Slashdot Mirror


What's Happened In Mobile Over the Past 10 Years

andylim writes "recombu.com has an article examining what's happened in mobile over the past ten years, including BlackBerry launching its first smart phone in 2002, Motorola launching the Razr in 2004 and Apple launching the iPhone in 2007. As a commenter points out, the first camera phone (Sharp J-SH04), which was released in 2000, featured a 110,000-pixel (0.11MP) CMOS image sensor, and a 256-colour (8 bit) display."

7 of 149 comments (clear)

  1. Hmm by Achromatic1978 · · Score: 5, Informative
    An article? Hah. More like "ten bulletpoints that will take you a good 20-30 seconds to skim, but get us several ad impressions", including "insights" such as:

    2003 The Windows Mobile brand is launched with Windows Mobile 2003. Windows Mobile is widely used by businesses to do work on the move.

    Wow. Or:

    2005 Sony Ericsson launches a superb new camera phone called the K750i and a great music phone called the W800i. These two handsets establish Sony Ericsson as a serious consumer player.

    Awesome. Just awesome. If you think there's more depth than this, there's not. That is the sum total of the analysis of those two years.

  2. Notable hardware by ickleberry · · Score: 4, Informative

    This deserves a mention, the legendary Nokia 6310i still has a thriving refurb market to this day. That thing is probably the highest quality mainstream phone ever made. http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2007/12/20/nokia_breakthrough_phone/

    3G (UMTS) turned out to be a bit of a disappointment with the required cell density there are only a few 3G-only networks in densely populated places like South Korea, 2G GSM is likely to stay around well into the LTE era.

    Satellite phone networks have also come a long way since the initial bankruptcies and unreliable services. There are now at least 4 Geosynchronous orbit satellite phone networks with handheld phones and the two LEO networks that went bankrupt both recovered and are planning to launch new satellites. The phones themselves also not half the size they used to be.

  3. Re:In other news... by CAIMLAS · · Score: 3, Informative

    Well, the nice thing about mobile technologies is that they've got a relatively low infrastructure cost compared to wired technologies. The spiderweb of cable needed is significantly less dense, and it can piggy-back on existing data telcom lines.

    Cellular tech also benefited in much of the world because they didn't have the initial 'heavy' cellular infrastructure to contend with - the legacy analog cellular crap. They also had fiber optics at their disposal, making the line cost significantly lower if anything did need to be laid.

    And most countries, particularly much of the European ones, have the advantage of having higher population density and smaller area. Even in countries like Albania (which I doubt has much for any connectivity) getting the whole country covered with modern data cellular would be much easier.

    Even still, it's possible to get a cellular connection of one sort or another pretty much anywhere in the US. I'm in one of the least sparsely covered parts of the US (from all carriers), which also happens to be one of the least populated. I can be tens of miles from the nearest person (forgive the hyperbole, but 1+ miles) or 30+ miles from the nearest town over 500 people and still get an SMS (or maybe a phone call) out. That's impressive.

    --
    ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
  4. Re:In other news... by segin · · Score: 5, Informative

    Well, what can you expect with a camera with a single fixed aperture and speed? Almost every cell phone camera out there is f/2.8, although if you are (un)lucky, you might get one with f/5.6. Whatever the aperture is, however, is what you are stuck with, for the most part (unless you are a super-wiz hardware hacker and can replace most of the camera...).

    The second factor in determining image quality is shutter speed, but since in this day and age, there is no physical shutter, "shutter speed" refers to how long the image sensor senses for image data; 1/400 shutter speed on a cell phone means that, actually, the sensor is only "looking" at the world for 1/400 of a second. While this is quite similar to a real camera, the fact that the sensor is "always exposed" means that it is always at odds with the world, in terms of lighting (being left camera-side up on a sunny day is not good for the phone's camera at all)

    So yes, megapixels don't mean shit. A decent camera with an adjustable aperture and shutter speed (possibly even a real shutter) makes for a better picture.

  5. Re:In other news... by Fred_A · · Score: 3, Informative

    Well, what can you expect with a camera with a single fixed aperture and speed? Almost every cell phone camera out there is f/2.8, although if you are (un)lucky, you might get one with f/5.6.

    But whatever their so called aperture, the physical aperture is still a pinhole lens that is a couple millimetre across. My proper f./2.8 lens have a diameter of 77mm (and can close to f./22). Which actually lets some light in.

    There's probably a physical limit under which you cannot go and still have a reasonably decent lens (not super studio high-end flawless quality, just decent). At a guess from the various compacts I've seen, I'd say it's around 1.5cm. Maybe a wee bit less.

    --

    May contain traces of nut.
    Made from the freshest electrons.
  6. Re:In other news... by Rakshasa+Taisab · · Score: 4, Informative

    And most countries, particularly much of the European ones, have the advantage of having higher population density and smaller area. Even in countries like Albania (which I doubt has much for any connectivity) getting the whole country covered with modern data cellular would be much easier.

    Worth mentioning is that the countries in Europe furthest ahead in cellular technology, the Scandinavian countries, have very low population density even when compared to the US. And still they have coverage in pretty much all of the country. (Including many remote mountainous regions)

    --
    - These characters were randomly selected.
  7. Re:In other news... by obarthelemy · · Score: 3, Informative

    Not quite true: I leave in France, where, when Al Gore invented the Internets, we where in a rather worse situation, telecoms-wise: single, nationally-owned carrier, high prices, quite good service, though.

    What they did, as in much of the EU I think, is force deregulation by
    - selling 3 nationwide GSM licenses, so there was competition right from the start
    - forcing standardization and interoperability by enforcing the GSM standard for all carriers, which helped with coverage and provider switching
    - Carriers also had to commit to cover an increasing percentage of the population, which is admittedly easier to do than in the US (France is a bit smaller than Texas, but has more than twice the population).
    - later, forcing number portability (you can switch provider and keep the same number)
    - above all, agreeing that the caller pays for calls, with mobile numbers set apart by a different prefix (06 = mobile, 01 = Paris, 04 = south east...). You used to be able to figure out which carrier someone was using by looking at the second couple of digits, but with number portability that is no longer 100% true.

    The one remaining issue, apart from Texts pricing, is pricing legibility: telcos are free to set up there tariffs as they wish, so it's very hard to come up with an apples-to-apples comparison.

    --
    The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.