The Nokia N90, $900 Camera Phone Reviewed

Lord_of_Tech writes "CoolTechZone.com has reviewed Nokia's N90 cell phones that comes with 2 megapixel camera and a host of other features, and it costs a solid $900 per unit. "The minute you set your eyes on the N90, the first thing that springs to your mind is 'it looks a lot slimmer in photos...' but as you take it out of the packaging, you realize the heaviness of it. To be very clear at the outset though, this is not Nokia's attempt to produce as sleek a phone as the Motorola Razr. What it is designed to be is a feature packed phone that doesn't mind compromising on the ergonomics to pack in every last bit of functionality you could ever want on a camera phone."

Comments

Tiny quibble with the review

[FidelCatsro]

One small , perhaps insignificant problem with the review.
It goes in-depth with all the features of the phone rather well, it does however miss one thing.

How good is it as an actual phone?
What does it sound like when making a call?
Is the antenna any use?
How is the microphone?

This is something rather important to me when buying a phone.. being that it is the primary purpose of the thing.

Good review of all the features though, I won't touch this phone with a barge-pole if the review is correct (and the price tag so inordinate ).

PS: I took the liberty of coral caching the site , it was taking a while to load pages when I was reading the review http://www.cooltechzone.com.nyud.net:8090/index.ph p?option=content&task=view&id=1915

Re:Tiny quibble with the review

[pasokon]

The review really doesn't tell you anything... try this http://www.mobileburn.com/review.jsp?Id=1689 for a decent review, with real pics of the phone and interface, as well as sample shots from the camera.

Re:Tiny quibble with the review

[yogix]

"Hey - the 90s called. They want your concerns back..."

I have been using Nokias (and other mobile phones) for over 10 years here in India. While some of the earlier models did have issues in these areas, in my experience, NONE of the current models do...

The problems that they do suffer from are mainly usability issues such as sluggishness of software, bad layout of keys and so on.

So although every time a cam-phone is mentioned on Slashdot someone brings up the 'mic and antenna' issue and how a 'phone should be just a phone', I really don't think these newer phones have a problem in that area any more.

[DISCLAIMER: This is of course based on my own experiences with several cam / non-cam phones I have used. Your mileage may vary...]

-YoGiX

Re:Tiny quibble with the review

[bluelip]

Your comments remind of the joke about a watch that does everything, but tell time.

Re:Tiny quibble with the review

[IANAAC]

So although every time a cam-phone is mentioned on Slashdot someone brings up the 'mic and antenna' issue and how a 'phone should be just a phone', I really don't think these newer phones have a problem in that area any more.

I think the poster's point was that it was a camera/vidcam review, not a phone review. He's right. The review is all about the camera functions and not much else.

Re:Tiny quibble with the review

[FidelCatsro]

I have had numerous problems with Microphones and speakers when using phones over the years .
It is very noticeable the difference in quality between some of them , especially with those that tend to drop parts of the conversation .
Perhaps I am just a little sensitive in regards to sound quality ,but it is very important to me .

I also live in a village , the reception here is not great . I need a good antenna to compensate for that . If you are in a city or town , chances are you will never notice something like this though.

Re:Tiny quibble with the review

[fjm03]

Good point since the handset, as configured, isn't practical on the Cingular network which increasingly relies on the 850 Mhz channel for coverage in many markets.

Re:Tiny quibble with the review

[Sathallrin]

$900 is just way too much for a phone. Especially with only a 2 megapixel camera. You can get a much better digital for much cheaper. Plus probably a much better phone to go along with it. The article doesn't say much about the quality of the actual phone.

Re:Tiny quibble with the review

[10Ghz]

How good is it as an actual phone?
What does it sound like when making a call?
Is the antenna any use?
How is the microphone?

After using several Nokia phones (1611, 5110, 7110, 6110, 6210, 6310i, 6220, 6260, 6680 and 9300) over the course of the years, I can say that there are no problems in each of the areas you listed. Those are really non-issues that are not really worth reporting on, really.

The N90 is a good phone. It has a good antenna and microphone, and it's easy to use. There, happy?

Re:Tiny quibble with the review

[scottennis]

There's also a good review of this phone here: http://www.mobile-review.com/review/nokia-n90-en.s html

Re:Tiny quibble with the review

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow that joke sounds hilarious. Let's hear it, idoit.

Re:Tiny quibble with the review

[Threni]

To me though it's more reminiscent of the jokers who always post to Slashdot every single time a camera is mentioned saying `yeah, but can you make phone calls?` as if there's a single camera-phone on the market with which you can't! You don't get reviews of the latest 3d graphics cards here followed up with morons asking `yeah, but can you use it to surf the web` here, but somehow phones are treated differently. Perhaps they should save up and get a phone that's been released in the last ooooh 10 years and see what all this fuss about SMS and mobile java gaming is all about?

Re:Tiny quibble with the review

[southpolesammy]

You're both correct, in that we shouldn't have to worry about old technology like mikes and antennas, but the reality is that this is still a problem, especially for those of us in America living on the fringes of the digital divide where tech hasn't quite caught up to the rest of the connected world.

I do agree with the original post -- primarily, the device is a phone and as such it must be able to do three things:

1. get and keep a good signal
   
2. capture my voice satisfactorily
   
3. reproduce the remote caller's voice clearly
   

Everything else are bells and whistles. Now, if this were billed as a computer, PDA, or camera that had cellphone technology, then the playing field is different.

Re:Tiny quibble with the review

[Eric Giguere]

A good site for honest phone reviews is Steven Punter's Southern Ontario Cell Phone Page. No, he doesn't review this particular model, but he has interesting things to say about various popular North American phone models. Check it out....

Eric

Re:Tiny quibble with the review

[FidelCatsro]

I do love extra features on my phone , I also use my phone for my calendar and address storage whilst on the go ,
I sync with bluetooth , I use it as a Dictaphone , I occasionally take a snapshot of things and play the odd game on it .

I also want to know how the phone handles in the real world as a phone . How good the sound quality is in a noisy environment etc.

I don't want just a phone , but I want the it to excel at being a Phone and I want the details .. especially when that phone costs 900 quid. Add to that the fact that it also functions as a media player , which requires good audio hardware .

Re:Tiny quibble with the review

[NotWorkSafe]

Yeah...but does it run Linux?

Re:Tiny quibble with the review

[Threni]

Quibble: it's $900, not £900.

Sure, it's got to work as a phone. But like I said, they've all worked fine for years now. On a train/bus, by a busy road, in an airport, at Notting Hill Carnival (assuming you can get a connection, otherwise use SMS) - no phone I've ever had (about 6 or 7) has had a problem in any situation I've used it in. There are codes you can enter into your phone to turn on/off/up/down compression and so on in case you feel like tweaking it. Phones tend to hone in on the narrow band of frequencies related to the human voice, so music (in the background) can sound odd, but more importantly a lot of noise is just filtered out straight away.

Re:Tiny quibble with the review

[Znork]

"saying `yeah, but can you make phone calls?` as if there's a single camera-phone on the market with which you can't!"

Frankly, personally I suspect it's more because the fact that cell phone coverage is still lacking in many places, they tend to disconnect suddenly even in many good coverage areas, and costs are vastly higher than what would be reasonable.

A more valid question, perhaps, would be 'can you make cheap reliable phone calls'?

Compared with old POTS, or upcoming VoIP/Wlan merged tech, the cell industry risks being found vastly underperforming in many areas. IMO, because they've spent overly many resources getting sidetracked, bickering about standards and pissing territory and nowhere near enough maintaining and improving price/performance for their fundamental service. And now when they risk getting alternate tech competition in that area, they, like Iridium versus Cell tech, like proprietary data networks versus Internet, may find their offerings simply arent nearly competetive enough.

Re:Tiny quibble with the review

[Threni]

> Frankly, personally I suspect it's more because the fact that cell phone coverage
> is still lacking in many places, they tend to disconnect suddenly even in many
> good coverage areas, and costs are vastly higher than what would be reasonable.
>
> A more valid question, perhaps, would be 'can you make cheap reliable phone
> calls'?

Not for a reviewer of a phone. I think if you're going to get a phone you have to first find out what the coverage will be in the areas you'll be using it in.

Expecting a review of the latest multi-media phone to mention whether or not you can use it in the suburbs of Cowpoke, Ohio is a little unreasonable, to my mind...

Re:Tiny quibble with the review

[the0ther]

Nokia is known for the best call-quality in the industry. Antennas (external) are useless. Chances are it's got an excellent mic.

Re:Tiny quibble with the review

[Anonymous Coward]

You use it primarily to make phone calls? Are you from the 90s or what? Perhaps from the U.S.?

Re:Tiny quibble with the review

[hackstraw]

I think the poster's point was that it was a camera/vidcam review, not a phone review. He's right. The review is all about the camera functions and not much else.

Nobody in their right mind would pay $900 for a phone, unless there is something special about it. Covered in jewels, a prop in a movie, or having a camera in it, maybe, but for a phone, no.

Re:Tiny quibble with the review

[Anonymous Coward]

...or having a camera in it...

Uhhhh...

Re:Tiny quibble with the review

[Doppler00]

Who actually talks into their cellphone anymore? Headsets are sooo much l3373r.

Re:Tiny quibble with the review

[StikyPad]

The reception has at least as much to do with the coverage of, and line-of-sight to, cell towers as it does with the phone itself. There's 2 sides to the transceiver story, and one end can only do so much. Improvements in the past 10 years haven't so much been in the area of antennae design, but simply increasing the number of towers. All a phone can do is amplify the signal it receives, and transmit a more powerful signal. The only thing digital modulation of the signals does is make a drop out pure silence instead of static.

Re:Tiny quibble with the review

[Tug3]

I see your point, but I disagree with the importance of some of these points. IMO there couple more important issue... (Well, you could count them as one.) ...as for your worries:
> How good is it as an actual phone?
I gather you are worried about the usability of this phone. This I DO agree with. VERY important point! If the phone is too sluggish or requires "getting used to", it's worthless.
> What does it sound like when making a call?
> How is the microphone?
I haven't used any modern phone that has major issues with these. I'm not expecting HiFi, it's a phone. But any of the modern phones have had good sound and good microphone pickup. The problems come later, when a phone gets old (and contacts become dirty). Also third-party HFs have problems, but that's not the phone manufacturers concern. You buy cheap, you get crap.
> Is the antenna any use?
This is an issue I've not even thought about in the last five years. I know this might be important in some backwater countries, but should not matter in developed nations. And yes, I do travel the countryside quite a lot too.
But what about the issue that I think is the biggest one?

STABILITY! Can I shout that out any louder? R E L I A B I L I T Y ! ! !

And let's not forget the usability, you mentioned earlier. These three points make all the difference in the world. And sorry to say, but Nokia has NOT been one for any of these in the last couple of years. At least when a phone comes out. I would NOT buy this phone - at least within a year, as the software is too buggy to use. And even then the responsiveness is not good.
Oh yes, I've toyed around with this phone. And it was not very responsive, and yes, it did crash! - And the phone was a production model, not a pre-release model. Sorry, but no sale here. (Even when I liked the idea of finally introducing optics to a camera phone.)

The first thing that springs to my mind....

[novus ordo]

"My god...$900"

oblig

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, but can it make phone calls?

Re:oblig

[scovetta]

Who cares? It'll take 2 megapixel PICTURES that you can e-mail to yourself. For an extra $199, you can do text messaging to other Nokia N90 customers.

Seriously folks, when was the last time you heard yourself say, "It's a good thing I had that camera in my phone, or I would have missed that!".

I'd expect some *useful* features in a $900 phone (universal remote control, PDA-like features, wi-fi, laser pointer, [a phone that you can make calls on]!!, maybe something cool like goggles or a tv-out that you can pipe internet access through your phone to a screen that you can actually see something on. Why not treat the phone as a thin client and have your "computer" be your phone.

Sorry, my phone just finished making me french toast, I've got to run.

Re:oblig

[DarkVader]

Well, I was never one of the people who really wanted a camera in my phone. I did want bluetooth, so I could use it as a modem with my iBook.

So, I got a motorola v551 - which happened to have a camera. I didn't object to a camera enough to bother finding a phone without one.

And then, I was at my girlfriend's business one night - and an eagle decided to eat a pigeon in the doorway.

Without a camera phone, I'd have missed getting pictures of that. So, I guess I'm glad my phone had one.

Re:oblig

[Tet]

Seriously folks, when was the last time you heard yourself say, "It's a good thing I had that camera in my phone, or I would have missed that!".

Actually, quite often. It's handy to know that wherever you are, you have a camera with you. OK, so it's not great quality, but it's good enough for a lot of uses.

Re:oblig

[Glsai]

Actually just two weeks ago I was happy for my camera phone. I didn't have to lug my SLR or Point and Shoot around, and while in Disney World I was shopping for a cake topper for my brother's wedding. I could take pictures of all the ones we found, e-mail them to him then call him and find out what he wanted. It was only VGA quality, but it was good enough. Of course though 900 bucks is just too much for a phone, the most I'd ever pay would be 250-300 and that would be a phone I plan to have for years, for example my Treo which I adore.

Re:oblig

[scovetta]

And then, I was at my girlfriend's...

A hundred thousand /.ers expected a different ending to that sentence.

Re:oblig

[utexaspunk]

and an eagle decided to eat a pigeon in the doorway.

Well, come on, let's see it!

Re:oblig

[patio11]

I, for one, was totally expecting bird-on-bird action. Because, honestly, what else could have gone on that would be of interest to the average /.er?

Re:oblig

[RKBA]

The closest I've found to what you describe is the PalmOne Treo 650 (See: http://snipurl.com/j3cu ). I pick it up on Friday so I haven't had a chance to use it personally yet, but it's supposed to have unlimited Internet access, email, etc.

Re:oblig

[Barkley44]

Let's see those pictures... post them to flickr!

Re:oblig

[linhux]

So, what's the URL of the picture? :-)

Re:oblig

[kjordan]

nonsense! i demand a pic of that bird-eating in action!

Re:oblig

[Anonymous Coward]

yeah, but can it run linux?

(no i didnt rtfa)

Re:oblig

[drewxhawaii]

how right you are, sir

Re:oblig

[DarkVader]

Well, ok. But keep in mind, I didn't say they were good pictures, just that I wouldn't have gotten any otherwise.

http://homepage.mac.com/jlcooper/PhotoAlbum1.html

Re:oblig

[utexaspunk]

those are quite tiny! still, cool that you got something...

It's Free

[Anonymous Coward]

I hear its going to be free with a 10 Year contract

Re:It's Free

[badzilla]

You think you jest.. in the early 1990's if you bought an analog phone in the UK then Nokia Mobira actually would offer to sign you to a ten-year contract!

N91

[pr0nbot]

Not sure why this was posted to slashdot... it's just another phone.

The one you want is the N91, which has 802.11g wi-fi.

Re:N91

[viktor]

Not sure why this was posted to slashdot... it's just another phone.

I agree, but then again every beta of every minor revision of the Linux kernel seems to get posted to slashdot, so why not a post for every phone model? :-)

Yeah, that could be considered flaimbait. Please don't bite it.

Re:N91

[bleedingpegasus]

Now, this is what i'd call superhandphone. Finally with something real for networking, 4Gb hdd, 10+ hrs of music, with equalizer(!!!), 3.5mm jack for headphone, and radio. Lot of euphoria news for this one as well, but keep the dreams up guys!

From the Whoops department...

[xtracto]

"does-it-ome-with-a-million-minutes "

OME as in Otitis Media with Effusion?

I thing you could get it after a million minutes of continuous speaking :)

low space

[u2pa]

only 25mb space on it... no thanks

Re:As a Nokia Insider

[xtracto]

Wow, an Anonymous Coward Nokia Insider Troll.

I didnt read all the comment, I already know it:

I dont know why does this Nokia zealots talk about Nokia phones being easy to use, they say "Making calls in a Nokia telephone is easy" sure, it is easy to...

Neat uh?

This phone is a travesty.

[generic-man]

I will absolutely not buy this so-called "phone." For $900 I can get:

1. A Nintendo DS on which to play games
2. A small 4-megapixel camera with which to take photos
3. An Archos PXF-78-MNpL-1 Personal Media Player Jukebox that will extract the photos, sew them into a DivX movie, synchronize with all seven of my Linux boxen, and perform many other tasks that an iPod cannot do
4. A free cellular phone from any carrier I wish
5. A portable DVD player on which I will watch movies
6. A large backpack to haul this around

As is common in these discussions, I believe I speak for everyone in this forum when I state that because I do not want this product, none of you should ever even consider purchasing it.

</coffee>

Re:This phone is a travesty.

[kevin_conaway]

Zing! Take that, Slashdot culture.

Well said. Even funnier that it got modded interesting

Re:This phone is a travesty.

[FidelCatsro]

Well that stems from UNIX Boxen which in turn stems from VAXen.
http://foldoc.doc.ic.ac.uk/foldoc/foldoc.cgi?boxen

boxen
 
/bok'sn/ (By analogy with VAXen) A fanciful plural of box often encountered in the phrase "Unix boxen", used to describe commodity Unix hardware. The connotation is that any two Unix boxen are interchangeable.

In German Boxen is Boxing as in pugilism

Re:This phone is a travesty.

[jtroutman]

and here I just thought it was simple pluralization (is that even a word?)... if the plural of ox is oxen then the plural of box must be boxen.

Re:This phone is a travesty.

[Kombat]

No, the parent is right. "Boxen" is trendy and stupid. It comes from
pluralizing "ox" (the livestock), but neglects to consider the convention of other words. For example, the plural of "fox" is "foxes," not "foxen." The plural of "pox" is "poxes." Actually, even the word "box" itself is supposed to be pluralized as "boxes." Have you ever heard anyone outside of the geek-clique say, "Hey Jim, hand me those boxen over there, would you?"

It's a trendy way for geeks with self-esteem issues to be trendy in a cult-humour sort of way, and feel like they belong in some sort of elite club that misuses words. Merriam-Webster, Oxford, and every other dictionary I checked all pluralize "box" as "boxes," and not a single one of them included any reference to an alternate pluralization ending in 'n'.

Re:This phone is a travesty.

[killmenow]

I will absolutely not buy this so-called "phone." For $900 I can get:

1. Hookers
2. Blow

I already have a digital camera and a cellphone and if my digital camera's batteries die after I photograph myself with the hooker, I can still use my phone to call my dealer for blow.

Re:This phone is a travesty.

[Anonymous Coward]

You also get: 5 different chargers, USB or connector cables. Do you have room on your desk for all that shit? Not to mention the great convenience of having to carry a freaking backback around to do all these things with.

Re:This phone is a travesty.

[FidelCatsro]

It is annoying i agree , but every sub set of culture has its trendy words .
If cowabunga and kook can make it into the dictionary , I don't see why Boxen can't .
Well not as a plural for box , but as a term for commodity hardware . I personally use "Machines " or computers , but each to their own .

Re:This phone is a travesty.

[Anonymous Coward]

Bravo. Also, I'd like to point that another DISadvantage to the all-in-one phone approach is that with the $900 phone, absolutely NONE of those spiffy features are available to you on an airplane because TSA and FAA regulations still require all communication devices to be turned off while in flight. It doesn't matter if the communication components can be disabled, they want all communication devices turned entirely off.

P.S. Maybe the cell-phone-in-flight regulations will change, maybe it won't. There are pros and cons either way.

Re:This phone is a travesty.

[moro_666]

actually the german word for number of "boxe" items is boxen ...

afaik, boxen doesnt doesnt only have 1 meaning in german, for example type this into the google's german-to-english translator :

ich habe viele boxen mit mir
-- translates to --
I have many boxes with me

i have to admit i havent seen my german teacher for ages, so i might be wrong, but i'm about 75% sure that i'm correct (sometimes a banana aint just a banana ...)

the world doesnt end at the border of united states and great britain, get over it.

nobody in germany writes ybergeek with an 'y' , it's actually supposed to be an u with dots, like this übergeek. but i dont see anyone complaining on that.

--------

and as an opposite to the thread author of this current thread, while some people may like to carry a bunch of stuff with them all the time, some others prefer to travel light carrying 1-2 items around. i still think i would prefer an hp/compaq ipaq to this thingy (with the gsm module and the camera), since it's far more comfortable to use and has more stuff to offer. so i would choose my wallet and a multifeatured phone.

not everybody carries a bag with him always, so if you have only 2 pockets, you pick 1-2 items and your keys along with you. and all your linux boxen and the rest of your equipment will just have to stay at home.

----

ist cool man! [ you remember that milka chocolate commercial ]? i wonder where the whining language lawyers where then ...

Re:This phone is a travesty.

[southpolesammy]

Nice post, but couldn't you just buy a cheap laptop with a wireless adaptor, a DVD reader, a webcam, and a headset for Skype to do all of the above? It would probably cost about the same and you'd still need the backpack, but at least you can do all of the above with one device instead of several. Sure, you'd have to stay in range of a Starbucks or McDonald's everywhere you went, but that's not too hard to do anymore...

Re:This phone is a travesty.

[NickFortune]

I believe I speak for everyone in this forum when I say that no one ever speaks for everyone in this forum.

Re:This phone is a travesty.

[GuidoW]

Well, I am a German, and one of the sort who likes to correct what other people say...

The word "boxen" as a verb means exactly what was said, "boxing".
As a noun, "Boxen" means loudspeakers (plural). I guess this was originally taken from the english language.

Re:This phone is a travesty.

[Anonymous Coward]

Bah! Backpack??? What, are you trying to look 'cool' or something? Fit in with the LUSERS perhaps? A real /.er uses a large belt and lots of clips to tote everything they need. Why wear a backpack when you can be a reallife batman or Luke Skywalker. Of course, you're not really a millionare/crimefighter/mystical warrior from long long ago, but dammit you can take a picture and answer a phone call in less than 15 seconds!

Re:This phone is a travesty.

[MBGMorden]

Preach it brotha man. If I had mod points I'd mod you up. It's torture every time I see someone use (misuse) the "word" boxen.

Let the complaining begin

[Nichotin]

As usual, there will be a lot of posts about "I just want the damn thing to be able to do calls, nothing more". Aside from killing the market (if every vendor had done so), I just think you haven't really considered the possibilities. I travel one hour per day, and since my SE K750i is so powerful, I watch re-encoded episodes of American Dad and Family Guy to kill some time. The quality is acceptable. I basically see the phone as a cool gadget to kill some time while travelling or attending a very boring class.

Re:Let the complaining begin

[Ford Prefect]

I travel one hour per day, and since my SE K750i is so powerful, I watch re-encoded episodes of American Dad and Family Guy to kill some time. The quality is acceptable. I basically see the phone as a cool gadget to kill some time while travelling or attending a very boring class.

Whatever happened to reading a book?

I'm starting to feel like some weird throwback to some bygone age with my newspapers and paperback books - and I'm only 26! ;-)

Re:Let the complaining begin

[teeker]

Aside from killing the market (if every vendor had done so), I just think you haven't really considered the possibilities.

No, I HAVE considered the possibilites. That sounds great for you but not everybody wants or needs to watch TV on their phone. Some of us really honestly truly would place a higher value on the simple ability to place calls and be as unobtrusive as possible the rest of the time. I am waiting for something smaller than the RAZR...I don't need a PDA, I don't need an mp3 player, I don't need a camera or widescreen video, I just need a bluetooth connection for a headset, backlit mono screen, a decent (simple) phonebook, and something that I can carry comfortably in my pocket. I'm not sure why something that simple these days couldn't be made about the size of a Zippo lighter... Couple that with data services so my laptop could connect to the internet via bluetooth to the phone, and it'd be absolutely perfect for me (and I suspect others).

If everybody was bitching about it, then you'd think somebody would make one, but apparently not.

Re:Let the complaining begin

[Anonymous Coward]

Try being an English major. I spend most of my life listening to cretins far and wide proclaim their massive intelligence while displaying, at best, fifth grade communicative skills.

The comparative lack of importance that is granted to literacy in the modern era makes me wince, but it's not really a huge surprise in a world where bookshelves have been replaced by "X-Box game case shelves."

Re:Let the complaining begin

[timeOday]

I am waiting for something smaller than the RAZR...I don't need a PDA, I don't need an mp3 player, I don't need a camera or widescreen video, I just need a bluetooth connection for a headset, backlit mono screen, a decent (simple) phonebook, and something that I can carry comfortably in my pocket. I'm not sure why something that simple these days couldn't be made about the size of a Zippo lighter...

Because the biggest components of a phone are the battery, keypad, and screen. Once you have those, adding an mp3 player and PDA add neglible weight and negligible expense.

Re:Let the complaining begin

[J.R. Random]

I basically see the phone as a cool gadget to kill some time while travelling or attending a very boring class.

I use books for that. No user manual required.

Re:Let the complaining begin

[utexaspunk]

Whatever happened to reading a book?

AFAIK, reading a book is still an option. We just have more options now. Nothing wrong with that.

Re:Let the complaining begin

[bleedingpegasus]

DUDE! this is /., and he already mentioned: to kill some time!

Re:Let the complaining begin

[Joel from Sydney]

Whatever happened to reading a book?

Funnily enough, I have an ebook reader on my Nokia 6600.

I don't think so

[Jeff DeMaagd]

For one, compromising ergonomics for everyone for features that only a subset of owners might use isn't a good idea.

And another, a phone that costs as much as a mid-range laptop (laptops start at $500 now) but smaller and easier to steal or lose doesn't seem to be a good idea. Even with a hefty service plan subsidy, it's not going to be as cheap as a low end laptop.

Which isn't to say there isn't a market for these but a $900 phone looks like a niche item to me.

I certainly won't be buying this, I thought the RAZR was too expensive.

Re:I don't think so

[generic-man]

Compared with my $20,000 platinum Vertu Communications Instrument (Flash), a $900 phone would be quite cheap. I would buy this "Nokia N90" if only it had a concierge button and some jewel-encrusted highlights.

The RAZR was "too expensive" for a few months; now you can find it for free* with a service contract.

* $1,200 minus $500 activation rebate minus $400 service activation credit minus $150 rebate which must be filed no sooner than 90 days and no later than 120 days from time of activation minus $150 rebate which must be filed no sooner than 180 days and no later than 210 days from time of activation equals FREE!

Re:I don't think so

[Red Flayer]

" For one, compromising ergonomics for everyone for features that only a subset of owners might use isn't a good idea."

Compromising a couple characteristics in order to create the perception of increased functionality works well. SUVs come to mind.

The mobile phone market is becoming like the automobile market is.

Sensible people will buy sensible phones. Other people will buy the 'SUV' of phones, not because it is better, but because they can brag to their buddies/coworkers/business contacts that they have the newest greatest most expensive phone.

I see it every day at my office, when the ad sales reps bitch and moan that the company won't pay for their new Dongle. And when, three months later, they've replaced that Dongle with a newer, more prestigious one. iPods, cell phones, PDAs, etc.

Re:I don't think so

[grimJester]

And another, a phone that costs as much as a mid-range laptop (laptops start at $500 now) but smaller and easier to steal or lose doesn't seem to be a good idea.

Oh come on! A phone is bad because it's "easier to steal or lose" than a laptop?

Re:I don't think so

[se7en11]

FYI: TigerDirect.com is offer the RAZR phones for free with a 2 year contract.

Re:I don't think so

[10Ghz]

For one, compromising ergonomics for everyone for features that only a subset of owners might use isn't a good idea.

I have used camera-phones, and I really haven't seen any evidence of this "compromising of ergonomics". All the camera-phones were just as good as normal phones, as phones without camera were. Besides, this phone is designed for the camera in mind. Don't want a phone with prominent camera-features? There are plenty of those available. And if you want a phone to "just to make phone-calls", may I recommend the Nokia 1101?

And another, a phone that costs as much as a mid-range laptop (laptops start at $500 now) but smaller and easier to steal or lose doesn't seem to be a good idea.

You apparently haven't heard of this. Prices range (IIRC) from $1.500 to something like $5.000. And besides, there are lots and lots of tiny things that are VERY expensive. Jewelry can cost a lot more. Watches can be really expensive.

Re:I don't think so

[Anonymous Coward]

yah, but it is tiger direct. Why you anyone in their right minds get anything via them, free or not.

Re:I don't think so

[Anonymous Coward]

Good God...that's just flat awesome. Platinum, 18K white gold, or 18K yellow gold...and Bluetooth? I have a new lust, and its name is Vertu.

Re:I don't think so

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course it's a niche item, it's a $900 phone! However there is also such a thing as a niche market that it can be sold to. Not everything has to be aimed towards the mass market.

Low light flash, image stabilization technology?!

[Dekortage]

Bah! I want low signal boosting and Verizon service stabilization technology!!!

No seriously...

[Anonymous Coward]

Can it make phone calls? Can the call be completed without being dropped? For $900 I might expect that level of reliability.

Rubic's Phone?

[Maavin]

How long does it take to fold the thing correctly?

Is there an algorithm out, yet?

" The Nokia N90, $900 Camera Phone " (!!!)

[Bananatree3]

[Grandpa voice]These people will never, never learn. Back in my day, a telephone was a commodity. Now, these young whipper-snappers are trying to coherse their parents into bancrupcy to pay for these new fangled gold bricks. My, when will you ever learn, young grasshoppers?[/Grandpa voice]

$900 now...

[squison]

..free in 1-2 years with contract.

Re:$900 now...

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, you can get today (since a few months, in fact) a SonyEricsson K750i for much less than that. Less than $100 with a contract. It also has a 2 megapixel camera with a rather good autofocus lens (not a dumb fixed focus lense). And it is also packed with features despite its small form factor. It's not a smart phone, though (no touchscreen).

And if you are looking for a smart phone with a bigger display, more features and more applications, then you can wait for the SonyEricsson P990, which will combine the 2 megapixel camera with all the nice features of the P900/P910.

(no, I'm not working for SonyEricsson - just happy with their nice phones)

No thanks.

[rindeee]

I believe one could get a very nice phone and a separate 4-5MP camera with a large memory card and still have some spending money left. Yeah, I get that this is an "all-in-one" device, but they've made the classic mistake that has torpedoed so many others in the past. They compromised on the camera (it's only 2MP and has very little storage capacity) and on the phone (it's big/bulky) in order to combine them. Even with the end product, $900 just seems a stupidly high price to charge.

hmm my short review

[sam_paris]

no headphone socket, no vibrate, less disk space than my sony ericcson, lame

The one feature mobile phone never have

[Serilkath_Montreal]

Making their owner not being a big jerk.

Re:The one feature mobile phone never have

[whiteranger99x]

You know, now that I think about it, cars haven't had the feature of making their drivers make less of an asshole either :P

A $900 phone?????

[gstoddart]

And why would I buy this? I can buy a digital camera with higher resolution than this and a new phone for less money than this.

Who buys a $900 phone??? Bah, I'm getting old I guess.

Japanese cell phones

[Bueller_007]

The "West" is so far behind in mobile phone technology. For only $200, I can get this phone in Japan:
http://www.vodafone.jp/english/products/model_3G/v 903t/index.html

It's completely bilingual (although I don't think it has predictive text in English mode), has a 2 MB camera, global roaming (and global GPS navigation (although only five or six countries are available at the moment)), can take video calls, communicate via Bluetooth or IR, read QR codes (very convenient in Japan). The Nokia N90 can't even vibrate when it's in silent mode. WTF? That's pretty much par for the course over here. And the Nokia is $700 more? If you can switch this phone to work on a Verizon account back home, it's almost worthwhile to buy a ticket to Japan, buy the phone and then fly back.

Even the free phones you get with a new account over here have AT LEAST a 1 MB camera. Some have 2. Some of the newer Sharp phones even have built-in optical zoom.

Vodafone is generally looked down upon by the Japanese people. NTT Docomo probably have even better phones available.

Re:Japanese cell phones

[antifoidulus]

Every time I hear one of these "In Japan, great cell phones!" posts I always chuckle at an accessory in common use in Japan is a plastic case that contains 4 AA(maybe AAA I forget) batteries that plugs into the power port. Why use such an ugly abomination? Because the battery life on those phones with a zillion features sucks. My 40 euro little dinky motorola phone can last me from Monday till Friday on one charge; that never happened when I lived in Japan. Also, about the whole predictive text input: when I was living in the US, my 4+ year old crappy phone had predictive text input in English, not all that advanced of a feature.....

Re:Japanese cell phones

[Bueller_007]

Well, English is still a FOREIGN LANGUAGE here. We're really lucky that they provide anything at all. The number of people who speak English is quite low, certainly much lower than the US, Canada, UK, etc. There's only a very small incentive to provide even support for the language itself, let alone predictive text messaging in it.

As for the battery life, generally speaking, a Japanese phone's battery life is shorter when talking, but longer when in standby. (Although the phone I mentioned is far longer than a "Western" phone for both.)

Re:Japanese cell phones

[Anonymous Coward]

For only $200, I can get this phone in Japan:

What, stolen from a research center? It's not even launched yet. Check the page you linked to. I also doubt you can get it for $200 without a subscription.

am i the only one...

[utexaspunk]

...who is disappointed that the screen doesn't flip all the way around so that the phone could close with the main display exposed? it could have been a cool little phone/PDA convertible. ...alas...

An alternative for under $900

[salimfadhley]

1 x Nikon D70s - Ths award winning machine does nothing other than take photographs very well. Dispite not having the highest megapixel count, this SLR comes with great optics and a sensor that delivers vivid colour and gret low-light sensitivity.

1 x Nokia Series-6 phone; This award winning range of Symbian phones comes with SDKs in Python, Java and C++; Possibly the most extendable range of phones ever built. You can still buy phones without cameras in them, but snap them up while you get a chance.

Result: A smaller, more OSS friendly phone, A bigger but much better camera... one that's likely to teach you a few things about photography. :-)

Re:An alternative for under $900

[Anonymous Coward]

1 x Nokia Series-6 phone; This award winning range of Symbian phones comes with SDKs in Python, Java and C++;

But you need like 5 files for even a simple HelloWorld program...

Re:An alternative for under $900

[rdunnell]

Close... but no cigar. You forgot to put a lens on that Nikon. Add in another hundred bucks or so for a cheap third party one - although that's still better than what the camera has I'm sure, it won't do the camera justice.

Of course it won't all fit in your pocket unless you have some really baggy cargo pants. But the camera comes with a neck strap...

Re:An alternative for under $900

[caveat]

Actually, the $900 is just for the camera body. $1200 with a lens, but in all fairness it's an excellent Nikkor. Personally, I'm going for the $1400 two-lens package, you can't beat the price for the glass you're getting.

Canon might make an arguably better body in the Digital Rebel XT, but by all accounts the kit lens pales next to the Nikon. And yes, I am a Nikon fanboy, or at least I already have several F-mount lenses that more than justify buying a new Nikon body.

Re:An alternative for under $900

[pev]

Of course you could do that. But you'll get one of these for free or very cheap with a contract in the UK. Would you get the free D70 with a contract? Absolutely not! It's not about the hadware *value* it's about the _cost_ to the consumer. I've always had top end phones, but I've never paid over £20 for one because I'm on contract.

~Pev

Re:An alternative for under $900

[rdunnell]

Incredibly off topic but cameta.com has that package + a 1 to 6 gb memory card, case, and some other misc throwins for a similar price (so hey, free memory card etc). I just bought the D70 package (same price, but with $100 rebate since it's a D70 and not a D70S) and it's supposed to get here Friday.

The difference is the second lens is 70-300 instead of 55-200. I would have preferred the 55-200 over the 70-300 but I'll probably want both anyway.

Re:An alternative for under $900

[caveat]

Yeah, I can see wanting both - that's why I'm going for the 55-200, I already have an amazing, very old, Nikkor-H 300mm tele. I love the thing, it's solid metal and you could probably beat somebody to death with it. I don't know how I feel about Microdrives though, I've heard mixed things about them; I know I can't knock it 'till I've tried it, but I'm opting for 2x4GB CF cards. Moot point anyway, B&H shipped already, should be here Monday.

Not for US market?

[fjm03]

It's a 900/1800 Mhz handset, not 850/1800 Mhz.

Re:Not for US market?

[Dysfnctnl85]

Actually T-Mobile supports 1800mhz GSM nationwide, so you could conceivably purchase this phone and take it to T-Mobile to get a SIM card. I've been thinking about doing this for the SE w800i...

Definition of heavy

[ChrisF79]

Clearly, this phone is heavy compared to other phones currently on the market. That part I'm not arguing at all. I just think it is funny to see how the definition of heavy has changed so much. It wasn't too long ago that someone that wanted a cell phone would often purchase the ones in the vinyl bags (that looked like something from the Vietnam war). If you would have handed someone this N90 back then, they would have raved at how light it is!

Global Roaming?

[Frankie70]

It's completely bilingual (although I don't think it has predictive text in English mode), has a 2 MB camera, global roaming


I have not heard of a phone which comes with roaming, global or otherwise.
It's the service provider who provides roaming on the phone.

Or is there something I am missing?

Re:Global Roaming?

[Bueller_007]

Yes, you are missing something. Japan uses a different cellular phone standard than the rest of the world. Most Japanese phones use PDC, a 2G protocol developed and used ONLY in Japan. PDC has its advantages, but pretty much the rest of the world uses GSM. That means that the average phone that you purchase over here is incapable of global roaming, regardless of your provider. PDC/GSM and 3G phones (capable of global roaming) are becoming more popular over here, but they usually cost significantly more.
Thus, I made a point of mentioning that it is capable of global roaming.

Re:Global Roaming?

[Frankie70]

Most Japanese phones use PDC, a 2G protocol developed and used ONLY in Japan. PDC has its advantages, but pretty much the rest of the world uses GSM.


Vodafone is Japan's GSM provider, so I am sure a regular GSM phone you buy anywhere should be able to
provide roaming in Japan also, if your provide has a tie up to Vodafone Japan.
Again, it's the provider who provides roaming not the phone.

A PDC/GSM phone will not provide roaming on a CDMA network, just like a regular GSM phone will not provide
roaming on a PDC network, right?

Re:Global Roaming?

[Bueller_007]

>Vodafone is Japan's GSM provider, so I am sure a regular GSM phone you buy anywhere should be able to provide roaming in Japan also, if your provide has a tie up to Vodafone Japan.

No. Vodafone Japan is NOT GSM. It is PDC. If you bring a Vodafone telephone from England to Japan, it WILL NOT WORK with Vodafone here. NO GSM PHONE WILL WORK IN JAPAN. Period.
http://euc.jp/misc/cellphones.en.html#tech
If you don't even know that much about Japanese cell phones, I don't know why I'm having this discussion.

Re:Global Roaming?

[Anonymous Coward]

Korean phones have had the ability to roam in Japan for a few years now. Since about 2002 I think.

Korean phones are very similar to Japan in terms of features. I laughed at the price...900$ for that Nokia? Ridiculous...

Steff from User Friendly

[Silver Sloth]

Marketing types always have to have the lates gadget, however costly.

Re:Steff from User Friendly

[cakesy]

Maybe the only ones who really buy it first are the other phone companies - so they see what they need to do to improve their own models. This would make sense, and a reasonable reason for having a high starting price.

That's Fine...

[Greyfox]

But if I'm going to pay $900 for a phone I vant to look mahvelous with it, dahling!

Uses Realplayer

[the_Bionic_lemming]

Since the phone uses realplayer - it's effectively a stinking piece of crap not subject to further scrutiny.

Avoid this phone at all costs, or immedietly turn over your geek liscence to be downgraded to a loser liscence.

You have been warned!

sound quibbles

[necro81]

The biggest problem we've had with this phone is that as much as it touts itself as a multimedia phone, it doesn't have the regular 2.5/3.5 headphone jack input, which means that you are left with the bundled headphone package. Although it's decent, it's not suitable for even the sensible aficionados let alone the audiophiles. The least you would expect after spending so much on a phone is a decent pair of earphones, but apparently our thinking is too wishful. There are no equalizer settings...

I admit that not having the standard headphone jack is just plain stupid design (unless Nokia plans on introducing a high end headset sometime, $$$ Profit), but really: since when has any audiophile given any cellphone the time of day. And why would they want to? Since when is pristine audio playback quality a selling point? The lack of equalizer settings is, I guess, a moot point, if the playback quality makes it unlikely you'd hear much difference. Once again; since when has having an equalizer been a selling point in a cellphone? My own cellphone is a midrange model (Motorola V220), but are these two items something that's standard with high-end cellphones? Why not just buy an iPod or other dedicated MP3 player, whose playback quality can be assured?

Nokia is trying to help the slashdot geeks!

[ShadowsHawk]

Come on guys, you're missing the point! The whole point of the heavy phone is to help you buff up while answering calls.

Weight Issue

[canfirman]

CoolTechZone.com has reviewed Nokia's N90 cell phones that comes with 2 megapixel camera and a host of other features, and it costs a solid $900 per unit. "The minute you set your eyes on the N90, the first thing that springs to your mind is 'it looks a lot slimmer in photos...' but as you take it out of the packaging, you realize the heaviness of it..."

However, at $900, the weight issue can be easily compensated by the lightness you now feel in your wallet.

Re:Weight Issue

[Dionysus]

However, at $900, the weight issue can be easily compensated by the lightness you now feel in your wallet.

Oh, come on. Most people are paying with credit cards these days. No weight differensial after you pay. Only thing you are going to feel, are the dishes flying towards you when your wife finds out you spent $900 on a phone.

Except...

[metamatic]

What it is designed to be is a feature packed phone that doesn't mind compromising on the ergonomics to pack in every last bit of functionality you could ever want on a camera phone.

The functionality I want is for it to be a quad-band phone, so I can use it everywhere. This phone isn't, so it won't work in some places.

Why do they keep packing in the extra features when they haven't got the basic phone functionality sorted out yet?

Everyone haul out the slashdot kneejerk reaction!

[lidocaineus]

Where are the hordes of people that are going to proclaim, "All I want is a phone that makes phone calls!!! No one else can possibly want more than I want!"

Of course almost all phone companies provide barebones phones (usually free with a service contract. And of course, this IS a frankenmonster of a phone and even gadget hounds would have a hard time justifying this one for the price. But don't let that stop any of you luddites out there from making it clear, once again, why YOU are right and everyone else is not entitled to have a slightly different view.

Nokia N70...

[GreekPimpSlap]

you will pretty much be better off waiting for the nokia N70 which will pretty much be the same phone but with a cheaper price. supposedly it will also have the 2-way PTT (like nextel) but with video also so you can actually see who you are talking to. here is a good review of it: http://www.infosyncworld.com/reviews/n/6234.html

What exactly is the point of a 2mp cameraphone?

[antifoidulus]

With the lens it comes with, your pictures are still probably going to look like crap, no matter how many pixels you use. A better lens however would make the phone bulkier and more expensive....Camera phones are great for those "slice of life" moments(example, here in Germany I saw a grifter with a live alpaca, but alas I had no camera to share the moment with everyone!) when you don't have a camera, but even then, do you really need 2 megapixels? Esp. for something you are probably just going to throw up on the web...

Re:What exactly is the point of a 2mp cameraphone?

[Anonymous Coward]

It has a Zeiss Lens . . .

Re:What exactly is the point of a 2mp cameraphone?

[The Cydonian]

I have a slightly earlier-version Nokia 6680. While night-time pics are, of course, grainy, for regular shots, I'm not complaining at all.

Re:What exactly is the point of a 2mp cameraphone?

[Anonymous Coward]

I see marketing works quite well on you. Slap a name on it and it must be good.

If they can make such a good lens small enough to fit into that phone, then why do they still make those humungous lenses anymore? Answer: because the technology to make a good lens that small simply does not exist, and slapping some elite name on does not change that fact.

Re:What exactly is the point of a 2mp cameraphone?

[antifoidulus]

But what kind of optical zoom do you get on that? Fine for close up shots, but without optical zoom, you are going to miss a lot

Re:What exactly is the point of a 2mp cameraphone?

[Overzeetop]

They make humongous lenses because (1) not all imaging areas are the size of a pinhead (eg: 35mm, 6cm) and (2) the larger the lens, the greater light collecting ability. While it is certainly true that you can cure certain quality ills with a larger lens, the principal reason is light gathering, with the size of the image being a factor in the light gathering equation. (a third is focal length, but that's another argument altogether, and tied up in the first two).

Zeiss makes good, small lenses, the Tessar in the old Yashica T4 coems to mind - every bit as sharp as lenses many times its size. Nonetheless, your point is valid that just saying it has a zeiss lens does not necessarily make it good.

Prosumer options?

[necro81]

The settings you have on the N90 are nothing less than what you will find on most prosumer digital cameras today. You can adjust the white-balance, contrast, color saturation, color effects and what have you. In our tests, we found that for the White Balance mode, the automatic worked best and we recommend that you don't play around much with this setting, as we feel the sensor adjusts a lot better if you simply set it to auto.

All those kinds of camera settings are things that professional (or at least, experienced amateurs) use to adjust the photo quality when they are taking stills, in a studio, and have the time to actually adjust the settings and do some experimenting. When using a cellphone camera, how much time are you going to spend tinkering with these various settings before taking a candid shot in a dark nightclub of you and some hot chick that you'll never have a chance of seeing again? And would she stick around long enough for you to do so?

My point here is that the presence of these features, while quite a feat considering the size of the phone compared to a pro camera, is just plain superfluous, because no one who uses this phone's camera is going to spend the time messing around with them on the fly.

Not again, "they are so far ahead in technology"

[Iloinen Lohikrme]

In Japan, they use different technology solutions, not more advanced technology in mobile phones.

The situation in Japan differs much from situation in other parts of the world, namely population density in Japan is much higher and there aren't many areas in Japan where there isn't high population density. What this means is that you have to build your whole mobile phone network differently, you have to have lot's of base station and they have to operate in much smaller area, thus leading to lower power usage in both base stations and in mobile phones. Because power requirements are lower, Japanese mobile phones have been a lot smaller for decades. They don't have any magical technology that the rest of the world hasn't, they just a different situation with different needs.

It should also be noted that the markets have proved that Japanese don't have more advanced technology, if they would have, they would have stormed the markets allready.

Good review site?

[dubbayu_d_40]

I want to research phones, but all I'm finding is obfuscation. Is there a dpreview for wireless phones out there?

Obviously

[Comatose51]

Obviously this is more than just a camera phone. It's a camera, phone, plus a transformer that transforms into a hole in your wallet!

Yes, but can it...

[Anonymous Coward]

play The Crazy Frog??!

/ba-ding-ding

I will not pay...

[ari_j]

I will not now nor ever in the future pay 8 times the going price for sacrifices. If I am paying 8 times what I normally would for something, it's because there are absolutely no sacrifices whatsoever. No sacrificed battery life, no sacrificed ergonomics, no sacrificed ease of use, no sacrificed antenna reception, no sacrificed looks. No sacrifices whatsoever.

But for the bargain price of _$800_

[Matey-O]

You can get an official Darth Vader Supreme edition costume. http://tinyurl.com/cubsg

Re:But for the bargain price of _$800_

[Smauler]

I was just about to order when...

Chest piece does not light up. Helmet does not change your voice.

I'm old fashioned

[faloi]

What it is designed to be is a feature packed phone that doesn't mind compromising on the ergonomics to pack in every last bit of functionality you could ever want on a camera phone."

The only functionality I want in my cell phone is that it make and receive calls fairly reliably. I don't want a camera, PDA, games, personal theme music...none of that. I'd rather have individual devices that do all these things well, rather than one device that doesn't really do justice to any of the features.

Re:I'm old fashioned

[velocipenguin]

I agree wholeheartedly. Cell phones seem to include far too many features at the expense of usability, size, and reliability.

Re:I'm old fashioned

[thaig]

Perhaps you haven't given it a try?

The convenience of not having to carry all those separate bits of equipment is considerable.

If you ever have opportunities to take a photo of something that you didn't expect to see, you might be glad that although you don't have a camera, you do always have your phone with you. This has happened to me on numerous occasions and even though my
camera-phone is not nearly as good as the N90's, it has still been useful.

I have used an N90 (I develop mobile phone software) and although the crispness of the screen is it's most "standout" feature, I think that the biggest technology jump is really the video recorder which, unlike older phones, seems to be able to record for as long as there is space left. The quality is good by video standards and the compression is mpeg4 so the files are small. I used to think that videos clips were a gimmick until I took a few - I think that a short video clip is a lot more evocative than a photo, especially if it is of people.

This phone is a bit too clunky for me but I think it is a good preview of the features that are to come in smaller packages in future. They are all desirable once the cost comes down and you have a chance to try them.

Regards,

Tim

Re:I'm old fashioned

[BenjyD]

My alternative (IXUS 50+ random small Nokia phone) to the N90, which would be cheaper, slightly smaller and a far higher quality camera.

There are plenty of cameras small enough to fit in a trouser pocket so that you can always have one with you, that's what I do with the IXUS 50.

Really is not a review...

[hkultala]

... but a presentation article about the phone's features.

lacks criticism etc.

the "reviewer" does not really understand what should be expected and just hypes the features the phone has got but does not comment about missing features other devices have..

"The settings you have on the N90 are nothing less than what you will find on most prosumer digital cameras today. You can adjust the white-balance, contrast, color saturation, color effects and what have you. In our tests, we found that for the White Balance mode, the automatic worked best and we recommend that you don't play around much with this setting, as we feel the sensor adjusts a lot better if you simply set it to auto." .. and no talk about aperture size, shutter speed..
tre "reviewer" does not seem to have any experience on "real photography".. prosumer cameras hae quite a lot of more adjustments, and I find the N90 camera adjustment feature list quite lacking, though I only have experience from a very small automatic pocket camera.

High Population Density

[246o1]

Actually, while most of the Japanese population lives in the major metropolitan areas (about 25% alone in Tokyo metro), most people here live in rural areas, as I do. Despite this, everyone here has cell phones (DoCoMo, probably having the best phones, also being the most popular). By everyone, I mean EVERYONE. Most schoolchildren start carrying cell phones when they go to school alone in grade school, and even the very old have them. Likewise, the above statement about cheaper phones with better offers is completely true. Whenever I notice the difference between the phones, I am amazed. That 2 megapixels would be something apparently extraordinary enough to draw such attention on /. surprises me, as I have even seen 3 megapixel phones advertised recently. Sure, technology here might not be miles ahead of America, but the truth behind the stereotype is that the availability of certain technologies is miles ahead here, regardless of the reasons.

Re:High Population Density

[Iloinen Lohikrme]

How rural is your rural?

Here are few examples of population density, on how many persons live in a km: Japan (337/km^2), USA (30/km), Germany (230/km^2) and Finland (15/km^2). In all of these countries the technology has to scale from densily populated ares to lower density areas. The thing that I claim is that in Japan even the rural areas are more populated than in the rest of world, thus allowing, and requiring building the mobile phone networks differently, thus allowing usage of different technologies and different solutions. So, the technology isn't ahead in Japan.

And when speaking about megapixel cameras and other features in phones, one has to remember that these technologies are all commodized. The reason why there are 3megapixel phones in Japan but not here is more contributed to Japanese consumers wanting more features than to more advanced technologies in use. You are right in that the technologies are more available to consumers, but there isn't no reason why they couldn't be available in the rest of the world, if consumers wanted.

The best Mobile phone review site ?

[mallumax]

Which is the best mobile phone review site, which covers not just the high end phones?

Safety

[HermanAB]

Talking on a phone is dangerous while driving, so Nokia decided to drop that feature...

Re:Safety

[BushCheney08]

But it's always a good idea to get photos of that guy yapping on the phone just before he crashes into you...

You list is missing one thing

[LWATCDR]

Internet access.
To me getting the latest news and weather over my phone means more to me than games, movies, and a camera.

Re:Everyone haul out the slashdot kneejerk reactio

[teeker]

Feel defensive much? I am one of those people who want a small, simple phone, but it doesn't mean I believe phones like this shouldn't exist. The gripe that you're (apparently) mistaking for some kind of personal attack is that there are multitudes of camera phones, lots of mp3-player phones, big built in screens, PDAs, etc out there to choose from, while the people who would just really like to have basic phone call functionality in a smaller, lighter package have nothing to choose from. It's not that I don't want you to have your media center/PDA/camcorder/PC/widescreen TV/kitchen sink phone, it's just that it would be nice if somebody would also make a phone for us.

So if you can't understand that, then by all means, keep whining about everybody who wants to take your technology away.

2 megapixel? That's all?

[Anonymous Coward]

For $900, it better be a hell of a lot more than that.

Re:Not again, "they are so far ahead in technology

[Bueller_007]

The phone that I was referring to was a 3G phone. 3G is the new GLOBAL STANDARD. This phone DOES NOT use PDC (the Japanese-only mobile phone network to which you are referring). PDC phones have a weaker signal strength, so they are smaller, lighter and use less power. They have little, if nothing in common with the newer, (much) larger 3G phones. Did I even mention the size of the phone in my post? No. The phone is pretty big. Surprisingly big when compared to the old 2G Japanese phones. The difference is that it has almost the same features as the Nokia, and it is CHEAP. About 1/4 of the price. Plus, it has global GPS, something that is actually useful to have in a cell phone if you're going to carry it around with you to other countries.

By the way, have you ever been to Japan? There are PLENTY of places with low population density. For example, the whole coast of the Sea of Japan... Tohoku... Hokkaido... Kyushu... Shikoku. Basically, EVERYWHERE except Kanto, Kansai and Nagoya. The population density of Japan is LOWER than that of Belgium and the Netherlands, both of which, I believe use the GSM standard for cell phones.

If you've ever gone to a Japanese electronics shop, you'd know that we are FAR behind them when it comes to phones.

Hilarious pompous diatribe!

[Dystopian Rebel]

Replace "Nokia" with your favourite bête-noire and mail it to all your friends!

Motorola Razr looks cool but sucks

[Anonymous Coward]

The motorola razr is a georgius looking phone, the black one looks incredibly cool. My gf got that one, so i had a look at it. And it sucks so much. Here in Spain they delivered it with a software version which doesnt take videos! I had to flash the dam thing to get video camera.
The screen is relatively big and bright, they keyboard looks like from the future, and it soo slim. But the camera sucks, low memory, slow menus... it doesnt honor its look at all.

-Steels

Re:Everyone haul out the slashdot kneejerk reactio

[lidocaineus]

Did you even READ what I wrote? The whole lunacy of the typical slashdot post about cell phones is that people complain about feature creep, yet phone companies DO make phones that cater to your needs. Let me quote from my original post:

...almost all phone companies provide barebones phones (usually free with a service contract).

I'm not being defensive, as if I want everyone to have a technical garbage phone. I'm trying to point out the idiocy of complaining for a phone that fits your needs when clearly THERE ARE PLENTY OF THEM AVAILABLE.

Sony Ericsson: the dark side

[meringuoid]

OK, I love the Ericsson phones. Great interface, great technology, versatile, it's all good. I've downloaded so many anime theme tunes from fan sites over GPRS to use as ringtones and alarm signals that it's just getting silly. Brilliant fun.

But... the joystick.

The goddamn Sony Ericsson joystick.

Everyone I know with any variant on the general theme of Standard Ericsson Phone has run into the same problem. That joystick starts sticking something rotten, as dust and pocket fluff and other grode start to gum it up. First the 'down' direction, for me, and now its response in other directions is getting dodgy too. Worse yet, pressing inward on the joystick counts as a 'click' sort of command - so a lot of the time when I'm trying to navigate down a menu it'll actually select the top item. That's bad on the net. It's infuriating playing games. It's a diabolic nightmare when you're in your phone book. You end up making half-second calls to about five people before you find the one you want.

Ericsson, for the love of God fix this. Your phones are fantastic except for this one horrific flaw...

Re:Everyone haul out the slashdot kneejerk reactio

[Stickney]

Right, there are plenty available...but they are all huge, heavy, un-stylish pieces of junk. How about a tiny phone that has basic functionality, with the clean lines of the RAZR? Anyone? Anyone?

There are already phones smaller than the RAZR

[blorg]

My quite old Nokia 8310 is smaller, and the Nokia 8210 I had five years ago is lighter - and you can get smaller yet these days, such as this little 44g thing.

By the way, this site has a pretty nifty 'compare size' function (on top of the images:) http://www.esato.com/phones/index.php/phone=23,cp= 141

Re:There are already phones smaller than the RAZR

[teeker]

Ahh now there's news I can use!

Damn shame that VK2000 doesn't have bluetooth, otherwise I'd probably start shopping for one today...and unfortunately the 8310 is a little smaller but thicker, which isn't great for carrying it in your pocket. But I definitely appreciate somebody who appreciates the utility of a simple phone!

WTF?

[gstoddart]

How the hell is this flamebait? There's a whole load of other posts saying more or less the same thing.

You can buy a digital camera and a new phone for less than this, and to me it makes no sense to buy this phone.

This phone costs more than a (very) decent computer.

Re:WTF?

[finnhh]

Yes, you can buy a better camera, phone and a bagpack for them to carry them around.

I'm no fan of cameraphones as the quality of the pictures will always suck I still feel it's unfair to compare them to a camera and phone.

It's like comparing a Bahco wrench to a socket set. You can buy a decent socket set for a price of one Bahco, and it will be better in use. it's the size that matters. You can't carry a socket set in your pocket as well as wrench. It's the same with cameraphones to camera and phone.

Re:Everyone haul out the slashdot kneejerk reactio

[teeker]

Do you even know what you're talking about? I hear what you're saying, but that's not what people are asking for. And I don't appreciate being called an idiot.

Everybody KNOWS there are cheap phones that don't do much more than make phone calls. It would be nice if a manufacturer put some effort into developing a nice phone that focused on voice functionality. Small (think small pager or Zippo lighter), simple fast phone book (for example, Samsung phones have a nice phonebook, except it's really slow), perhaps bluetooth for a headset connection or to act as a modem on a laptop or real PDA, and SMALL.

Like I said, I don't have any problem if you want to have a phone that does everything...did something happen to you in your childhood that makes you wish that I don't get what I want too?

Can I have just a phone

[squoozer]

With the success of the iPod which does basically nothing but play music how come no one has figured out that there could well be a market for a phone that does little more than make calls. While some may be interested in a phone with hundreds of extra features I would like a phone that basically just lets me make calls. Adding a camera to a mobile phone has, IMHO, got to be one of the worst combinations of technology since someone combined chocolate and fireguards.

Re:Can I have just a phone

[serbanp]

I feel the same. The last two Nokia phones I owned (on Sprint) were nothing but shitty. Lots of "features" but abysmal reception.

Now they're dead hardware in a drawer, happily replaced by Sanyo gear, which does exactely what it's supposed to do (making/receiving calls) and does it very well.

Hey Nokia, if you're ever listening, fix first your frigging chipsets and then talk about adding features!

B.t.w., it is very difficult these days to find comparative data for reception and sound quality of cellphones (I'm talking about the US market). All reviews use buckets of ink to rave about the features, without any mention of the features that make a cellphone a cellphone. Serban

Samsung's 7-Megapixel Camera Phone Hits Road

[da5idnetlimit.com]

there is a camera phone to your liking then :

http://www.pcworld.com/resource/article/0,aid,1230 92,pg,1,RSS,RSS,00.asp

Samsung's 7-Megapixel Camera Phone Hits Road

Cell phone will sell in China next, possibly other markets will follow.

Sumner Lemon, IDG News Service
Wednesday, October 19, 2005

BEIJING -- Samsung Electronics plans to ship in a mobile phone with a built-in 7-megapixel camera in China later this year, according to a company spokesperson.

        Advertisement

This marks the first time that the company has made a version of its 7-megapixel camera phone available outside its home market of South Korea, said Erin Lee, a Samsung spokesperson. "China is the only market outside South Korea where we are offering our most advanced products," she said.

While the new camera, the SCH-M709, will only be available in China, Samsung could roll out the phone in other countries, depending on customer demand and the response from operators, Lee said.

Camera Phone Specs

Samsung is showing the SCH-M709 at its booth at the PT/Wireless & Networks Comm China 2005 exhibition (PT Expo) here this week.

The SCH-M709 is built for CDMA 2000-1X mobile networks and is designed to look like a phone on one side and a digital camera on the other. The camera phone has a 7-megapixel camera with a 3X optical zoom and a 5X digital zoom and can take digital still pictures and video. The SCH-M709 also has a built-in MP3 player and has TV output.

The phone has a 240-by-320-pixel LCD screen capable of showing 16 million colors and weighs in at 5.6 ounces. Its dimensions are 5 by 2 by 2.2 inches. The SCH-M709 will be available in China during December. Pricing has not been announced, but comparable models sell for around $900, Lee said.

There Should Be a 12-Step Program For You Guys

[aquatone282]

. . .every last bit of functionality you could ever want on a camera phone.

Motorola RAZR sleek?!?

[bigbug]

I had to Google "define:sleek" when I read that as I wouldn't believe it. The RAZR looks just about as embarassing and kitchy as any other Motorola phone I've seen. If by "sleek" you mean "having a smooth, gleaming surface", I might agree, but if not, I am speachless. Those blue LEDs are just impossibly dreadful to begin with...

You insensitive clod

[marat]

There ought to be someone to call first. My cellphone only exists in order to specify it's number in forms. At least charging it seems completely optional.

Re:Everyone haul out the slashdot kneejerk reactio

[lidocaineus]

No offense, but go take a reading comprehension class. My OP was discussing how people complain about not getting what they want (a basic phone) when they can get it. Never have they mentioned aesthetic value (and in fact, many mention that they don't care how it looks as long as it does one thing). I never said there was anything WRONG with this. What *is* wrong are people who think that's the only right way to do things.

You are the one who brought up aesthetics. If you can't seem to find a simple phone that meets your criteria (hard to believe), then your needs are not getting met. However that has NOTHING to do with my OP, as it was only addressing the supposed non-existance of simple phones and never once brought aesthetics into the discussion.

Let me put it in simple terms:

Typical /. response to an article like this: "I need a phone that just makes calls. I don't want a fancy techno gizmo."

Inevitable +5 karma whore mod.

Level headed response from numerous other people: "There are phones that do only phone calls. They are still on the market. They will always be on the market. What's the problem?"

Once again, I will point out that aesthetics was never a topic of contention, and therefore, I did not pay any mind to it. You brought it in. It is not part of the stereotypical response. I was addressing the stereotypical response. Got it?

3G doesn't mean that it's compatibility

[Iloinen Lohikrme]

A quate from Wikipedia

The world's first commercial W-CDMA service, FOMA, was launched by NTT DoCoMo in Japan in 2001. FOMA is not compatible with UMTS. But the effort for migrating the FOMA specifications to UMTS are indicated by Japan.

So, are you sure that it works in other parts of the world?

And back to the technology part, if Japanese phones would be technologically superior to other phones, then why Nokia is the world leader in mobile phones, and why Motorola and Samsung are the followers? Could it be that the technology in Japan isn't more advanced, and availability of certain features in phones is more contributed to Japanese consumers wanting more advanced features than to superior technological knowhow?

Re:3G doesn't mean that it's compatibility

[Bueller_007]

>So, are you sure that it works in other parts of the world?
100%. FOMA is NTT/DoCoMo, and the phone I mentioned was Vodafone, so your Wikipedia quote doesn't apply. Vodafone uses CDMA2000 (the 3G protocol used in Japan and much of the rest of the world) by default and falls back on GSM (the 2G protocol used pretty much everywhere in the world EXCEPT Japan) if it cannot find a CDMA2000 network. Because Vodafone maintains a large group of partners in countries around the world, if a region has either a GSM network or a CDMA2000 network, this phone can be used.

>And back to the technology part, if Japanese phones would be technologically superior to other phones, then why Nokia is the world leader in mobile phones, and why Motorola and Samsung are the followers? Could it be that the technology in Japan isn't more advanced, and availability of certain features in phones is more contributed to Japanese consumers wanting more advanced features than to superior technological knowhow?
Oh my... You're not going to argue that ubiquity equates to superiority, are you? On Slashdot, no less? VHS/Betamax, etc. arguments aside, there is at least one MAJOR reason why Japanese manufacturers haven't succeeded in the global market.
Until recently, all Japanese cell phones operated using PDC, a Japan-only network protocol. The rest of the world uses GSM, a completely incompatible protocol. Most Japanese tech research takes place in Japan itself, meaning that the manufacturers have no testbed for GSM devices. Sure, you could do it, but it'd be difficult, and the results would probably not be very good. This lack of compatibility, and a desire to compete in the global market were two of the major reasons that Sony partnered with Ericcson. (Having a Japanese partner also makes things much easier for Ericcson, where, despite the huge market here, foreign mobile phones were extremely rare before the introduction of 3G.) Although their sales results have been dismal thus far, one must keep in mind that Sony Ericcson is among the least respected "Japanese" cell phone manufacturers. (Sharp and Toshiba being the most popular, I believe.)
With Japan phasing out its incompatible 2G PDC protocol and switching over to the wCDMA and CDMA2000 protocols used the world over, you'll soon see a number of Japanese phones entering the market, if cell phone manufacturers can become untied from the service providers. If they can maintain their extremely low prices (comparatively), Japanese companies will be poised to take control of the market.

Re:Everyone haul out the slashdot kneejerk reactio

[zippthorne]

Ok. all i want is a phone that makes phone calls. and doesn't look and feel like it belongs in the 'barbie keeps in touch' playset.

they make the "just phones" chincy so you won't like them and spend the extra dough on a 300 mhz datacenter photo phone.

No one ever pays full price, Not in the UK anyway

[Anonymous Coward]

People that equates to abot £450 over here in the UK but with a contract
  will be sold probally at £200 tops

Re:As a Nokia Insider

[Anonymous Coward]

Any company that's willing to irradiate the heads of it's subscribers with high-power radio waves, I would argue, cannot be good anyway.... They're like a smoking company, they know their phones probably give you brain cancer, but damned if they're going to admit it, and there is lots of money to be made right here, right now, so screw everyone else, we'll use Bluetooth headsets. If you think this is all baloney, go and check the power output of older mobile phones versus the newer phones. The older phones were also great to talk on and very crisp voice because they were outputting hefty radio strength. 10-15 years time we'll see the truth come out. Then it could very well be Game Over for the mobile companies, it's lawsuit time!

Only tri-band

[Malc]

$900 for a phone and it's not even quad-band.

Nokia has got it right with the E-Series phones

[brett77]

The E-Series phones are being made to compete with the BlackBerry line. I currently own a Nokia 6820 which is the text messaging phone with a fold-out keyboard. I absolutely love it. It seems they have improved on this design with an enhanced screen and BlackBerry mail support.

Check out the E-Series line: http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000193062973/

Re:Everyone haul out the slashdot kneejerk reactio

[teeker]

Look I'm not going to get into a flamewar about it. What I'm saying is that so-called "stereotypical response" you're talking about is NOT asking for a phone that just makes phone calls and doesn't care about anything else like you say. I mean, a lot of people in general are dumb, but do you really believe that people can't find a phone that makes phone calls? Don't you think they are asking for something besides that? Either you're not hearing them (possible), or they're doing a bad job at getting thier point across (more likely). Since your original post seemed to be a little derisive of people who ask for such a thing, I was simply trying to let you know that those people don't deserve that because they are NOT asking for what you seem to think they're asking for.

Do you get it now?

Re:Everyone haul out the slashdot kneejerk reactio

[lidocaineus]

do you really believe that people can't find a phone that makes phone calls?

NO!!! And that's the point RIGHT THERE. OF COURSE people can find phones that make phone calls, thereby making the aforementioned 'stereotypical slashdot kneejerk reaction' COMPLETELY FOUNDLESS. No, they are NOT asking for anything beyond that; not aesthetics, not functionality; not anything. They just want a brick that dials. And that's the point. Right there. END OF STORY.

Once again - take a reading comprehension class. I'm done with this thread, as I've now repeated myself far too many times.

just not a good idea.

[yagu]

I'm seeing standard and predictable fare (not necessarily a bad thing) in posts for this article. There are basically two camps; those who just want a cell phone that sends and receives calls reliably (that's where I am); and those who love the extra features and want the coolest gadgetry they can blend with their cell phones.

My thoughts:

• reliable calls. Please fix cell phone technology before you add cameras and video to my phone! I've heard the argument it's the manufacturers of the phones doing this, not the providers. I don't care! Clearly the phone manufacturers and providers talk (unless, maybe they're using cell phones), and collaborate on what goes into new cell phone designs.

  There has been a recent emergency in my family and I was totally frustrated by the number of dropped calls, unintelligible conversations, etc. I endured with people on the other end using cell phones.

• it isn't the cell phones that are the problem, it's the implementation of the networks. I don't care! If I'm buying cell phone service, I assume it's an end-to-end solution. If you want to know more about how cell phones work, look here. It's an interesting read, you'll learn a lot about how cell phone technology works, but you won't find out why or how they would fix quality problems with the technology.

• combining is just a bad idea. I remember one time combo TV-VCRs on the market. I asked a friend why he'd bought it. He shrugged, said it just seemed cool, and more convenient. But what happens if the VCR breaks? (It did, btw). Same for combo-cell phones. More stuff in one device means more opportunity for some piece to break, leaving you with awkward devices that don't do everything you bought it for.

• related to point previous, there's the compromise in quality of added functionality. If I'm dishing out $900 for a do-all gadget and it takes pictures, it'd better be at least 4Mpixel with a Leica lens and variable focus (I don't want infinite depth of field in all of my pictures).

• for the total cost of this new gadget (I'm loathe to call it a phone) I could buy: a very good 4M pixel camera; an iPod; and a cell phone. I know people argue for the convenience of them all in one. I don't buy that. The all-in-one invariably compromises in form factor. It's not an ideal form factor for a phone, it's not an ideal form factor for a camera, and it's not for an mp3 player.

  Yeah, it's not as convenient to carry multiple gadgets around, but it's not nearly as inconvenient as people want to make it out to be to strengthen their all-in-one argument.

• pay-for services. I didn't even know about this one until recently, but lots of these combo gadgets are designed to suck more money out of you. For example, the ads show people sharing pictures and videos with their camera phones, but it turns out that's not part of the basic service, you pay as you go to send pictures. What a ripoff (why isn't that just part of the service minutes?)!

• I keep hearing the argument that we can just buy a phone if that's all we want. But, I'm not finding that to be true. I've been to kiosks where they don't offer any non-enhanced phones. They may be out there, but they're not easy to find -- and the sales force out there isn't inclined to be helpful around this, they're making their big bucks by selling the bling.

Bottom line: (at least for me) I just want a phone that does a very good job of being a phone.

Re:just not a good idea.

[Dionysus]

reliable calls.

Seems to be a problem in the US. Can't say I had this problem in Europe, no matter the phone, network or location (I've been to places in Norway where I couldn't get reliable radio signal, but the phone still worked).

I keep hearing the argument that we can just buy a phone if that's all we want. But, I'm not finding that to be true.

Again, this is a problem in US. In Europe, since all providers use the same network, I can go to the store (not related to the network providers) and buy a cell phone without a mobile plan. Or I can get a mobile plan without a cellphone. In the US, you basically have a choice between the cellphones that the provider gives you (which is always incredible limited).

Besides, Nokia is coming out with there E-series of phone, which will be without mp3 player and camera (but will have stuff like POP3 and IMAP support)

Re:Everyone haul out the slashdot kneejerk reactio

[teeker]

Well if that's your point, then you're simply wrong. I'm sorry if me trying to clarify things a bit for you got you in a twist. Obviously you've already made your judgement about everybody in the world who thinks differently from you, which I'd like to point out is the same thing you accused (unprovoked and unsupported I might add) those people of.

Good day, sir.

Feature Creep

[Doc Ruby]

Every last bit of cameraphone functionality I'd ever want includes realtime slaving a nearby PC window to the camera, over Bluetooth (or WiFi, more likely). Mind control over the psychic friends network, too, but I can wait for that.

functional vs style

[Tempest7]

I love a good functional phone, basically a phone that works well, just like anyone else. But I have to admit I pick my phone based on style. I'm willing to pay the extra (and so are many people) for extra features that fit my needs and a good looking design. I'm not a Nokia fan, but this is a personal opinion. 2 MP camera is nice, I guess it doesn't compare to the 3MP cell phones in Japan.

As for people who demand the best, camera, mp3 player, functional phone ... there are tons of people who use their camera phone everyday to take just normal pictures. I see them all the time (every day on the street). Of course I just happen to be in HK at the moment.

You can look for a car that's just a box on wheels, or you can get one with power windows and a/c. Why complain about having the option to buy a new phone that has more features. Obviously if the rest of the world thought like "you" then there wouldn't be a market for it. No matter how dumb you think other people's opinions are, you still need to live with other people... Though I guess you can always go back to your MMORPG...

Anyways, since everyone is throwing in their 2 cents, I might as well throw in mine.

Re:Everyone haul out the slashdot kneejerk reactio

[Anonymous Coward]

note that the original poster got modded insightful. you did not. also note that everything he said made sense. none of your arguments did. note that he practically spelled out what he was saying and how you did not understand it. you still didn't get it. note that he clearly understands your position and made an exemption for you. you still didn't understand.

he called out a stereotype. you try and twist it into your own interpretation by the loosest connections and reasonings. i call troll on you. i would've modded you as such, but i seem to have run out of points when i went to moderate.

Review with pics

[Faile]

Mobile-review.com got two much better reviews. Honestly, who reviews a phone with a 2MP camera and DESCRIBES the pictures in text?

This Comment Does Not Compute

[the0ther]

What are you talking about man? The lens is actually one of their selling points. I even know the name, it's a Carl Zeiss lens. Isn't that supposed to be high quality? Your comment needs some explanation.

Slight mistake

[frank_adrian314159]

...you could ever want on a camera phone.

Should be "...you never really wanted on a phone."

What type of contract

[Barkley44]

What type of service contract will you have to sign to get it free? ;)

How about shockproof/waterproof?

[DG]

Here's the #1 feature I want in a phone (that I can't seem to find anywhere)

I want it to be TOUGH. I want to be able to drop it in the bathroom, have it carom off the bathtub, and land in the toilet, and still be functional.

Is there such a beast?

DG

Re:How about shockproof/waterproof?

[Animats]

There are ruggedized phones. The Motorola i325IS is qualified to MIL-STD 810F for ruggedness and waterproofing, and is approved as intrinsically safe for use in explosive atmospheres. Built-in off-network walkie talkie mode and GPS receiver. Usually used with Nextel, but available for most GSM-type services.

So if you actually need a ruggedized phone, they're available.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

More like TRON-phones

[Anonymous Coward]

The "West" is so far behind in mobile phone technology. For only $200, I can get this phone in Japan: http://www.vodafone.jp/english/products/model_3G/v 903t/index.html

Clicked on the link and suddenly got an urge to drive a lightcycle and chuck disks of light at my enemies.

To avoid being COMPLETELY modded as off-topic, I for one love a feature-packed phone. Yes. $900 is uber-expensive; especially as someone pointed out that purchasing the individual devices and a large backpack would be more cheaper.

If a phone is $900 but there is a reasonable cost-benefit (aka the phone transforms into a laptop... or an Autobot), I would totally buy it.

There will be people who whine about the simplicity and transparency of single-function devices (ie. phone) but I think their preference is derived from bad design, bad implementation, and user's unwillingness to become familiar with a multi-feature product.

At some point, these cellphones are going to become as feature-packed and powerful as Star Trek tricorders. It's a combination of a desire for minimalism and accessibility. I mean minimalism as unobtrusive.

That's why I'm looking forward to the Nokia N91.

So there... Tron rules!

throwup on the web

[Anonymous Coward]

... you are probably just going to throw up on the web.

I was simply struck by the poetry of the above line and had to pay my respects....

Re:Not again, "they are so far ahead in technology

[squiggleslash]

FWIW, 3G is NOT a standard. 3G is a marketing and political term. It essentially boils down to "These standards support data rates approximately better than the worst DSL available." The following, totally incompatable, systems are considered "3G". UMTS. CDMA2000. FOMA. GSM with EDGE is also considered 3G by some groups, though it's borderline in practical terms.

There are others, but these are the most popular.

"3G" is little more than an attempt to extract more frequencies from governments by proposing they'll be necessary for a hypothetical future generation of mobile phones, which are assumed to provide video and high-speed Internet access. To call the entire concept fraud isn't far from the truth, but that said, governments have needed prodding as far as releasing their stranglehold on radio goes. Outside of government lobbying, it's a marketing term, with companies keen to portray their latest offering as 3G, usually redefining the term very few months so they can announce a minor upgrade as "3G" each time they do one.

So, no, 3G is not a standard. Looking at one of the links an earlier poster mentioned, it looks like Japan is getting UMTS via Vodafone (UMTS is essentially 3G GSM), FOMA, and CDMA2000, to add to 2G PDC and PHS. Can't comment on FOMA. CDMA2000 is an incremental enhancement to the US IS-95 standard, which in practical terms is barely a second generation standard (IS-95's essentially a digital version of AMPS, the old analog standard in the US, and is deployed largely because it's cheap - and I mean that in every sense of the word) the only "nice" part is the air interface technology, and seems - for the most part - to be incompatable with the rest of the world for the sake of doing so.) UMTS is, by all accounts, pretty good - all the benefits of GSM with improved data rates and capacity - as long as Vodafone over there do not screw up, you're not "far behind" with phones. You'll at least have UMTS, and have the CDMA2000 people pushing the UMTS people in terms of prices.

clueless about cameras, and phones as well.

[baffo]

the reviewer seems to lack some very important clue points about cameras and phones. The phone doesn't have infrared? You are not going to miss it! It doesn't have vibration? Who needs vibration!

And I will not even get started about the surreal comparison with digital prosumer cameras... dude, those things have manual focus and manual exposure. I hope that at least Nokia gave him one free phone.

Life is definitely too good...

[Anonymous Coward]

...when you start worrying about $900 phones.

How about real features?

[Nerdposeur]

Yes, another phone that will do everything but make you a sandwich.

Before we start adding laser pointers and vacuum attachments, let's think about what a phone SHOULD do.

A good phone should:
1) Let me group my contacts and, for example, direct business calls to voicemail when I get off work
2) Be able to ring for more than one phone number
3) Have a "sleep" setting to tell callers that I'm likely in bed, but if it's an emergency, press one and it will ring; otherwise get voice mail
4) Allow me to press a button and send complete contact info to the person on the other end of the line, so they don't have to manually enter my name
5) Have quick web access to a LOCAL PHONE BOOK. This is WAY more obvious on a PHONE than say, browsing for ringback tones and wallpapers and crap.

Etc etc. I wish I could sit down with the phone makers and say, "look, this thing is a PHONE. It's for communication. What features does a PHONE need?" The first person to say "a video camera" would get whacked with a rolled-up newspaper.

*yawn*

[evangellydonut]

GSMArena reviewed it almost 3 months ago... http://www.gsmarena.com/nokia_n90-review-44.php

Sharp v903 far better for price...

[dimension6]

I don't really understand how this phone is worth $900.00, when the Vodafone/Sharp V903 offers so many features around the $400-$500 price range (in Japan it's actually quite a bit cheaper). The v903 has a 3.2 megapixel camera (with a decent lens, containing autofocus AND 2x OPTICAL zoom). I've been using one of these in the US (T-Mobile) for weeks, and it's terrific. Interestingly enough, you can purchase a beta-unlocked Japanese version that has a few relatively minor bugs (which is what I did) or buy a completely unlocked UK version (only available in one color, has slightly different software and features). I haven't tried yet to roam in Japan through T-Mobile's service though, but apparently it even works in Korea...

Re:Everyone haul out the slashdot kneejerk reactio

[timmyf2371]

Nokia's 8800 is one of these phones.

Focused on voice calls & SMS, it still supports WAP, albeit in limited format. It supports Bluetooth and GPRS for a connection to laptop too.

The one puzzling thing about it is the internal 0.5MP camera. With handsets including cams of 1.5MP and higher these days, it seems very much an afterthought and something included just because.

That aside, IMO it is a beautiful phone - small, lightweight, and without feature bloat.

go to mobileburn...

[YesIAmAScript]

Go to mobileburn.com and check the pics from the Sony K750 or W800.

They are probably a lot better than you think. No, they're not perfect, but depending on the subject matter, if you weren't told it came from a phone you wouldn't know much of the time.

they seem to have different priorities...

[YesIAmAScript]

Those super bad-ass Japanese phones are usually enormous and the battery lasts typically a day.

I just think most of the rest of the world isn't interested in phones like that. I know I'm not. I'll take a fair number of features, if they can be put in a small space with decent battery life.

missing feature

[cas2000]

> to pack in every last bit of functionality you could ever
> want on a camera phone.

does it have a digital answering machine built in?

no?

then it doesn't even come close to having every last bit of functionality i could ever want in a phone.

a camera in a phone is only marginally useful - it's kind of handy to have a camera with you all the time, but it would be much more useful to have an answering machine built in to the phone.

but you'll never see one because the phone manufacturers don't care what the users want/need, they make the phones that the telcos want....and the telcos certainly don't want any feature that will cut into their profit margins - and they make money every time someone retrieves voicemail from their network.

IMO, telco-network voicemail should be only for when the phone is switched off or out-of-range - at all other times, the phone itself should record the message.

Clarifying Some Confusion in this Thread

[cnj]

I'm not sure if anyone had a valid reason to mod the parent flamebait, because it makes valid points.

First off, Vodafone JP uses the same frequency for UMTS as Europe (2.1GHz iirc). I used my rhomboid Nokia 7600 on their network. They do not use GSM 900/1800/1900 or CDMA2000 (although there is at least one other carrier that uses CDMA2000 in Japan).

Without reading the linked article, I just want to point out that GPS and GPRS are different. Re bluetooth: very few phones in Japan support it, it hasn't poicked up anywhere near the ame momentum as it has in Europe or even the U.S.

And as was mention $200 is the subsidized price with contract. The N90 with contract will undoubtedly be much cheaper than $900, probably around the same price point. The N90 will also probably be available unlocked, or even be unlockable. I have not heard of any successful unlocking of Japanese phones, and a lot of people have tried with the line the referenced one is from. It certainly won't work on Verizon as someone else desired.