Slashdot Mirror
Anti-Smartphone Phone Launched For Technophobes
geek4 writes "A Dutch company has launched what it calls 'the world's simplest phone,' targeting users who are sick of new-generation models. Only capable of making and receiving calls, John's Phone is dubbed the world's simplest mobile phone, specifically designed for anti-smartphones users. It does not provide any hi-tech features. No apps. No Internet. No camera. No text messaging. All you have to do — in fact, all you can do — is call, talk and hang up."
Is it me or does £60 to £80, or about $95 to $127 dollars seem extremely overpriced for a phone with essentially no features?
My postings are informational and does not constitute legal advice. Act on it at your risk.
They annihilate each other in an explosion of "hipsterons," the particles responsible for carrying the force of hipsterism.
Motorcycles, Robots, Space Gossip and More!
If you can only call, talk and hang up, it doesn't appear very useful to me. Listening would be a nice addition, and receiving calls as well...
I imagine old people will enjoy 3 weeks of battery standby time and not being pestered by SMS spam.
Funny, I seem to recall TV ads a few years back for a series of phones — "Jitterbug", as it was called — that effectively did just this. Complete with the "old person afraid of smartphones" use case example. Though with screens (just to see the numbers as you dial them).
Demanding constant attention will only lead to attention.
How about for people you don't need extra stuff/crap and just want a fucking phone? I'm a Unix/Windows SA and systems programmer with 4 computers at home (Windows and Linux) and have managed everything from Crays to PC - so, hardly a technophobe - and I still use my Qualcomm QCP-1900 from 1998. It cost me $200 with no-contract and my service is still $15/month (no contract). The thing still provides 6 hours of talk and two-weeks of standby.
Sure, text and web might be nice - sometime - but I don't really need/want to be that "connected" all the time.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Agreed. What I don't like about the standard flip phone is the obligatory "web" button that can't be disabled. I'd take this product over that.
My wife is a vehement technophobe, and she has a very simple flip-phone that she only marginally knows how to operate. Usually I hear "Hello? I can't hear you. Hello?" to which I am shouting "Hand. The. Phone. To. Your. Daughter." (Daughter has no problem hearing me on the same phone.) Not being there I can't be sure, but I suspect that wife is holding it upside down. I don't suppose that will change even with this phone.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
I think even the now disappearing "basic phones" have some sort of phone book/directory function. That's not mentioned in the summary. Also, I see it has no display of any kind.
The phone has a display for incoming calls. The address book exists in the form of a pad of paper on the back of the phone you can write on.
I'm serious.
Check it.
Sony did a good job with a "justaphone" they recently released, the Naite.
I bought one a few months ago for around $120. No contracts, basic phone, no sliding, good screen, some free games that are good, bluetooth, a decent camera, small form factor, and really good battery life. It even accepts standard microSD cards, if you need it.
The free Sony management software is really pretty good, too. It offers phone backups, you can send/receive text messages through your machine while it's plugged in, and it didn't come with a lot of BS carrier lock-in stuff.
Check it out, it's been perfect for me.
In the US, we already have such a phone, called a Jitterbug, and it is aimed at the geriatric market...
Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
If you're seriously considering this phone, especially paying extra for it -- have you seen it? RTFA.
Let me put it this way: Why would you want a phone without at least an address book? I'm with you that it's gotten out of control, but why would I want a paper address-book stuck to the phone, so I can take it off the back, flip through it, and manually type that into the front? Every time I want to call someone, I'd have to do that.
Or I can press probably fewer buttons than it would take to actually dial the number, and only have to remember the person's name.
Yes, I do "just want a fucking phone." But this isn't just a fucking phone -- the paper addressbook does indeed scream "technophobe."
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
On the one hand, I can see this being useful for people like my aunt, who have an "emergencies only" cell phone. Easy to understand, no frills, no chance of accidentally going online. I can also see it being useful for those who just don't want to bother with all the extras that are on phones anymore. Even my "dumbphone" has a camera, a media player, texting, and online capabilities, and I don't really need or want all that (Except texting. You can't take away my texting).
On the other hand, I can't help but feel that pandering to an already technophobic crowd only makes their fears seem more substantial (to them, at least). With technology changing so incredibly rapidly, it doesn't seem like the best course of action is to put them in a bubble and tell them it'll be okay, we won't let the bad bad digital phone hurt them. Technological advancements aren't going to go backwards; at some point these people are going to have to learn something new.
Mixed feelings.
This phone, the firefly, has just 5 buttons: call mom, call dad, phonebook, call, hangup.
http://www.fireflymobile.com/store/firefly/
-molo
Using your sig line to advertise for friends is lame.