real word because the Microsoft Word auto-correct feature kept changing it to a real word that has quite the negative connotation.

      I don't really know of too many engineers that can stand to have the auto-correct feature left on - it gets really annoying anytime you are writing anything technical. Which happens to be a big part of the job. So make your conclusions as to who is responsible/dumb.

      Also, I have seen (and played with) prototype versions of the iTunes phone. The photos here look nothing like it. Then again, the software is really what matters and thus the actual phone that is released could look like anything. It would not surprise me if Apple asked Motorola to keep the external design a complete secret, even to Motorola employees (aside from the obvious required design team). As you can see, we are not used to a corporate culture of secrecy.

  21. Re:Public Danger... by Otter · · Score: 1

    Apple fanboi, my ass! Where's his iPod?

  22. Nothing like... by llamalicious · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...linking a 6+MB PDF directly. Then posting on the homepage.

    Really, have some compassion Slashdot. :P

  23. Re:Public Danger... by pahles · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Great. Now people will be able to talk and listen to music while driving....

    I've always been able to talk while driving. Listening to music isn't that difficult to, just turn on the car stereo.

    --
    Sig?
  24. Not even sure it's that by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 2, Insightful
    That's a shitty looking phone that someone cut and pasted a screenshot onto in photoshop for a corporate presentation.

    Considering the presentation didn't focus on that at all, or bring any attention to it, I might even believe this is a hoax.

    It's scary that this is all it takes to get a mac rumour going.

    Sadly, this is actually more evidence than usual for a mac rumor.

    1. Re:Not even sure it's that by squiggleslash · · Score: 1
      Well, the hoaxer must have pasted a lot of other stuff in then, because it does seem to be included in a section on their headline, next generation, phones of which the RAZR is the first and PEBL, including this phone, is the next. If the iTunes phone is in a presentation that doesn't focus on that kind of stuff, I assume you mean the whole "phone shapes" thing (about three sequential slides, first two focussing on shape and last focussing on design) should have been removed too.

      If it's a fake, it's a pretty impressive one from what I can see.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    2. Re:Not even sure it's that by badasscat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If it's a fake, it's a pretty impressive one from what I can see.

      It is almost certainly a fake and it is not very impressive from my point of view.

      The strongest evidence of a fake is that all of the graphics in this presentation are raster, except for this phone, which appears to be vector. Does that make any sense to you? No, not to me either. It's almost as if Motorola would have used one source for all of their images and then a second source for just the image of this phone. Now, you can assume that there'd be some back and forth with Apple or possibly even an outside design agency over this phone, but that still wouldn't explain why this one graphic is in a completely different format than all the others.

      Second, this phone is not a PEBL. The PEBL is a specific model, as is the RAZR. Yet it appears under the heading of "PEBL".

      Third, the design of the phone itself doesn't make any visual sense. Look at it. It's simply a candybar phone that somebody has Photoshopped an ugly green wheel directly on top of. If we're to believe this, there are actually buttons under the scroll wheel.

      Lastly, does this thing look like anything Apple would actually sanction? I mean, seriously. Use your critical thinking skills. Apple has some very rigorous standards for their branding, and they only allow their logos to appear on products that they have approved. Something this big, I can't imagine Steve Jobs himself not being personally involved with. And this does not look like anything either Apple or Jobs would ever allow out there. Not just because it's ugly (though there is that), but it just looks so completely different from their design ethos. Apple is not going to have their first iTunes phone be a mini-Xbox.

      I have no doubt this was a real presentation, but this image was not originally part of it, and it is not a real Motorola phone. If I'm wrong, I will eat my hat.

    3. Re:Not even sure it's that by squiggleslash · · Score: 1
      Lastly, does this thing look like anything Apple would actually sanction? I mean, seriously. Use your critical thinking skills. Apple has some very rigorous standards for their branding, and they only allow their logos to appear on products that they have approved. Something this big, I can't imagine Steve Jobs himself not being personally involved with. And this does not look like anything either Apple or Jobs would ever allow out there. Not just because it's ugly (though there is that), but it just looks so completely different from their design ethos. Apple is not going to have their first iTunes phone be a mini-Xbox.
      The HP iPod? As AppleTurns once observed, people have seen corpses that colour.

      In any case, it's not an Apple phone, it's a Motorola phone. The focussing on this as "Apple would never design/approve the design of something that looks like..." thing stuff is largely misplaced. It's sold by Motorola and it's going to play music, under license, from iTunes. It's not an Apple product.

      The vector argument you give is interesting though. I have no way of telling that this is the case, but I'll take your word for it.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    4. Re:Not even sure it's that by anagama · · Score: 1


      I tend to think that this wouldn't be an apple design because the UI would suck infinitely. It looks like the control buttons are lined up in a row on one side of the device. I have a creative nomad II mg with the control buttons in this config -- it's worse than dreadful. And to top it off, the darn thing isn't even heavy enough to act as a paperweight.

      I just can't believe that's an Apple design. If it is, the company's days are numbered.

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    5. Re:Not even sure it's that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Plus the .pdf was created after the presentation was given.

      And the perspective lines on the "screen" don't match.

      I wouldn't be suprised if an Apple iPodPhone appears but I doubt this is it.

    6. Re:Not even sure it's that by topper24hours · · Score: 1

      "If I'm wrong, I will eat my hat." OK. I'm holding you to that!

    7. Re:Not even sure it's that by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      One other thing, the PEBL is a family, not a specific phone. Motorola's first PEBL phone appears to be the V6.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    8. Re:Not even sure it's that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Is it healthy to eat that much tinfoil??

    9. Re:Not even sure it's that by Kiryat+Malachi · · Score: 1

      PEBL is a model; much like RAZR is the V3 (RAZR V3, technically) the PEBL is marked as the V6.

      --

      ---
      Mod me down, you fucking twits. Go ahead. I dare you.
      (I read with sigs off.)
    10. Re:Not even sure it's that by Illix · · Score: 1

      In the new iPod designs with the Clickwheel, the buttons really are under the scroll wheel, so that when the user pushes the wheel on one side it hits the button underneath. That's how the Clickwheel works.

    11. Re:Not even sure it's that by squiggleslash · · Score: 1
      I'm pretty sure you have that backward. PEBL is a family, as is RAZR. The first RAZR is the V3. The first PEBL is the V6. They'll be adding models within each family over time.

      This makes sense given it's what Motorola does generally. The V6x range are all pretty similar in style and appearance, likewise the T7xx series. When actual names have been used in the past, the Timeports, the StarTACs, etc, they've never applied to one single phone model. If they're going to heavily market the RAZR, they're not going to do it for a one off phone, especially when the defining characteristic they're marketing is the thing's form factor.

      PEBL is, likewise, about a form factor (as is SLVR)

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    12. Re:Not even sure it's that by Kiryat+Malachi · · Score: 1

      The name for the V series is actually the Triplets family, named after the 300/400/600 introductory members; they all run the same OS, down to the point where a V600 flash will run perfectly well on a V400 (I think the RAZR has enough firmware mods in there that this is no longer true for it, but it runs more or less the same OS as the triplets).

      RAZR V3 is the model. PEBL V6 is the model. SLVR V8 is the model. There are plans for a SLVRcam, from what I've heard, but it will be a seperately named model. There will probably be RAZR updates as well. However, you're confusing family (which is a lot more to do with internals - hardware platform and software) with design style (all the members of the triplets series, which now bears a striking resemblence to Adams' Hitchhikers' Trilogy, share a general design style, while RAZR has its own which it will share with any eventual updates). Technically, RAZR and PEBL (and eventually SLVR) belong to the triplets family as well.

      Why am I sure I'm right about this? Well, I was playing with a RAZR in mid-2003. That should give you some idea why I might know about it. (No, I don't work for Motorola designing cellphones - yes, I was given strict instructions not to photograph or talk about the RAZR at the time before I was allowed to play with it.)

      --

      ---
      Mod me down, you fucking twits. Go ahead. I dare you.
      (I read with sigs off.)
    13. Re:Not even sure it's that by coopex · · Score: 1

      Depends.

      Metallic tin is not very toxic due to its poor gastrointestinal absorption.

      Aluminum ... is not a necessary substance for our bodies and [though] too much may be harmful.

      However, both of these refer to minute aluminum particles, not large (>1cm^2) pieces of foil, and much less amounts than a tinfoil hat would consist of.

      Additionally, the aluminum foil will react violently with hydrochloric acid in your stomach, producing aluminum chloride and hydrogen. Assuming your stomach doesn't rupture from the pressure, AlCl3 has toxicity of Oral rat LD50: 3311 mg/Kg. Oral mouse LD50: 770 mg/kg
      Tin is unreactive with HCl.

      So assuming he got real tin foil, he should be fine. The Al foil would be quite dangerous, depending on how much his hat is made out of. There is also the added danger of being cut from the foil.

      --
      The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
  25. huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've got mod points but there is no -1, Rambling and Incomprehensible option. :\

    1. Re:huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or the ever needed -1 Dumbass option.

  26. Not lame anymore... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny


    It has wireless and more space than a nomad!

  27. Great! More Buttons on a Phone! by smug_lisp_weenie · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Now they actually have to superimpose them on top of each other (note how the scroll pad intersects the number keys)- Don't these designers understand that this is a horrible design?

    It's so obvious what to do: The scroll wheel is great for picking songs and numbers to call out of the address book- For numbers, just use voice recognition: Having a recognizer just for digits works fantastically already- Heck, they wouldn't even have to do the recognition in the handset, but use a central server to handle that part, if it requires too many computrons!

    For crissakes, the whole point of the scroll pad is that it is a versatile input device- The scroll pad is all you need!

    1. Re:Great! More Buttons on a Phone! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, and how are you going to write an SMS or input the names on your address book?
      The iPod gets away with its minimal interface because you can do the hard bits on a computer and sync up...

    2. Re:Great! More Buttons on a Phone! by smug_lisp_weenie · · Score: 1

      Well, if I'm entering SMSes, I'd like a device with a full keyboard ala blackberry, etc- Entering them on a numpad is just as painful as a scroll pad would be...

      As for phone numbers, since this device will be synced up to a computer anyway, why not give the user a slick functionality for organizing their phone numbers with names through an iTunes add-on?

      That would be far easier to use, in my opinion...

    3. Re:Great! More Buttons on a Phone! by GauteL · · Score: 1

      "For numbers, just use voice recognition: Having a recognizer just for digits works fantastically already"

      Problems:
      1. Text messaging is a basic feature of phones today. Almost nobody will buy a phone without it.
      2. You don't always want to shout out phone numbers or messages aloud.

      Unless you get a really brilliant and fast way of putting in text with just a scroll wheel, a keypad is still necessary.

    4. Re:Great! More Buttons on a Phone! by mrchaotica · · Score: 1
      why not give the user a slick functionality for organizing their phone numbers with names through an iTunes add-on?
      They already have. It's an application (or system widget) called Address Book.
      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    5. Re:Great! More Buttons on a Phone! by RJabelman · · Score: 1

      For crissakes, the whole point of the scroll pad is that it is a versatile input device- The scroll pad is all you need!

      Then how do you do use touch-tone menus? Sounds awkward.

    6. Re:Great! More Buttons on a Phone! by Rockin'+Az · · Score: 1
      Not being a text crazed teenager (sounds a bit weird doesn't it) or SMS junkie I think a scroll wheel would be just as easy to text with. When I text I'm looking at the keys and counting the number of times I press it when doing messages. I'm not looking at the display. What happens? I'm halfway through a message when I realise I've been messing over half of it up. It's worse if I use my wife's phone - hers has a button that switches between lower case, upper case and numbers. The number of times I've switched to numbers and forgotten to switch back is is too numerous to remember.

      With a scroll wheel I'll be looking at the display. Scroll clockwise/anti-clockwise to get the letter/number/whatever, hit the middle button to enter or tap to enter. Obviously there would need to be some refinement to improve speed, but I think there is potential for a scroll wheel to do just fine on a phone.

      --

      I come from a LAN down under

      Where the packets flow and routers chunder

    7. Re:Great! More Buttons on a Phone! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Honestly, you don't need to carry a full keyboard for 160-character messages. But, you don't like SMS, that's fine. The address book problem is much bigger:

      So, you're at a cafe, you meet someone interesting, they give you their number and you don't just type it into your phone, you have to carry a notepad and pencil with you to write numbers in so you can type them into your computer and then sync them up with your phone! Very user unfriendly.

      Plus you wouldn't be able to sell this hypothetical phone to people who don't have computers but still want to listen to MP3s on their phone...

    8. Re:Great! More Buttons on a Phone! by smug_lisp_weenie · · Score: 1

      I can't imagine meeting someone in a coffee shop, then spending five minutes fiddling with the phone to program their info into a phone- That would be really annoying and rude...

      I think if you get someone's phone number you're expected to write it on a strip of paper, stick it in your pocket, and not interrupt the conversation fiddling with your cell phone...

    9. Re:Great! More Buttons on a Phone! by Echnin · · Score: 1

      Well, they can just use IR or BT to transfer it, can't they? If the other party doesn't have that, using a scroll wheel to enter numbers 0-9 and letters a-z with toggles for A-Z and punctuation is not impossible. Has everyone forgotten how text input on game consoles work? In fact, an acquaintance of mine has a tiny Nokia phone with no keyboard and just a scroll wheel, and she's even texting happily and stuff. Not a problem.

      --
      Lalala
    10. Re:Great! More Buttons on a Phone! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For numbers, just use voice recognition

      Yeah, you do it. I find people talking to the devices to look incredibly stupid. And fairly annoying to.

    11. Re:Great! More Buttons on a Phone! by dangitman · · Score: 1
      Yeah, and how are you going to write an SMS or input the names on your address book?

      You do the hard bit on the computer, and then sync it up. I can't stand writing SMS messages with a numeric keypad. So I just pull out my powerbook and use bluetooth to send the message, or add contacts, without touching the phone. In fact, with a bluetooth headset, I need never get the phone out of my bag. There's always the option of avoiding sending SMS messages in the first place, which is fantastic.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    12. Re:Great! More Buttons on a Phone! by lucas+teh+geek · · Score: 1

      I can't imagine meeting someone in a coffee shop, then spending five minutes fiddling with the phone to program their info into a phone- That would be really annoying and rude...

      Thats why we do it on the num pad in less time than it would take you to find your goddamn pen... but you obviously never meet anyone out and about so i guess thats not a bit problem for you

      --
      TIAEAE!
  28. Re:I think that they look cool. by Adrilla · · Score: 1

    Apple will most certainly demand that it work seamlessly with iTunes, which should make file transfers a breeze. That would be the last worry I'd have with this product.

    --

    "Plans are for fools! Oglethorpe, the plutonian (Aqua Teen Hunger Force)
  29. Woah! by Tim+C · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Like, awesome presentation, dude! I mean, like, wow!

    (That's the worst presentation I've ever seen, and I too work in a corp.)

    1. Re:Woah! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What did you expect? It's Motorola.

      Did you notice the strong brand they claim for the dumbass word "Moto?"

    2. Re:Woah! by 2.246.1010.78 · · Score: 1

      I bet the original powerpoint presentation had WHOA sound effects, too...

  30. Corporate presentations by dcclark · · Score: 1

    Reading through those other slides, this presentation is like something from another world. Slides with "WOW!" and "YIKES!" on them in huge letters -- when did Motorola slip into the Comic Book dimension?

  31. More famous sayings... by aardwolf64 · · Score: 1

    "640k ought to be enough for anyone" - Bill Gates.

    "4 Letters is all anyone will ever need in a cell phone model number" - Motorola CEO.

    1. Re:More famous sayings... by tialaramex · · Score: 1

      There's no evidence that Bill ever actually said that. Go on, find the quote. If it was in a magazine or newspaper someone would know which one and when. If it was at a keynote somewhere, there would be a recording.

      "No-one should believe anything I post on Slashdot" - Aardwolf64

    2. Re:More famous sayings... by the_sidewinder · · Score: 1

      "640k ought to be enough for anyone" - Bill Gates.
      Bill never said that, according to wikiquote

      --
      /. is not to be used by individuals with high blood pressure or a history of heart attacks
    3. Re:More famous sayings... by aardwolf64 · · Score: 1

      I was going for humor... The Motorola CEO obviously didn't say that 4 digits should be good enough for any phone model number, but has introduced models like the RAZR and SLVR.

      Get a sense of humor, dude...

    4. Re:More famous sayings... by Knetzar · · Score: 1

      Yes, but from now on, everyone will think he did :-)

    5. Re:More famous sayings... by Chmarr · · Score: 2, Interesting
      There's no evidence that Bill ever actually said that. Go on, find the quote.
      Interesting challenge. I did a small amount of research, and couldn't find anything.

      Snopes doesn't even have a 'true' or 'false' on it... perhaps that'd be a good project for them? :)
    6. Re:More famous sayings... by Chmarr · · Score: 1

      Replying to myself... bleah...

      In this interview, Bill Gates denies making any such quote.

    7. Re:More famous sayings... by DarkVader · · Score: 1

      And if it were just in conversation with someone, there wouldn't be a quote or recording.

      The anecdotal evidence is pretty strong on that quote and its attribution - and while it's possible he didn't say it, unless you can prove he didn't say it, he's as logical a choice for the attribution of it as anyone.

      And obviously SOMEBODY said it.

      So for now, we might as well pin it on Gates.

    8. Re:More famous sayings... by timster · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't know that it's obvious that anyone ever really said it, but Bill Gates certainly didn't play any significant role in determining it.

      What was likely said, and by an IBM engineer, was something along the lines of "a 1MB address space ought to be enough for this personal computer." Keep in mind that the PC was not intended as an architecture that would take over the world and still be around in 25 years. That happened purely by accident.

      The 640K limit for base RAM was a simple consequence of the choice of processor, as the Intel 8086 is limited to a 1MB addressing bus. IBM presumably chose that particular chip because it was reasonably inexpensive and comparable with the CPUs of other personal computers of its day.

      It was much later when Bill Gates came to be a symbol of the PC revolution, and as the most vocal proponent of the PC, it was natural for people to think of him when they encountered its most frustrating limitations. So I can believe him when he says he didn't say it.

      --
      I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient.
    9. Re:More famous sayings... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I did not have sexual relations with that woman..." - Bill Clinton

    10. Re:More famous sayings... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope... I remember reading that the IBM PC was originally going to be a M68000 based. The design was changed to 8086 because of a cross license agreement between IBM and Intel where IBM got rights to 8086 and Intel got rights to bubble memory.

      Now, who got the better deal on that one? Things might be a whole lot less ugly today if the design stayed as the engineers wanted it instead of how management mandated it. (Though if IBM got manufacturing rights to the CPU, I guess it ultimately was about cost. Still, Intel was the winner in the long run - not IBM.)

    11. Re:More famous sayings... by timster · · Score: 1

      The point being that the decision was internal to IBM, not something Microsoft was involved with.

      Intel was absolutely the winner in the long run, as they gained a dominance in the PC CPU market that continues to this day.

      --
      I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient.
    12. Re:More famous sayings... by trick-knee · · Score: 1

      do people actually believe the stuff they read here?

    13. Re:More famous sayings... by catmistake · · Score: 1

      but the quote was

      "No one will ever need any more than 64K" -B.Gates

  32. The Motorola E725 also has a scroll wheel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
  33. Looks fake, but... by Iriel · · Score: 2, Insightful

    While the PR from Motorola on this makes it look like nothing but hype for Motorola, it would be an interesting concept to take a stab at. However, M$ plans on making phones that will kill off the iPod, and while I don't think this will happen, a good enough media phone could kill the Shuffle. If Apple plays this right, they could outdate their own shuffle with an enhanced capacity iTunes phone, and destroy Micro$oft's dream at the same time.

    --
    Perfecting Discordia
    www.stevenvansickle.com
    1. Re:Looks fake, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think that a media phone would kill the shuffle. The point (for me) of the shuffle is that it is cheap. There are times I want to listen to music, but I don't want to take an iPod, or an expensive phone. Such as biking, or jogging. If the shuffle broke, that's no big deal. But if my cell phone broke, that really sucks.

  34. Yeah but.. by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 3, Funny

    Does it accept Morse code? :)

  35. "First Picture of new Motorola iTunes Phone?" by anonicon · · Score: 4, Funny

    Ya know, when I see incredibly dumb Apple topics like this one, this article immediately springs to mind:

    iProduct.

    1. Re:"First Picture of new Motorola iTunes Phone?" by mbbac · · Score: 2

      Looks like JWZ feel into his own trap now that he is a Mac user.

      --

      mbbac

  36. Re:Public Danger... by bodester17 · · Score: 1

    Or for that matter, just turn on the $300 ipod you already bought.

  37. Or is it something like this.. by Dynamoo · · Score: 2, Informative
    ..the rumoured Motorola E790 which is at least *white*.


    Look closely though at the two handsets and they are both a very similar layout, apart from the "rotator blob" on the new picture which seems to clash with the keypad.


    The "E790" pictured is basically the E390/E398 platform that has been remixed onto several different handsets already.

    --
    Never email donotemail@WeAreSpammers.com
  38. That goes double for me... by argent · · Score: 1

    Yah, when work switched carriers they had to switch phones, so we all got these fancy LG phones to replace our old dumb B&W nokia bars. So now:

    Battery life sucks, it's less than half... I had to get a charger for my desk because if I forgot to charge it overnight one day the chance of running it flat before I got home was too high.

    I can't read the display outside. Color displays for cellphones are just plain wasteful.

    The Nokia had three dumb games on it (snake was one, i forget the others). They were great for keeping kids/teens amused, and the battery life was good enough they didn't run it down from ten minutes waiting in line. The LG has some kind of game rental function but the rest of the phone is so messed up there's no way I'm going to activate that.

  39. For those that don't want to click and RTFA by Delta-9 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Here is a Link to a screenshot of page 15 w/ a photo of the phone.

    Mod me however you feel, I don't care.

    1. Re:For those that don't want to click and RTFA by ptomblin · · Score: 1

      Is that a phone, or Apple's next mouse?

      --
      The next Cmdr Taco duplicate will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and see it early!
    2. Re:For those that don't want to click and RTFA by babbage · · Score: 3, Funny

      That thing clearly has too many buttons on it to be an Apple mouse :-)

    3. Re:For those that don't want to click and RTFA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      No, here is a better link to that image

    4. Re:For those that don't want to click and RTFA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      That thing clearly has too many buttons on it to be an Apple mouse :-)

      Ziinnggg!!!! That one never gets old.

      You know what's another good one? You can extend "wassup" to something like "Waaaasssssuuuuup" to the point that your tongue hangs out of your mouth. It's hilarious!

    5. Re:For those that don't want to click and RTFA by darkmeridian · · Score: 1

      The Anonymous Coward link is a troll. (Duh, read the link, mods!)

      --
      A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
    6. Re:For those that don't want to click and RTFA by Mononoke · · Score: 1
      The Anonymous Coward link is a troll. (Duh, read the link, mods!)
      Maybe the mods went ahead and clicked on the link and found that it went to pictures of the phone, thus making it informative.
      --
      NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
  40. Change isn't that significant by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 1
    Well, the hoaxer must have pasted a lot of other stuff in then, because it does seem to be included in a section on their headline, next generation, phones of which the RAZR is the first and PEBL, including this phone, is the next.

    Delete the apple logo and that slide of the presentation still makes sense within the "next gen phone" context. I can't imagine that doing a deal with apple wouldn't be played a lot mroe strongly in front of financial people. That's why I'm thinking possible hoax.

  41. iTunes phone.. by fyrewulff · · Score: 1

    Now, I haven't read the PDF (it keeps 404ing), but how does the phone exactly work? Is it basically a mobile version of your iTunes service? Does it also allow you to hook the phone up to your iPod and transfer your purchased music to it? Even though I do not own an iPod (or cellphone) that would be an awesome idea. Listen to your music on the go AND buy it and transfer to your iPod while away from the computer.

    --
    "We need to get over this notion, that, for Apple to win... Microsoft must lose." - Steve Jobs, 1997
  42. All this furor over a fake picture?! by beef+curtains · · Score: 1

    Clearly someone drew a green circle over the picture of a real phone...if you look closely, you can see the outline of a standard keypad & some sort of joystick-style control through the fake scroll wheel.

    Any guesses on which existing Motorola phone was photoshopped for that stupid fake picture? I think it sorta looks like an E1000.

    In other news, the "SLVR" looks pretty cool. Anyone know the ETA for that thing?

    (reposted, because I initially accidentally posted it as a response to some unrelated comment - mea culpa)

    --
    Just once I'd like someone to call me 'Sir' without adding 'You're making a scene.'
  43. I don't need 3 separate devices either by Shivetya · · Score: 1

    There are just as many people on both sides of the fence. While I would never accept the low quality of a cell-phone camera I would not mind it keeping notes, emails, or playing music.

    Why?

    Because I don't need 2 or more devices with me at all times that I need to lug around. Worse on trips each manufacturer seems intent on using their own AC adapter.

    Last trip I took was just with the cell phone, iPod, and a digital camera. Now as before I do not want the junk cameras they are using but I could have done well without two separate adaptors, and that includes carrying a pair for "car use" only.

    The only outstanding issues are size and battery life. A flash based mp3 player would be fine as well as handle the misuse that phones commoningly get. A HDD based one is asking for trouble.

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
  44. It's a joke? by Slayer_X · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Seriously guys, do u will buy this phone? who needs to buy music in iTunes Store? music with restrictions... no thanks! Anyway, ok, you like to buy music (no matter of DRM o formats). so... your are in the street and thinks "ohhh this girl is like Britney, I will buy a Britney song now with my ubber-cool cellphone right now, I can't wait to go to my home and use my PC!!!"

    PLEASE!!

    --
    - Slayer_X
    http://www.slayerx.org/
    Lima
  45. Dead Link by SenFo · · Score: 1

    "pdf presentation" linky no worky :-(.

    1. Re:Dead Link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a mirror here
      But I can't see the phone :(
      SergeiDoc

  46. Motorola Phones by schnablebg · · Score: 1

    OT but..

    Does anyone else here think that Motorola phones are crap? I've known them to have very poor reliability and awful reception to boot.

    Many stories abound about people exchanging their Motorola phone multiple times, and it seems like if there's one person in the room with no service, they're sporting a Motorola.

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

      No.

    2. Re:Motorola Phones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have had Moto phones for several years and still do (in my case, the old rechargers work on new phones) I have had the 120c, V60, and now T720 and all use the same charging connector.
      These phones have been dependable. I did have a microphone replaced in the T720 a few months ago, but nothing else in my experience has gone wrong. too bad you had your troubles. I did not.
      (maybe the parent poster had too much operator error)

    3. Re:Motorola Phones by squiggleslash · · Score: 1
      Nope. My T720 works great. I switched from Nokia two years ago after finding each phone I got from them was worse than the one previous.

      The first phone I ever got was from Motorola too (a "Graphite", a phone made specifically for one2one in the UK), and that was solid as a rock. Unusually, it had a fairly reasonable UI too, despite being from 1997 or so.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    4. Re:Motorola Phones by Edoko · · Score: 1

      I've had great reception with Moto phones. The 2000 world phone is amazing, probably because it has a pull out antenna (remember those?). However, the user interface, imho is the *primary* reason Moto lost market share to Nokia. Even today I still can't store and retreive numbers easily, although the newer models, like v-600 are considerably better, still there wierd 'dead zones' in the interface one can fall into and can't get out of.

  47. Re:Public Danger... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hold on there, they might have patent on "drive & talk".

  48. For the layman (lame man?) by g0at · · Score: 1

    ...what in the hell is a RAZR or a PEBL?

    -b

    1. Re:For the layman (lame man?) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      RAZR is an abbreviation of Razor, which describes the flat nature of the phone.

      PEBL, I would assume by extension, means 'Pebble,' referring to the rounded form of the phone.

  49. Re:I think that they look cool. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and hopefully syncing will work over bluetooth, if you don't mind the wait. As it stands now my Motorola V710 can't sync files over bluetooth because Verizon has crippled it (we think, there is an ongoing lawsuit over this.) I can at least sync the contacts and datebook with my powermac via isync which is better than the people stuck with windows can do at the moment.

  50. Razr .vs. PEBL ... by ElitistWhiner · · Score: 2, Informative

    notice the difference? PEBL looks more like a traditional phone than the RAZR StarTREK communicator .but. PEBL is without any signposts from the past.

    No buttons, no dials... PEBL isn't built on the communicator paradigm. US Supreme Court ruled yesterday that the Internet is not a "communications carrier" subject to FCC regs but instead an "information carrier".

    PEBL looks like it skirts the babyBells battle for button pushers, entirely. PEBL will be defined by its software functions and information *abilities* in the vein of RIM's Blackberry. Like Blackberry it will also have a phone but not nearly the quality or functionality of phone as offered by the mainstream Bells.

  51. This isn't the first nor the best... by h2d2 · · Score: 1

    Just because it supports iTunes and comes with an Apple logo doesn't mean it'll be as good as an iPod. And btw, Motorola has the shittiest & clunkiest user interfaces among all major cellphone manufactureres.

    For a better example, check out Samsung's SGH-i300, a tri-band GSM bar phone that comes with a 3GB 1-inch HDD, a 1.3MP Camera and looks much better that this Motorola presentative piece. Oh, and it comes with Windows Mobile.

    --
    Mozilla stole tabs from NetCaptor. So what? Right?
    1. Re:This isn't the first nor the best... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Oh, and it comes with Windows Mobile."

      Well, you had me sold until that last part.

  52. iphone.org ? by kulakovich · · Score: 1

    check this out:

    Domain ID:D15354654-LROR Domain Name:IPHONE.ORG Created On:16-Dec-1999 04:59:34 UTC Last Updated On:27-Jul-2004 18:32:41 UTC Expiration Date:16-Dec-2005 04:59:33 UTC Sponsoring Registrar:EmarkMonitor Inc. (R37-LROR) Status:CLIENT DELETE PROHIBITED Status:CLIENT TRANSFER PROHIBITED Status:CLIENT UPDATE PROHIBITED Registrant ID:mKn-14211604 Registrant Name:Apple Computer , Inc. Registrant Organization:Apple Computer, Inc. Registrant Street1:1 Infinite Loop Registrant Street2:M/S 60-DR Registrant Street3: Registrant City:Cupertino Registrant State/Province:CA

    kulakovich

  53. Couple of things to consider... by argent · · Score: 1

    One... on the AC adapter front: most devices have a USB charge cable available, and you can get auto- and wall-wart adapters now with a "power-only" USB connector in them. You can also get a wall-wart with an auto cigarette lighter socket in it, and use the car adapters only.

    Two... my experience with fancy phones and PDAs with MP3 players in them is that because the MP3 player sucks down power for extended periods you're much more likely to have a music player device that's "too low to use" than any other bit of personal kit. When that just means you can't listen to music, that's OK. When that means you can't use your phone, it's not.

    I could see a camera in a phone more than an mp3 player in a phone, because a camera doesn't get left on for hours.

  54. Pretty much. by JimTheta · · Score: 1

    Pretty much. I work at Motorola. Awhile ago they had a little internal contest asking us to come up with any cool 4 letter names. Never heard if that one yielded any fruit. I'm sure the marketing flacks are racking their brains.

  55. Perfect... by ImaLamer · · Score: 1

    My plan is complete!

  56. Re:First post! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You fail it, as usual

  57. Xbox by guinsu · · Score: 1

    This looks like the X-box phone, not the I-tunes phone. There's no way this is real.

  58. You're not as funny as you think you are. by argent · · Score: 1

    I know I, my family, and many of my friends, do not need these super tricked out computers. We do not need games, high quality audio, video playback, cameras and image support, or mp3 players in our computers.

    Absolutely. Luckily for you and your family older computers still work just as well as they ever did, because unlike cellphones they haven't been obsoleted by new protocols, incompatible battery packs, and carrier lock-outs.

    In addition, there are hundreds of models of specialised computers you can buy that just do one thing well. As well as the handheld or set-top game computers and music players, these include the stand-alone email stations and word processors you're loking for. You can buy them in most large office supply stores, and I've even seen them on sale in pharmacies and grocery stores, from companies like Brother and Pocketmail.

    (as in, if a full-on computer is bloated to you, you can save time and money and buy just the features you want... and these gadgets have been on the market since long before you could play MP3s or video on computers. Just because there's a market for feature-ridden phones doesn't mean there's no place for simple ones either)

  59. Re:Public Danger... by atavus · · Score: 1

    Now that's funny.. A joke is corny and marked down. The reply misunderstands the joke and is marked as funny...

  60. Uh-uh, it's a clamshell. by argent · · Score: 1

    If you do more digging online, you can find the PEBL phone... it's going to be a clamshell. Google for it.

  61. Yes but... by JoeLinux · · Score: 1

    There is an issue you haven't thought about: Department Of Defense stuff. I cannot have a camera on my phone, but would LOVE to have an iPod on it. And there are many many in my position (Anyone who lives/works on a base).

    Personalization. It's a beautiful thing. Unless you choose cp/m. Then you need to be put down.

  62. Greed? Greed? by crovira · · Score: 1

    They're pulling the same shit that Ma Bell did of charging $300 + monthly blood letting for a crappy modem back in the mid eighties. And you had to jump through hoops to get one.

    Ask 'em why and its "because we can"

    I for one don't miss Ma Bell.

    --
    MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
    1. Re:Greed? Greed? by bonehead · · Score: 1

      I, for one, do miss Ma Bell.

      Sure, she had her problems, but as someone who works in the telecom industry, the hodgepodge of independant carriers and LECs that we have today, all with different rules, rates, and policies, is a complete fucking nightmare.

      I'd much rather deal with one large monopoly than several dozen small ones.

  63. drm on the iPhone? by swissfondue · · Score: 1

    As iTunes 4.9 is already iPhone enabled, will the phone sync only over cable or also wireless? If BT, could this potentially allow tunes sharing with other phones or computers? Clearly the networks would disallow any tunes sending. So do you think it will be drm'd somehow?

    --
    Rubies and Pearls are not what you think.
  64. How 'but PEAR or APPL or FRUT? by crovira · · Score: 1

    The marketing flacks must have weak brains.

    --
    MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
  65. Now there's a market for ya. by crovira · · Score: 1

    an open source open framework for puttting together a phone you actually want (instead of having to put up with features you don't)

    The hardware would have to be modular (thin substrate ICs form the components) and you could have the gust in a range of hand sets.

    Somebody should work on that...

    --
    MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
  66. Duh! At least it works! by capnspanky · · Score: 1

    Quit whining.

  67. The article title asks a question by Thaelon · · Score: 1

    Here's the answer: No.

    If you just look at the damn pics you can plainly see they're hacked together images with a purpose similar to concept car drawings. It looks like they pasted a semitransparent clickwheel and LCD display images onto an image of an existing phone as if to say "here's what it might look like, should we make it?" You can even see the damn buttons on the phone through the touchwheel.

    Don't get all excited, the thing isn't even vaporware yet.

    --

    Question everything

    1. Re:The article title asks a question by iduno · · Score: 1

      The phones have already been made and the software is being developed. I've had a bit of a play with the PEBL, but its too much of a chick phone for me to get one. I think overall it should be a decent phone when the firmware is finished.

  68. Might be an untapped market here?? by King_TJ · · Score: 1

    What if someone starts selling completely customizable cellphones, on a direct order web site similar to Dell?

    To do this right, you'd want to offer contracts with any of your choice of pretty much all the available carriers for your given area though - which might prove to be tough to arrange.

    But even if they had to settle for new phones you bought straight out with no service contract, at least they wouldn't be "chipped" to only work on a particular carrier's network - so people might still buy them.

    Offer, say, 2 or 3 basic "skeletons" of cellphones, like a flip style and a "candy bar" style, and then let people buy options like "Add camera: $39" until they have exactly what they'd like.

  69. Mirrordot mirror of PDF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Here's the mirrordot copy of the PDF, which has since dissapeared from the official site.

    1. Re:Mirrordot mirror of PDF by eaglebtc · · Score: 1

      Thank you, sir. I believe you're the first to post this. Kudos to you.

      --
      Homestarrunner.net -- It's Dot Com!
  70. E398 can do iTunes via firmware upgrade by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So there isn't such a thing as 'iTunes phone'. The software can be theoretically put into any phone with adequate hardware capabilities. Of course that is only relevant if you have a way to upgrade firmware.

  71. One word: by fanblade · · Score: 1

    Phoney.

  72. Eat hat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  73. Mobile phone visualiser?? Not!! by kiwioddBall · · Score: 1

    Yes indeedy. Burn through your mobile phone battery power by running a visualiser whilst playing songs? I think not. The iPod doesn't have a visualiser, why would the phone? iTunes has the visualiser. They'd be doing pretty well to port the visuliser to the phone!! The visualiser part at least must be fake.

  74. You want a basic cell phone? by ModernGeek · · Score: 1

    Two words: Nextel. Done.

    --
    Sig: I stole this sig.
  75. Re:Public Danger... by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

    Is that an Apple fanboi humping you, or are you just glad to see me.

    --
    It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.