The Feature Phone Is Dead: Long Live the 'Basic Smartphone'

zarmanto writes: "The numbers have been telling us for a while now that (formerly expensive) feature phones have been slowly displaced by more feature-rich, high-end smartphones. Thus, it should come as no surprise that the other end of the market is also receiving active encroachment by low-end smartphones. Now, ARM is suggesting that it's actually quite conceivable for OEMs to produce a 'smartphone' for as little as $20 — as long as you compromise a bit on those things which actually make it a smartphone in the first place. So, is this just more graying of the line between smartphones and feature phones? Or is this an indication that the feature phone (as we used to know it) is finally well-and-truly dead?"

Comments

WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[Anonymous Coward]

Or is this an indication that the feature phone (as we used to know it) is finally well-and-truly dead?"

Assuming we've heard of this term "feature phone" in the first place.

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[tomhath]

It's based on a Gartner analysis. You don't expect them to give meaningful information, do you?

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[mark-t]

Feature phones are cell phones with additional "features", especially the ability to run different applications that a user can decide to install on it.

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[ZorglubZ]

I think I have a "Feature Phone"... it's an LG Optimus 3D, the 'feature' being 3D camera and 3D display (I don't use either feature; I might've used the 3D Camera if I had a proper 3D TV...).

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[TechyImmigrant]

What makes a 3D TV "proper"?

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[Mr D from 63]

Finally, the fabled future of the feature phone is found to be fabulous.

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[Sigma 7]

Technically, a feature phone is a class of cell phone half-way between conventional smart phones and cellphones that only allowed dialing.

It's also a back-dated definition.

As for programming software for one - don't bother. There's so many variants that it's easier to aim for an Android or iOS.

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[Stormwatch]

Not using anaglyph glasses, maybe?

Re: WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[Vairon]

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F...
"A feature phone is a mobile phone which is priced at the mid-range in a wireless provider's hardware lineup.[dubious – discuss] The term "feature phone" is a retronym. It is intended for customers who want a moderately priced and multipurpose phone without the expense of a high-end smartphone."

In my mind there's 3 general categories to mobile phones:
1. basic phone - Can make and receive phone calls. Example: Jitterbug phone
2. feature phone - Supports limited browsing of web, changing ringtones, very basic games or applications and makes/receives phone calls. Example: Nokia 6020.
3. smart phone - Runs an OS like Android or iOS with an application pool of thousands of applications to do similar functions as a PC along with making and receiving phone calls. Example: Samsung Galaxy S5

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[steveha]

A "feature phone" is a phone that does more than just let you make calls, but is less not as powerful as a smartphone. I'd say that the key difference is that a smartphone lets you install apps, while on a featurephone, the only "apps" you get are the ones that came pre-loaded. You get what came with the phone and nothing else.

Also, everyone expects a "smartphone" to have a multitouch screen these days. In the early days of smartphones, some phones didn't have this (e.g. the classic Blackberry had no touch screen at all, just a trackball!). Feature phones are less expensive than smartphones because they omit the fancier components like a multitouch screen.

There are a few people who want the simplicity of a feature phone... for example, some people really don't like it when their phone locks up or spontaneously reboots. (I don't like it either, but I'll put up with it happening from time to time in return for things like a web browser.) But in the long run, it will be cheaper and easier for the mobile carriers to just offer smartphones. Why pay developers to write custom "apps" for a phone, when you can just slap Android on the thing and pre-install a few Android apps?

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[ichthus]

The best scene release 3D TV? The opposite of a "nuked" 3D TV?

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[csnydermvpsoft]

As for programming software for one - don't bother. There's so many variants that it's easier to aim for an Android or iOS.

Also, there's no money there. The people that own feature phones have them because they either can't afford a smartphone, or they don't want to learn how to use one. Neither market segment is particularly prone to purchasing apps, and they're not as valuable to advertisers.

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[interkin3tic]

From wiki it sounds like the term is basically just "not a smartphone." Dumbphones evidently fall into that category. I'm guessing "feature phone" is simply a stupid marketing term that sounds better than "dumbphone."

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[wcrowe]

That was my question too. I'm glad I'm not the only one. More pretentious bullsh*t from Gartner masquerading as useful information. Do you care? Does anyone care? Perhaps the manufacturers care, but surely they are well aware of their sales numbers and are capable of populating a simple spreadsheet as well as Gartner can.

Gartner: experts at telling you what you already know -- with charts.

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[Echemus]

Feature Phones are devices that were designed around a specific purpose or feature. Examples of the Feature Phone are: The Nokia 6800, its feature being fold out qwerty keyboard and email. The Nokia 5310, with music controls. Nokia 8800, style and quality over function. Realistically the original iPhone was a "Feature Phone" with its feature being touch-screen input.

The idea is that users buy a device based around the feature(s) they are most interested in. In the days before carrying touch-screen computers, it is a reasonable idea to target devices in this way. Compromise the general purpose of the device a little to accentuate other features. With a large touch-screen and more powerful processors such compromises aren't needed to be made as the UI is not limited to the standard 4x3 keypad with a small screen.

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[squiggleslash]

Back when Feature Phones were "the thing", we called them "Camera Phones". Then, for reasons that don't make sense, after the iEverything came out, we started calling them Feature Phones.

No, I don't understand either. If it's because both generally had cameras then (1) It's not as if every touchscreenappsphone needed to have a camera by definition, and (2) it's not as if touchscreenappsphones didin't have features.

I can vouch for the article, FWIW. I'm about to switch back to a feature phone, and use a small tablet for my Interwebs needs. When I swear off a technology, it usually means it's about to take over and nobody is going to even be given the choice of not using it any more. You heard me right: everything from Windows to Blu-ray is my fault. At some point I'll figure out how to use this power for good.

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[rogoshen1]

i think you left off a third demographic "people who reject the need for being CONSTANTLY connected/tracked"

I make enough money for a smartphone, i know full well how to use one .. i just don't want to be constantly within nagging range of email or texts. And i definitely want nothing to do with social media, or stalking/snooping apps.

If there was a compelling reason for a smart phone and/or app (other than social media nonsense, or the aforementioned email/texts) i'd buy a smart phone. but right now, it's just about tracking users and this irritating social media bubble that cannot pop soon enough.

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[DutchUncle]

I'll add a fourth demographic: people who don't want to be bothered. My wife has an iPhone, I have a 4-year-old flip-phone that makes calls and that's about it. And I like it that way.

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[koreanbabykilla]

I know how to use an iphone, I know how to use an android device. I'm well able to afford a smartphone. I use a feature phone because while I like having data available to my laptop on the go, as well as a browser on the phone to use while shitting, I don't need all the bullshit like having to charge it everyday.

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[koreanbabykilla]

Most feature phones let you install j2me apps. Ever one I have had since my first RAZR has supported them.

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[Charliemopps]

They're much more popular in areas where computers are not much of an option like Africa. When I was there, you could stop at little wooden booths on the street and buy Feature phones and calling cards for a few dollars right along with various junk food and mystery meat on a stick. Due to the US cellular market being such a disaster no-one from the US's phone would work there unless you were an AT&T international plan. As a result everyone from the US would get off the plane and immediately buy one of these for $5 and enough minutes to call home.

Are they dead in the US? They were never a "thing" here to begin with. In Africa and other very rural areas with poor infrastructure, they are basically the only computer you can get and are hugely successful. People run full blown businesses off the things. So no, they aren't dead. Most people in these areas have a hard time coming up with the $5 for the phone. The average wage where I was at was $7/month. So the difference between $5 and a fancy $20 smart phone is 3 months salary. Don't get me wrong, these people had wealth (land, livestock, clothes, etc...) . It just wasn't easily transferable to US currency. They bartered a lot.

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[sjames]

Once upon a time, we had phones. You dial the number and (if a cellphone), hit send. That was it.

Then, they started adding features. Some quite useful like speed dial and an address book. Then a todo list, alarm clock, and calendar. These features made it a feature phone. Then they added a mostly useless limited web browsing ability (mostly useless because you had a 1.5x1.5 inch screen and only a phone keypad to enter text). Then text messaging. In other words, what people who aren't in marketing call a dumb phone today. Or perhaps 'basic phone' since they are the closest thing to the no longer sold basic phone.

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[Anonymous Coward]

You clearly dont know how to use a smartphone, because you can disable text/MMS messaging and you arent forced to have an email account bound to your phone. That goes along with the rest the the social media that you find oh so irritating.

So what the real reason you dont have a smart phone???

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[mark-t]

The term "feature phone" is not new... it's existed for almost as long as such phones have existed. It was invented to differentiate from just "cell phones", which are only capable of making or receiving calls and possibly text messages (although most phones with the latter capability are also feature phones). The feature phone is thus distinguished from the cell by having more "features".

The distinguishing characteristic of a feature phone in my experience is that you can run applications on it that the manufacturer did not bundle with the purchase of the phone... whether these applications are run natively by the phone's CPU or whether they utilize a virtual environment such as J2ME may vary. Basically, if it comes out of the box able to everything that you can ever do with it, then it it's not a feature phone. It is theoretically possible, with a firmware update, to change a pre-feature phone into a feature phone, although I've never seen that happen, I can only acknowledge its theoretical possibility.

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[camperdave]

What makes a 3D TV "proper"?

It only gets wholesome channels. It'll show Little House on the Prairie, but you'll get a blank screen if you try to watch Game of Thrones.

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[rogoshen1]

did you really just suggest that?
by disabling those features i'd have a dumb phone -- with the addition of a browser, I suppose. An overpriced dumb phone.

Maybe my eyes are going bad, but browsing the web on a ~3 inch screen at a snails pace isn't worth much to me.

So, no thank you.

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[camperdave]

When I swear off a technology, it usually means it's about to take over and nobody is going to even be given the choice of not using it any more. You heard me right: everything from Windows to Blu-ray is my fault. At some point I'll figure out how to use this power for good.

Okay. We need you to embrace Windows 8, and Apple, and ditch open source. Oh, and for the love of Sanity Itself, please never abandon Slashdot Beta.

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[tepples]

As for programming software for one - don't bother. There's so many variants that it's easier to aim for an Android or iOS.

That and the fact that the way one installed apps on a lot of them was locked down like the game consoles. BREW was tuned for established companies rather than amateurs or startups, the developer certificates were more expensive than the $99 per year iOS certificate, and if I remember correctly, one had to negotiate to get the app in each carrier's catalog, not a central "BREW catalog" or even a particular manufacturer's catalog.

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[davydagger]

feature phone is the industry term for what we call "dumb" phones.

i.e. old motorola four letter phones running p2k os

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[steveha]

Huh, I didn't know about this. Now I wish I could edit my original post.

I just did a few Google searches. Results:

J2ME:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_Platform,_Micro_Edition

Feature phone apps are big business in India (article from 2011):
http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/industry-and-economy/info-tech/feature-phone-apps-the-buzz-grew-louder-this-year/article2749955.ece

Facebook just spent $16 billion for a company that produced J2ME apps:
http://www.ictworks.org/2014/02/21/a-16-billion-dollar-future-in-feature-phone-app-development/

So I guess the term "feature phone" and the term "smartphone" are fuzzier than I thought. The more a phone looks like an iPhone or Android phone, the more it is a "smartphone" I guess.

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[squiggleslash]

While many technologies I embrace fail, it's usually because the embrace occured as an implied part of swearing off a rival technology, and that rival's success implicity required the technology I liked to fail. Unfortunately, me merely embracing any of those will not ensure any of them fail, or a suitable improvement succeeds...

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[wolrahnaes]

i just don't want to be constantly within nagging range of email or texts.

I'm pretty sure there's not a single phone that still works since AMPS was turned off which doesn't have texting. It's a basic part of the GSM standard and I assume fairly basic in the CDMA world as well.

If there was a compelling reason for a smart phone and/or app (other than social media nonsense, or the aforementioned email/texts) i'd buy a smart phone. but right now, it's just about tracking users and this irritating social media bubble that cannot pop soon enough.

Or you can not install any social networking apps on it and use it as the magical information oracle like a lot of us do. Neither Android nor iOS comes with social networking installed by default. Yes, Google has Google+ but the app is not there in a base Android install, you have to get it yourself from the Google app store. It's been a while since I used an iOS device but to my knowledge the closest to "social" they have by default is the Game Center system.

If you're really paranoid you can install CyanogenMod, Replicant, Ubuntu Touch, or any number of alternative OSes and/or Android forks which you can build yourself from source and know exactly what's in it.

Disliking social networks makes sense. Avoiding smartphones because of that doesn't make any sense. No one is forcing you to use social networks just to have a smartphone.

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[mark-t]

Are they dead in the US? They were never a "thing" here to begin with.

They were definitely a thing in the US only a few years ago... A feature phone is basically just a low-end mobile phone. The key characteristic is that feature phones have more computing abilities than otherwise "plain" cell phones, the latter of which are capable of only sending or receiving voice calls and/or text messaging. The line between feature phone and smart phone is definitely a lot more blurry, but tends to be a function of how good the device is at running third party applications and how general purpose that the underlying computing platform is.

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[UncannyCleric]

If you're not frequently away from a wifi connection, a dumbphone is to me a better choice. I'd rather not pay for an unnecessary data package just so I can say I've got a smartphone when I have no actual need for one.

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[steelfood]

So it's HDCP-compliant.

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[khellendros1984]

If you're worried about someone tracking you, then I hope you pull the battery when you aren't using the phone. Even something that would be called a "feature phone" or a "dumb phone" has to keep in contact with the towers. A cell provider knows which towers you're in range of and the strength of signal to each tower. It's enough to get a decent idea of your location.

Social media is crap. I like having texting available, though (and I think you'd be hardpressed to find a phone that doesn't support some form of SMS). I like being able to carry a phone, GPS, camera, bookshelf, set of reference materials, pile of games, music and video player, programming environment, instrument, voice recorder, and OBD-2 reader in my pocket with me. Other than that, I agree; smartphones are only good for social media nonsense, email, and texts. Completely useless.

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[murdocj]

Cost.

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[gl4ss]

feature phone == phone that has features like a camera and running applications written in java or some other language and a web browser.

now, the exact same is the smartphone. however, the stats companies and phone companies invented these terms so that some companies could show higher smartphone percentage(were they all lumped together then nokia would have been in 80% range for past decade...). now nokia is as guilty of this as everyone else, sometimes they shuffled phones between these two categories for their quarterly reports because of internal politics.. series60 phones regularly were counted as one or the other depending on under which label they were. fucking stupid, eh? practically _all_ phones that are sold today that cost over 60 bucks would have been counted in the smartphone statistics ten years ago.

in other news, nokia is now making nokia x in their old featurephone category. nokia x runs android and the models are 75 to 100 bucks(not marketed in usa/europe, due to internal politics, ha, since some bigwigs want wp's sold).

ten years ago the difference between a smartphone and a featurephone was quite simply that smartphone ran native arm applications capable operating system(such as series60, palmos, or others) while featurephones ran only j2me apps, but like i said, they blurred this definition on their category reports in the past decade.

anyways, whichever marketshare owns the sub 100 bucks smartphone category in the next two years will own it for a decade.

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[Osgeld]

feature phone, anything that does more than just make calls, and is not a smartphone

real popular in the early to mid 2000's

now get off my lawn

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[soccerisgod]

For me it is the fact that I don't want to babysit another computer. My telephone should allow me to send and receive messages and calls. Everything else, to me, is superfluous. Is that such a big deal?

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[soccerisgod]

Oh you can still get a super dumb phone that can only do calls. It's those phones with huge keys and an emergency button for elderly people!

Re:WTF Is A "Feature Phone"?

[sjames]

Even those tend to have speed dial.

The only features ...

[Anonymous Coward]

... I require of my phone is that it make calls and sends/receive texts. My Tracfone costs me about $120 bucks a year. I'm not paying that much per MONTH for a smartphone for the added benefit of playing Candy Crush and watching cat videos on YouTube.

Re:The only features ...

[NotFamous]

I would leave off the call feature - big waste of time for me.

Re:The only features ...

[Herder Of Code]

Well, even if you're only interested in making/receiving calls with your phone, you have to admit that *in general*, it's much easier to manage contacts, call logs, sens SMS, etc when using a smartphone than with a dumb phone or a feature phone. Sending SMS on those feature phones used to be a total nightmare and I would do it only as a last resort.

Heck my dad, my uncle and my father in law ( all above 60 y/old) used to barely be able to make/take calls on feature phones. Now they have the cheapest refurb iphone and without having to teach/show them they use contacts and call logs, according to them it "changed their life" for the better having those contacts on hand at all time.

Re:The only features ...

[Anonymous Coward]

I have an Android phone on T-Mobile's $30/month, 100 min, unlimited texts and data (throttled at some point. I rarely use my 100 minutes, I don't really like talking on the phone. I am usually on WiFi, but when I'm traveling I like to be able to check email & google stuff sometimes, and while driving in DC traffic I find Waze useful. Plus there's streaming Pandora in the car, etc. I'm a cheapskate, but I find the extra spend on data worth it overall.

I have used pretty low end Android devices in the past, and they were generally frustrating. Personally, I wouldn't get a device with lower specs than what i'm using right now (Galaxy SII); luckily, some of these low-end devices will probably match that in a year or two. (Ok, maybe not at $20.)

Re:The only features ...

[pluther]

Why even bother having a phone.

What other device can you carry around in your pocket that can do everything he lists?

For me, pretty much the same - texts, messaging, web browsing, and I'd also add playing audiobooks, music, and podcasts.

The voice calls aren't a feature I use often.

Re:The only features ...

[vux984]

I can live without the voice calls.

I routinely engage in 5 minute phone calls that would take hours to resolve via text messaging.

I like email and text as much as anyone, but the speed and efficiency of two-way information transfer over either is far lower than a voice call -- even if the voice call does force both parties to engage simultaneously in realtime.

I prefer to do as much as I can via email etc myself, because i prefer the written record, and the asynchronous nature -- but to suggest a voice call is unnecessary completely, ever, is ridiculous to me.

Re:The only features ...

[rogoshen1]

you don't want to waste gobs of money in order to join the facebook zombie army? sad.

Re:The only features ...

[BitZtream]

People calling my phone is an asynchronous interrupt which doesn't fit with my life and work style.

My phone needs to, in order of decreasing importance
1) Play Ingress.

I can live without the voice calls.

From the sound of it, its a safe bet you don't have any friends who would call you, you seem to be pretty antisocial.

Re:The only features ...

[mopower70]

>I would leave off the call feature - big waste of time for me.

Yup. I tend to avoid the whole call thing. People calling my phone is an asynchronous interrupt which doesn't fit with my life and work style.

The most ironic part of it is, it's the one piece they just can't seem to get right. Phone calls on a cell phone suck. Period. They're awful. I was at someone's house the other day and talked to someone on an old AT&T Bakelite phone over POTS and I was shocked at how beautiful the sound was. I have never, ever - not even once - had a cell phone call that came anywhere close to that. Cell phone call quality is the audio equivalent of a Jackson Pollock painting: anyone who claims they can understand a damn thing is just lying.

Re:The only features ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Cool story, granddad.

Re:The only features ...

[Mousit]

It's worth pointing out that having a smartphone no longer requires being forced into an expensive monthly post-paid service, a fact that is very much related to the posted article, if only tangentially. It certainly USED to be the case (in the U.S. especially), but these days there's quite a number of pre-paid services that are like Tracfone, that allow you to use a smartphone. StraightTalk comes to mind, since they offer Android and iPhones. Even AT&T's GoPhone (a service similarly priced to Tracfone, notably) lets smartphones on these days, though in the past I admit they used to outright reject them and tell you they could only be used on post-pay.

Many pre-paid providers don't even require you to have a data plan with a smartphone. You can live on voice/SMS alone, and get your data needs via WiFi.

Basically, it's entirely possible these days to enjoy both cheap service AND a smartphone. Though I won't begrudge anyone who truly does want a simple, voice-and-text-only phone. Have at 'em. But people who might like a smartphone but not the expensive service plan should not need to hold out anymore.

Re:The only features ...

[chihowa]

It's been getting gradually worse, too.

Back when cell phones were analog, the call quality was generally better. Partially, it was because considerably larger bandwidth was allotted to each voice channel (at the cost of being able to handle fewer phones). Mostly, though, it was because in the analog system the call degraded by having increasing static, which is fairly easy to hear through to a point, and calls degrade now by entirely losing audio or adding chirps and skips.

Re:The only features ...

[tepples]

Well, even if you're only interested in making/receiving calls with your phone, you have to admit that *in general*, it's much easier to manage contacts, call logs, sens SMS, etc when using a smartphone than with a dumb phone or a feature phone.

But is it worth paying hundreds of USD per year extra for the convenience? On a random U.S. prepaid carrier, dumbphone service starts at $7 per month, while smartphone service starts at $35 per month even if you leave cellular data turned off.

Re:The only features ...

[tepples]

Many pre-paid providers don't even require you to have a data plan with a smartphone.

Last time I checked, Virgin Mobile still required a data plan in order to activate an Android phone. To which U.S. prepaid carrier should I try switching? Ting?

Re:The only features ...

[sootman]

> The only features I require of my phone is that
> it make calls and sends/receive texts.

Well la-di-da and good for you. You can go hang out with this guy in the corner. I am more than willing to pay for all the things a modern smartphone does for me -- chief among them, maps with live traffic info, access to pretty much ANYTHING on the entire WWW at any time from any location, email, a bunch of USEFUL apps, and a very good camera. (Camera snobs please STFU; the camera is totally suitable for what I ask of it and I'm not going to lug my DSLR around 24/7. The fact is it's better than all the point-n-shoots I bought, and was totally happy with at the time, over the years.)

And thanks to T-Mobile, I get a decent price on a good amount of data WITH TETHERING. (Suck it, AT&T.)

Re:The only features ...

[Mousit]

PagePlus Cellular doesn't require a data plan. They use Verizon's network though so that is unfortunately a limiting factor because Verizon doesn't tend to like activating phones that were not bought through them (i.e., BYOD). Using smartphones with PagePlus is a hit-or-miss story, but I mention them anyway because they are widely known.

AT&T's Prepaid options include pay-as-you-go basic phone plans that do not include data (I lived on the 10c/min, 20c/text plan for years), and they also have a no-contract monthly $25 smartphone plan that does not include data and does not require you to purchase any either. AT&T also now owns and operates pre-pay-only carrier Aio Wireless, though I don't think that one does no-data plans at current.

There is also GoSmart Mobile. They are owned and operated by T-Mobile, like MetroPCS is. Also speaking of subsidiaries, don't forget Net10 which belongs to Tracfone, and does not require data. However I believe Net10 requires you use one of their own devices, not bring your own (much like Tracfone itself).

There's a whole host of little-known MVNOs as well. If you have an interest in Ting (which yes was one I might point out), then I might also suggest ChitChat Mobile, which like Ting also operates on Sprint's network. It has plans that do not require data, and they even openly advertise that they allow smartphones on those same no-data plans. Their homepage currently boasts that they'll activate Sprint iPhones on their $10/mo talk/text/no-data plan.

Re:The only features ...

[ArchieBunker]

Neckbeard much?

Re:The only features ...

[TechyImmigrant]

But I have a telephone for phone calls. It uses wires over which to communicate and integrates nicely with the conference call application on my laptop.

I've tried it on my cell phone. It sucks and is expensive.

Re:The only features ...

[TechyImmigrant]

>you seem to be pretty antisocial.

Very. Never call me.

Re:The only features ...

[vux984]

Ah, so your saying you just don't need your cell phone to be able to make calls, not that you don't ever need to make calls.

I guess that's fair.

The only scenarios i can think of where 'cellphone calls' are really necessary over 'regular phones':

driving - pretty easy to take or make a handsfree call. Virtually impossible to do the same via text. But arguably even handsfree calls should be eliminated.

emergencys - I'd hate have to try and text someone to get a locksmith or a towtruck or to report a robbery-in-progress, or what have you, and locating a landline in these cases isn't always viable. In theory, there's nothing preventing these sorts of things to be done via apps and texts etc... but its not quite here yet.

Re:The only features ...

[TechyImmigrant]

The old school phones with rounder edges would be easier for that.

Re:The only features ...

[TechyImmigrant]

There's been a competition in the voice coding world to achieve ever lower bit rates for a voice call. Improved quality has never appeared to be a goal. 32Kbps adpcm audio was fine on DECT phones. Indistinguishable from 64Kbps PCM.

So your cell phone might happily download a meg of data for a web page, but insist on 2.4Kbps for a voice call.

Re:The only features ...

[TechyImmigrant]

If the device is too large, it feels like a laptop with a missing keyboard.

Re:The only features ...

[mjwx]

I prefer to do as much as I can via email etc myself, because i prefer the written record, and the asynchronous nature -- but to suggest a voice call is unnecessary completely, ever, is ridiculous to me.

This, I loath phone calls so they're an absolute last resort for me but... sometimes I need an answer now and a SMS or email could take hours.

Re:The only features ...

[Voltage Spike]

It's slowly (slowly!) getting better:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Re:The only features ...

[Mr. Slippery]

To which U.S. prepaid carrier should I try switching? Ting?

I have an Android phone on a T-Mobile prepaid plan. Ok, it's 1.6, but it's Android. (It's my landline replacement, just needed something as cheap as possible to which I could assign the home phone number I got back in 1995, so as long as it makes and receives calls at my home location I'm satisfied -- my other phone is the smart phone I carry, I'm pickier about that.)

Re:The only features ...

[wiredlogic]

A lot of the problems with cell phone quality is the crappy microphones with a tiny opening tucked out of the way in one corner of the phone. They also inject "comfort noise" so you don't notice the transmitter turning off and on between extended periods of silence.

Re:The only features ...

[ccguy]

My phone needs to, in order of decreasing importance
1) Play Ingress.

...
I can live without the voice calls.

I have the same problem with my oven. In decreasing order of importance it needs to

1) Print both sides
2) Have a fax
3) Scan documents

Seriously...Have you considered the possibility that what you need is not a phone?

Re:The only features ...

[kackle]

I started in cellular in the late 1980s. The analog, one-frequency-per-call system was MUCH better than cellular phones of today. The analog cellular system we put customers on had 3 times the bandwidth as they allowed for the upcoming digital system calls. You could easily confirm this on an RF spectrum analyzer.

When we were told to give customers free digital phones for beta testing, many were angered by how poor the quality had become as they ran their businesses from them. They demanded their old phones be returned (reinstalled, since they were mostly car phones), but I was told by my boss to assure them the software upgrades would improve the service in the future (which I believed). From what I've seen, they never did.

I'd bet it's even worse now due to the sheer quantity of users and the multitude of different services bouncing between the air, antennas, and equipment. Think about it, if they need more bandwidth at a certain tower, it's probably not hard to dynamically take some bits away from the voice channels.

Re:The only features ...

[TechyImmigrant]

That would be a tablet. But they don't fit in my pocket.

Re:The only features ...

[TechyImmigrant]

You'll get more voice bandwidth with Voip from your phone than with a phone call from your phone.

Not the phone

[dpilot]

I suspect the real desire has nothing to do with the phone itself. The telcos just want to move everyone they possibly can from merely-slightly-expensive voice plans to very-expensive data plans.

(Then call that "broadband internet access" for regulatory purposes.)

Re:Not the phone

[NewWorldDan]

When I think about it, I really don't need a data plan anymore. 95% of my data is coming over WiFi networks anyway. My phone is already set up for data at home, work, the coffee shop, several restaurants, and my kid's school. The only time I really need data is if I'm lost and I need a map.

On the other hand, I'm probably not all that typical. All I'm using for data is mostly email and weather. I don't play games on the phone and I'm not an app junkie. But even if I was, I think I could get by without an actual data plan.

Re:Not the phone

[CastrTroy]

When I think about it, I don't really need a voice plan anymore. The only thing I use my phone for is to send text messages and look up information on websites. I find that my phone is much more useful as a mobile internet appliance than it is as a phone. The few times I do make a phone call, something like Skype could take up the slack if it was possible to get a phone without an actual voice plan. I guess you could just get a data only plan, but where I live, getting a data only plan is the same price or more expensive, most likely because they assume you'll hook up a laptop to it and use a larger amount of data than the typical phone user would.

Re:Not the phone

[CauseBy]

I was in the early rounds of recipients for the Republic Phone. I returned it during the evaluation period because it dropped about 30-40% of my calls. Has your experience been better than that? (I've ended up with prepaid service for a cash-bought cell phone.)

Re:Not the phone

[LearningHard]

Republic uses the Sprint network which is absolutely awful in most of the country. Unfortunately for me if I want decent coverage I need AT&T and Verizon networks which are pretty much awful expensive. The reason my family doesn't use a smartphone is I refuse to pay the extortionist fees they bill. I worked in cost management for Alltel and Verizon Wireless and I'm painfully aware of how cheap it is for them to provide data service to us.

Re:Not the phone

[macemoneta]

At least in my area, Sprint is great. They've also been doing a massive buildout over the last year, so you may want to check again. Republic Wireless also offers free roaming onto Verizon and local carriers. So you get coverage if you have WiFi, Sprint, or Verizon. Many people are even using the phones overseas - any place you have WiFi, you're connected. Unlike VoIP apps, you use the same incoming/outgoing number no matter how you're connected.

Re:Not the phone

[used2win32]

Have have a cell plan (non prepaid) with four phones. Three are feature phones along with one older non touch screen smart phone working as a feature phone (of sorts)

All four phones together are less than $60 per month (talk, text and some data). That is $15 per month per phone. Hard to beat. $180 per year per phone. I know people who pay more than that in a single month with ~one~ smart phone...

Re:Not the phone

[El Rey]

FWIW, Android phones on Tracfone are on Verizon and you can bring your own phone. You can get the ones they sell on Amazon for $50. Unfortunately the only not running ICS is heartbleed vulnerable (4.1.1).

Re:Not the phone

[afidel]

Yes, the Moto X basically never drops a call, they made the default to be very aggressive towards preferring CDMA if they detect any potential disruption on WiFi (unless you're in an area where you know you have poor Sprint coverage, then you can set that AP to never auto handoff). It's basically been completely invisible to my wife that she's using WiFi for voice calls.

Re:Not the phone

[radarskiy]

"Data plans are no longer expensive"
Compared to voice they are. In *your very own example*, voice and text are unlimited while data is throttled.

Re:Not the phone

[macemoneta]

I'm currently on Republic Wireless $10/month plan (unlimited voice and text/MMS, WiFi data only). I always have WiFi available; our cable company has even lined all the major highways with access points. All major retailers (and even some minor retailers) have free WiFi (via AT&T). The nice thing is that Republic Wireless lets you switch the plan from the phone with immediate activation twice a month. So if I need data, I can turn it on, and it's prorated on a daily basis.

So if you have four smartphones and reasonable access to WiFi (who doesn't), all four will cost $40/month.

Re:Not the phone

[afidel]

Get a Moto X or Moto G on Republic and use the $10/month unlimited voice/text plan and an offline map package (Google maps can easily save an entire metro area for offline use, if you want more than that there are paid apps with full continent maps and POI databases). If you find you want to use data at some point you can switch twice a month so turn on data and get it at a prorated $25/month for just as long as you use it.

Re:Not the phone

[swv3752]

Actually, I think you are like most people. You're usage profile matches my own and most people i know.

Re:Not the phone

[Anonymous Coward]

Verizon absolutely requires a data plan for every smartphone and their basic phones are overpriced.

Why not just use a Verizon MVNO like PagePlus? Because Verizon restricts what phones can be ported over. No iPhones and no Pay As You Go (includes basic and a few smartphones). Some people have reported getting the iPhone ported over, but the mere fact Verizon would set these rules is absurd.

I know they're CDMA and GSM, but apparently there exists such a thing as "CDMA cards" (in China of all places), so Verizon could potentially allow any device on their networks (hell, they could do that without cards, they're just assholes).

Re:Not the phone

[mrchaotica]

I guess you could just get a data only plan

T-Mobile has a special plan (only available online or at Wal-Mart) that costs $30/month for unlimited data (5GB of 4G) but only 100 voice minutes. It's the closest thing I've found to a cheap data-only plan (at least a 4G one... 3G data-only plans can be even cheaper).

Re:Not the phone

[macemoneta]

What's so hard about 5GB at full bandwidth and whatever else at reduced bandwidth? A limit implies that they will cut you off; they don't. It's unlimited.

Re:Not the phone

[Prototerm]

I'll do you one better. My dumbphone costs me $100 US a year for voice and messages (I turn text messages off, though -- the phone's too small to type on with my fat thumbs), and any money I don't spend on calls gets rolled over to the next year. The phone doesn't use data, and I don't need it to. Email and Internet's what my laptop is for. Why would I want to spend $35 each month when what I've got now is more than I need? Oh, and that $35 is just the starting point. After you add state and federal fees, it's more like $50 a month.

Re:Not the phone

[geminidomino]

I like how they list "unlimited wifi" as a feature of all their plans. XD

Too bad they only seem to support two phones, and both are Moto and running late-model android versions. :P

Re:Not the phone

[macemoneta]

I'll do you one better. My dumbphone costs me $100 US a year for voice and messages (I turn text messages off, though -- the phone's too small to type on with my fat thumbs), and any money I don't spend on calls gets rolled over to the next year. The phone doesn't use data, and I don't need it to. Email and Internet's what my laptop is for. Why would I want to spend $35 each month when what I've got now is more than I need? Oh, and that $35 is just the starting point. After you add state and federal fees, it's more like $50 a month.

It's $25/month (voice/text/data on 3G and WiFi), and the taxes and fees are about $3, depending on the state and locality. If you're replacing a landline, they have a $5/month plan that's WiFi only. The advantage of course is that you can take it with you anywhere you have WiFi, and from the phone you can switch to the $10, $25 or $40 plan instantly on a daily prorated basis. So that's about the same annual cost after taxes and fees, but you get a smartphone and all the functionality that comes with that.

Re:Not the phone

[macemoneta]

I like how they list "unlimited wifi" as a feature of all their plans. XD

Too bad they only seem to support two phones, and both are Moto and running late-model android versions. :P

They "only" offer two current generation, less than 6-month old, Motorola phones: the Moto G and Moto X, both highly rated. "Late-model android versions" means the current version, which is Kitkat (Android 4.4.2). Who's running a new version?

Re:Not the phone

[dissy]

I like how they list "unlimited wifi" as a feature of all their plans. XD

Usually that refers to the carriers fixed hotspots around town that one can pay by the hour or whatnot for access. If you have a cell package with them, use of the hotspots does not cost extra nor on a timer.

Personally I don't spend much time in McDonalds and the like, let alone spending time there on the Internet, but for people who are this feature is aimed at them.

Of course any access point that is open or you have access to is always available.

Re:Not the phone

[kesuki]

i get all my Rx meds refilled by a smartphone app but that can be used over wifi but i have my phone's wifi separate and off most of the time, well and one laptop... because android is a threat to my network and allowing it 24/7 access to my network is unthinkable. i realize they make av software for smartphones but they tried that with windows and it still gets pwned if you are not careful. so i am careful and assume that my phone is a spyware laden (by design) and only let it see one machine on my network. i also have the other wifi for guests with smartphones. i really need a third network for those people but only family ever comes over so it isn't a priority.

Re:Not the phone

[geminidomino]

KitKat is the latest model, on the Moto G. 4.2.2 is recent enough that I considered it "late model" enough, which is on the Moto X.

I don't consider either version particularly usable.

Re:Not the phone

[geminidomino]

Of course any access point that is open or you have access to is always available.

That's what I thought they were talking about. But apparently, from some reading, they're talking about unlimited VOIP calling. I'm not sure if they have a transparent pass-thru or not, though.

Re:Not the phone

[macemoneta]

KitKat is the latest model, on the Moto G. 4.2.2 is recent enough that I considered it "late model" enough, which is on the Moto X.

I don't consider either version particularly usable.

The Republic Wireless Moto X is running 4.4.2 Kitkat as well. If you order now, you may receive the phone with Jellybean (4.2.2), but it will upgrade immediately after activation.

Re:Not the phone

[radarskiy]

"It's throttled after 5GB/month. "

Which I already noted. My point is that there are no limitations placed on voice or texts other than the laws of physics. If at a fixed price voice/texts are too cheap to meter but data is worth metering, then the data is more expensive relative to voice and texts.

Re:Not the phone

[geminidomino]

That's too bad. =\ I would have jumped at the deal otherwise (I'm already on sprint, so the coverage isn't an issue).

Re:Not the phone

[meburke]

ATT points out that the demand for wireless services will increase 8 times (800 percent for those of you who don't undrstand math) from December 2013 through December 2018. Most of this increase will be the continued rise of phones as internet devices. (2014 is the first year that demand for internet to phone devices exceeds internet to desktop computers.) A large trend is the demand for inter-connectivity between devices; Vehicle-to-vehicle, phone-to-computer, wearable gear-to-desktop and cloud. Thesity will be increasing ly replaced by virtualization ande are all crating demand for wireless services. Data pipes will be like oil piplines untill the infrastructure catches up. Worse, where we have hardware connectivity will be replaced by virtualization and software-defined device emulation and virtual networks, so errors and breakages will be more disruptive.

Synching calendars and contacts well

[93 Escort Wagon]

That's all I ask. Even on the crap Android 2.2 phone that was my original smartphone, being able to easily manage my calendars and contacts was HUGE. It was such a step up over the feature phones I'd previously had...

I know the world is all about apps - but I could live with a basic smartphone that just did those two things (on top of the phone things - calling and SMS/MMS of course). Especially since I find my iPad Mini to be the perfect size for most other mobile tasks.

Re:Synching calendars and contacts well

[oldmac31310]

Hey, you know what 'feature phone' means! Care to share?

Re:Synching calendars and contacts well

[TechyImmigrant]

>Hey, you know what 'feature phone' means! Care to share?

Ringtones. For a fee.

Re:Synching calendars and contacts well

[CauseBy]

Most people on Slashdot know what 'feature phone' means because we've all used telecommunications in the first world during the last two decades. What time or place are you from? Do you use the terms "rotary phone" and "corded phone" and "cell phone" and "smart phone" in your placetime?

A feature phone is like an intermediary step just before full-blown smart phones, capable of a much more limited set of operations, but more functional than a cell phone which merely does talk and text.

In the future when you don't know a term used in an online forum you can often find it on Wikipedia.

Re:Synching calendars and contacts well

[compro01]

It's a phone that does more than just calls+texts, but isn't quite an all-up smartphone. The category is fairly ill defined. Most of Nokia's S40 devices (pre-Asha anyway) would be considered feature phones today.

Re:Synching calendars and contacts well

[BattleApple]

If you have a feature phone with more capability than the first gen iphone, what would you add to it to make it a smart phone?

Incomplete Analysis

[Anonymous Coward]

The analysis is ignoring everyone who can't use a smartphone because of environmental factors (feature phones are much more resilient to dust, sand, impacts/falls, moisure, etc.) or techophobia (it's difficult to teach people a new UI, especially a non-tactile one, beyond a certain age).

Feature phones will continue to be with us for a long time to come.

iPhone is even sometimes "free"

[The New Guy 2.0]

All things smartphone are getting cheaper, and the phone company subsidies are still there it seems. And any iPhone launch event seems to have leftovers of the previous generation with "free" signs for the lowest model of that class. Seems like there's always a smartphone available... and is last year's iPhone worth nothing when the new one comes out to you?

This can only happen if we avoid mobile OS bloat

[richtopia]

It is easy to claim that Android can be used on these types of devices, however these devices will have little memory to keep price down. If you could load Android 4.x onto the original HTC Dream then by all means bring on the low end phones.

Still waiting to see how FirefoxOS compares, as they are going after the low end market but I know that Firefox on Android is not the best with limited memory (I believe that Opera Mobile takes that title, so naturally it is discontinued).

Re:All I need...

[93 Escort Wagon]

and my dog!

Re:All I need...

[the_skywise]

RAAWWRRR...

I don't need my dog...

What?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't understand this summary.

If smart phones are "feature rich", then what is a feature phone? If a feature phone is a phone with features, but not a smart phone, then surely a low end smart phone is a feature phone? What constitutes a feature anyways? My old motorola flip phone with pull out antenna had snake on it. that seems like a feature?

No standard meaning of smartphone

[damn_registrars]

The concept of a "smartphone" seems to change at least twice a year. I seem to recall that some time ago it was just a phone that was also a PIM. Then Apple and others told us that a smart phone had to store and play music. Then Facebook told us the smart phone had to natively give them all our personal infomation. Then we were told a phone can't be smart without a 12 megapixel camera with zoom. Then we were told any phone that accesses the internet wirelessly slower than a cable modem isn't smart.

Now, I have no idea what consittutes a smartphone. It apparently is just whatever our carriers tell us (and of course whatever makes them the most money in contract and sales fees).

Re:Cue the vintage-nazis

[CanHasDIY]

This story will now be flooded by the "I am so retro-cool because I own a Nokia 1100 with a 1-incg monochrome LCD and it does all I ever need it to do" crowd.

Puh-LEEZ.

You're not cool unless you own a bag phone like this one.
 
... Which I do, thankyouverymuch. [insert cocky, derisive hipster laugh]

Re:Lack of choice in form factor

[Anonymous Coward]

Few Android phones come with hardware keyboards, and of those that do, all that I've seen are slide-behind-the-screen types.

You can buy hardware keyboards from third-party manufacturers for popular smartphones (I've seen models for iPhone 4, iPhone 5, iPhone 5S, iPhone 5C, Samsung Galaxy S2, Samsung Galaxy S3) that slide to cover the screen, in an approximation of the flip phone form factor.

I don't think you're going to find anything better, short of some niche Chinese product that even I haven't seen -- and I've seen a lot of what the market has to offer.

How is this news?

[avandesande]

I have a year and half old LG that I paid 45$ for that does most of the things I want and has a real keyboard. I bought a new battery for it on it's anniversary but I haven't had the urge to spend any more on a phone.

It's All About The Data Plan

[snookerdoodle]

Speaking as someone the rest of you might consider a Luddite because I have a feature phone (it's a Samsung with a touchscreen, I don't know the model), the devil's in the details of what the carriers require of you to connect the phone to their network.

Verizon requires you to have a data plan to even use (e.g.) an iPhone. Even if you never use the data service. If Verizon considers your phone a "Smart Phone", they require you to have and pay for a data plan to use it. My understanding is that the other carriers have the same policy. The people that are buying these phones are paying these monthly fees.

If you knew me, you'd know I'm not really a Luddite. For example, when I play my guitar, I don't play with a tube amp, but use a device that models a tube amp that is then plugged directly into a P.A. I pay for said device (a Line 6 HD 500) with the money I save by not paying for a data plan. I prefer to say I'm frugal.

Also, what others have noted: It's Gartner. Seriously?

Re:It's All About The Data Plan

[BitZtream]

Its fairly easy to have them mail you a simcard and take you off the data plan. Tell them you lost your phone and have some simple phone that doesn't use data, check their website for models they have. Call them up, have them mail it to you, put it in yourself, no smart phone pricing and you can still use whatever android or iOS device you want.

but use a device that models a tube amp that is then plugged directly into a P.A

That just makes you a wanna-be. You're trying to pretend you understand why a tube amp is used ... and then not using it and trying to synthesis it. You've been conned into buying something you don't understand for reasons you don't understand. Just use a normal solid state amp, I seriously doubt you can tell the difference.

Using a tube amp doesn't make you a luddite, and the word isn't capitalized, its not a name. You might want to actually lookup the definition of the word, it doesn't just mean you 'prefer older technolgoies'

Re:It's All About The Data Plan

[RR]

Verizon requires you to have a data plan to even use (e.g.) an iPhone. Even if you never use the data service. If Verizon considers your phone a "Smart Phone", they require you to have and pay for a data plan to use it. My understanding is that the other carriers have the same policy. The people that are buying these phones are paying these monthly fees.

The environment is more complicated since the last time you looked into cell phone plans. I don't blame you, because you have better things to do, but you might be able to save money with a smartphone, now.

There's decent activity in Mobile Virtual Network Operators (MVNO), companies that rent capacity on the carriers' networks. Most of them have conventional plans that work with any phone from that carrier. If your usage falls into particular patterns, those plans can be cheaper than the carriers' own plans. But with a smartphone, a company can offer radically different plans:

Republic Wireless has plans starting at $10, or $5 if you have good WiFi and don't need to do calls away from your home/work/car hotspot, ever. Their cheapest phone is only $149, so it doesn't take long to start saving money compared to a typical carrier. Republic Wireless is what I use.

FreedomPop has plans starting at $0, as long as you don't use more than 200 minutes a month, or $10.99 for unlimited voice and texts. Their cheapest phone is $99. I'm not confident in their service quality, and I don't like their overage-based business model, but it doesn't get any cheaper than free.

Re:It's All About The Data Plan

[Rinikusu]

I've actually been looking at going that way for awhile. I currently have a smartphone and frankly, it's just one big distraction. Go out to eat? Everyone's on their phones. Go to the movies? Fuck me if everyone else in the theater can't seem to actually watch the movie rather than check and text on their phones. Driving cars? Oh, let's fucking respond to emails while driving.

And I'm just as guilty of it as everyone else (except for the driving part, I decided against car ownership in Los Angeles).

Lately I've been playing with the idea that I should just get a landline with an old fashioned phone and an answering machine (complete with stupid jingle message) and ditch the cellphone altogether, all in the name of human interactivity.

Re:It's All About The Data Plan

[snookerdoodle]

Thanks for the thoughtful reply!

We've stuck with Verizon because they still have a signal in places nobody else does. But, just as you noted about the data plans, even this is beginning to change as people start putting up cells out in the country. So, as our contract end gets near, I will take your advice and look elsewhere.

Re:It's All About The Data Plan

[msk]

Ting (ting.com, a CDMA MVNO) is $6 per month per phone. If you use no minutes, no text, no data, then $6 is all you pay.

Re:It's All About The Data Plan

[snookerdoodle]

We actually still have a land line - mostly because the math worked us towards DSL and it's really cheap with truly unlimited minutes.

I am impressed with no car in L.A. - I've only heard that the options there aren't great. I certainly see people texting. OTOH, I lived in NJ for many years and used to see people reading the newspaper, shaving, or putting on makeup while flying down the Garden State Parkway at 75 mph...

Even with our dumb phones, we forbade texting at the dinner table with two teenagers. With one about to go to college, I'm prepared to have to change my thinking about smart phones.

Re:It's All About The Data Plan

[puto]

You are giing misinformation. 1. A large number of Verizons phones do not have sim cards due to them being CDMA in nature. 2. When a GSM, CDMA phone hits the network can request the IMEI and match the make and model on the phone automagically and most networks(especially where I work) will then place a data plan on device and then text the customer what has happened. I was recently using an unlocked HTC phone in Colombia, and it quit working and advised me to go by the local Claro office. I went in and they looked up my account and because the network had identified the phone as a model it did not support, it stopped all services. I put the sim card in an unlocked S2 and all was fine. At my employer when you call in, I can tell exactly what phone you are on, even though the one registered in the system is completely different.

Re:It's All About The Data Plan

[snookerdoodle]

That just makes you a wanna-be. You're trying to pretend you understand why a tube amp is used ... and then not using it and trying to synthesis it. You've been conned into buying something you don't understand for reasons you don't understand. Just use a normal solid state amp, I seriously doubt you can tell the difference.

Using a tube amp doesn't make you a luddite, and the word isn't capitalized, its not a name. You might want to actually lookup the definition of the word, it doesn't just mean you 'prefer older technolgoies'

Well, the "wanna-be" accusation plus the fact that you clearly don't yourself know that Luddite is capitalized gave you away as a troll and I won't take your bait other than to correct some other misinformation that user puto didn't already correct. I'd hate for some other person to read your post and perhaps write off modelers on the word of someone like yourself who clearly does not know what they are talking about.

Whether or not I understand why a tube amp is used is irrelevant. The modeler was recommended to me by several people including a professional session guitarist. The particular model I use does a damn fine job of modeling not just my amp of choice, but also several others, if I so desire. Moreover, setup is a simple cable to the snake vs an amp plus cab (though, TBH, both of my amps are single cab/amp combos) plus mike plus stand. You are allowed to disagree, but it's not just me you're disagreeing with.

Welll.....

[TemporalBeing]

...it's not like the carriers don't make it hard to get a dumb-phone or feature-phone. You have all of a selection of 0-5 in a store carrying 60 some phones.

And no, the store doesn't get to decide what to carry. Corporate does; which is why you get insane things like stores in the Washing D.C metro area carrying all phones with cameras when 50% of the working population (a fluke of the W.D.C area) isn't allowed to have a camera (let alone a camera phone) at their desk at work.

So Corporate has decided to sell Smartphones instead of feature phones; and they have made it really hard to get anything less. No wonder that's what shows up in the statistics.

Now I do quite agree that smartphones do have some good features - I switched my Motorola v180 for a NexusOne specifically for the contacts, calendaring, and data synchronization features - anything else being gravy, and no I didn't (and still don't) want a data plan. I'm happy using it with WiFi only for all data.

Re:Cue the vintage-nazis

[OzPeter]

This story will now be flooded by the "I am so retro-cool because I own a Nokia 1100 with a 1-incg monochrome LCD and it does all I ever need it to do" crowd.

Nah .. I'm so retro that I own a Razr .. and that my typical yearly bill is about $200 max.

Given that I sit in front of multiple computers for most of the day I see no need to carry the internet in my pocket.

Battery life

[QuietLagoon]

The feature phone's biggest feature for me is the battery life. I charge my phone once every couple of weeks, if that much.
.

The smartphone's biggest detriment to me is all the data that resides on it, and how much the apps track your every move.

Re:Battery life

[asavage]

I have owned 3 cell phones. The first was a flip phone that lasted 16 days on stand by and I bought an extended battery that gave it even longer life. My second phone had a touch screen and a keyboard that slide out underneath. It lasted about a week on standby. Now I have a Nexus 4 that would probably only last 2 days on standby. This does everything I need from a phone and more but the biggest feature I want in my next phone is longer battery life. I don't need any more pixels, RAM, or CPU speed. Maybe a better camera.

Re:Battery life

[Geeky]

I get the point, but I'm surprised at the poor battery life on the Nexus 4. I have a Nexus 5, and with very little use I get four days out of it on a full charge. That's syncing one email account and a few things like weather widgets. It's the screen that kills the battery, but with moderate use I still get a good couple of days. GPS and Bluetooth off, obviously, and it's on wifi at home and work.

I used to get two days out of it when I had Facebook installed. Then they came out with an update that wanted too many extra permissions, so I binned it. Lo and behold, battery life almost doubled...

And battery life suffers.

[Dzimas]

My wife still carries a 4 year old Samsung feature phone with a slider keyboard. The reason? She doesn't like having to charge a handset every day or two. Her little phone will go for several weeks without charging, so she can just leave it in her shoulder bag most of the time. Her service is also dirt cheap because she doesn't have to worship at the altar of data -- she pays about $12/month. I really wish I could do the same and cut the strings; I'd probably save about $500 a year by going data-free.

Re:And battery life suffers.

[WhoBeDaPlaya]

Data doesn't have to be expensive. I bought a retail Galaxy S3 in Asia (so 2GB RAM + quad core, unlike the crappy US version) and am on AT&T's $35 GoPhone plan with 500 minutes, unlimited text and unlimited data.

The two problems remain

[ThatsNotPudding]

Smartphones = hugephones. I would be much more amenable to switch from my creaky Env2, if there was an actual Android phone that fit into human-sized shirt pockets.

The second issue is more serious: $40 per month soaking for the 'data plan', for a phone that will mostly remain off during working hours per policy.

Re:The two problems remain

[jbrandv]

Not quite. Look at the Samsung mini line. Galaxy S III mini or S 4 mini will work great for you. I returned my Galaxy III because it was too big but I love my S III mini.

Re:The two problems remain

[sconeu]

Mod parent up. I was just looking at phones the other day. SIII mini is pretty damned small, and relatively inexpensive, too.

Re:The two problems remain

[lunchman]

A feature phone is one that doesn't require a data plan.

Re:The two problems remain

[jratcliffe]

I have human-sized shirt pockets, and my Galaxy S4 fits perfectly, as would any of the iPhones.

Re:WTF Is "Dead"?

[billstewart]

Apparently "Dead" means "still close to half the phones being sold", aka "doesn't want to go in the cart!" Sure, they aren't gettin' better, but they're not dead yet.

"Feature Phone" is a standard industry term - it means phones that do more than basic calling, and often have installable applications, but aren't based on the iPhone/Android touchscreen designs that have taken over the market and usually don't run general-purpose operating systems (except maybe Symbian.) Most of them either don't have web browsing, or have some crippled-HTML-substitute like WAP. They're usually smaller (remember when being the smallest phone you could get meant it was the fanciest and most expensive?), often have clamshell designs, sometimes keyboards, and actually fit in your pocket.

Best smart phone ...

[PPH]

... is something like this. A better form factor would be nice, as would longer battery life. But one advantage this one has is that the GSM/GPRS module does not have direct acess to the processor busses. No provisioning your phone with malware/crapware by your network operator.

Re:WTF Is "Dead"?

[camperdave]

it means phones that do more than basic calling, and often have installable applications, but aren't based on the iPhone/Android touchscreen designs

Ah! So Blackberrys then.

Can already buy smart phones for cheap

[DrXym]

Here in Ireland - Tesco Mobile sells the Alcatel T'Pop Black for €29 PAYG and Vodafone sells a Samsung Galaxy Pocket Neo for €39 PAYG. That's retail price including VAT, albeit sim locked and you have to wait 12 months to unlock them. Undoubtedly these are pretty shitty by smart phone standards but they run Android and would probably be fine as a spare / temporary phone, a portable hotspot, a kid phone, a GPS tracker for running or whatever.

Most phone sellers will sell a few candy bar phones below that price for between €9.99 and €29 which are all very basic even by feature phone standards.

Terminology

[gaiageek]

I can't tell if some people really haven't heard these terms before or it's some deep sarcasm. Feature phone = your average dumb phone. The phone you had before you had a phone that you could download and run mobile-OS specific applications. Its "features" probably included a calculator, calendar, camera and built-in WAP browser (even if you never used it), and probably allowed you to download and run Java apps (even if you never did). It may have even had a built-in music player. No options to install a new browser or media player, though there were some decent Java apps, like language-translation dictionaries. Basic smart phone = budget Android phone or maybe something from the Nokia Asha line. We're already seeing Android phones in the $50 range. Most of us would consider them to be crap, but if you live in a developing country and you're coming from a dumb phone, just having something like GPS is a big step up, and probably all you can afford.

CDMA2000 and BREW

[tepples]

Most feature phones let you install j2me apps.

Unless your feature phone was for a carrier that used Qualcomm's CDMA2000 stack, in which case you were usually limited to BREW apps in your carrier's store. Adding other apps required becoming a registered developer, which cost money.

A feature phone doesn't need a data plan

[tepples]

I live in Slashdot's home country, and I've defined a feature phone as a phone that won't cause you to have to buy a data plan. The major U.S. CDMA2000 carriers (Verizon, Sprint, and Sprint-owned Boost and Virgin) refuse to on talk-and-text-only plans, and the U.S. GSM carrier with the best coverage (AT&T) will automatically add a data plan to a talk-and-text-only SIM if you insert it in a smartphone.

Re:A feature phone doesn't need a data plan

[LihTox]

I live in Slashdot's home country, and I've defined a feature phone as a phone that won't cause you to have to buy a data plan. The major U.S. CDMA2000 carriers (Verizon, Sprint, and Sprint-owned Boost and Virgin) refuse to on talk-and-text-only plans, and the U.S. GSM carrier with the best coverage (AT&T) will automatically add a data plan to a talk-and-text-only SIM if you insert it in a smartphone.

Good point. That's the reason I have an iPod Touch and a separate dumbphone (for which I pay ~$50/year).

Re:A feature phone doesn't need a data plan

[Bing Tsher E]

You can get a pretty powerful Android phone for Virgin Mobile for significantly less than an iPod Touch, and never sign up for any cellular plan on it. Awhile back there was a Virgin Android phone for $40 at Walmart. A perfectly good mobile wifi-only device, and with an SD slot and the Google Play store.

It's hard to figure out how Apple sells any iPod Touches at all in today's market.

Phablet

[tepples]

You could try a 7" 3G/4G tablet instead of a phone. You still get the data, just not voice and SMS. But good luck reaching someone who still has a land line.

Rich(er) than you ludite here

[sinij]

I have old Nokia cellphone (it only calls and texts), Galaxy Note WiFi tablet and old 3G USB cell modem. If I need portable data I use cell modem with my laptop, I then have an option to use laptop as a WiFi hotspot and connect to it. Free WiFi is everywhere, so I rarely have to use modem.

Re:Rich(er) than you ludite here

[puto]

I carry a almost three year old Samsung Galaxy S2, with an extra large battery. I can 3 days out of it, and also use it as a mobile hotspot, and even do most of my internet stuff I need to from the phone. I like not having three devices when one does all.

Unmetered != unlimited

[tepples]

I understood what was meant: "A subscriber on this carrier is entitled to 5 GB of fast data and unmetered slow data in each month."

But I think BitZtream might be playing word games as a way to remind you that nothing is truly "unlimited". No computer is Turing complete because memory is bounded; at best they're linear bounded automata. There is no way to physically transfer "unlimited" information to a computer, even with a 10 Gbps Ethernet drop. And cutting a subscriber's speed to, say, 64 kbps is a substantial limit on how much the subscriber can transfer during a month. Assume 10 payload bits per byte to account for TCP/IP overhead, then 64×86400×30÷10÷1000000 = 16.5 GB if the subscriber leaves the phone running 24/7 after the fast data expires.

Re:Unmetered != unlimited

[macemoneta]

I understood what was meant: "A subscriber on this carrier is entitled to 5 GB of fast data and unmetered slow data in each month."

But I think BitZtream might be playing word games as a way to remind you that nothing is truly "unlimited". No computer is Turing complete because memory is bounded; at best they're linear bounded automata. There is no way to physically transfer "unlimited" information to a computer, even with a 10 Gbps Ethernet drop. And cutting a subscriber's speed to, say, 64 kbps is a substantial limit on how much the subscriber can transfer during a month. Assume 10 payload bits per byte to account for TCP/IP overhead, then 64×86400×30÷10÷1000000 = 16.5 GB if the subscriber leaves the phone running 24/7 after the fast data expires.

I assume that people that have this issue have never had a smartphone, or home internet connection, or perhaps they're a bit special. The term 'unlimited' in the context of cell data and internet means 'unlimited usage' not 'a trillion quadrillion bits per second'. You can have unlimited dial-up internet at 52Kb/s or unlimited internet over fiber at 10Gb/s. The data rate is not a factor in the terminology.

Screw that

[LeonPierre]

No matter how cheap or good the smartphone they make, I bet the battery on my feature phone will run circles around it.

Drops to the ground aren't a concern either, it's very well built.

Water? No problem. It'll handle an accidental submersion.

Extreme temperatures? It doesn't complain about it being too hot or too cold for it to work.

Regardless, even if they developed a ruggedized smartphone it would still lack the one feature that makes a feature phone worth carrying around: a battery life that doesn't require the constant worrying of making sure you charge the phone every 16 hours or else.....

Re:WTF Is "Dead"?

[Captain Splendid]

actually fit in your pocket

If you're a munchkin, sure. My 3GS (no case) fits neatly into the fob pocket of my Levis.

Re:WTF Is "Dead"?

[mirix]

Symbian was one of the original "smart" phones, really. As it had installable native apps and such. It's not as fancy, but it was pretty much the definition back then.

The nokia feature phones ran S40 or similar, which could only run java apps, and were much more simplified in general. (all the integral apps had much less features, etc).

Not cheap enough to me.

[antdude]

Since I rarely use the mobile phones (don't even own one) and rarely go out (always use Internet indoor), it would be nice to have a backup Internet connection for my computers. I just don't want to pay a lot for something I would use rarely (a few times per year) and do want fast speeds and very high caps (unlimited preferred). Hence why I still use dial-up for $9.95 per month that has e-mails, usenet (binaries too), plenty of POPs, etc.

Re:WTF Is "Dead"?

[Travis Mansbridge]

Perhaps billstewart is a petite woman.

Re:WTF Is "Dead"?

[operagost]

No. Blackberries aren't even good at making calls.

AOL is sucks. What can you do with a bisk?

[tepples]

It's AOL logic. At one point, AOL was mass-mailing "bisks" (install CDs) that came with "700 Free Hours!*" because that was more eye-catching than "First month's on us". I think BitZtream would consider AOL's offer more honest than "unlimited".

* Expires after 30 days

Data while riding transit

[tepples]

My phone is already set up for data at home, work, the coffee shop, several restaurants, and my kid's school. [...] All I'm using for data is mostly email and weather.

Is it set up to receive mail and weather while you ride transit to and from these places? Because the bus system in my home town doesn't provide Wi-Fi data.

And a fifth

[justthinkit]

I bought a Nexus 5, but after seeing how much radiation my wife's Nexus 5 put out -- more than a working microwave oven -- I sent it back and stuck with my old dumb phone. Excessive across-the-Internet-so-you-get-dosed "chatter" is the new spam.

Re:And a fifth

[khellendros1984]

Got a citation for that? A quick search shows Nexus 5 in-ear SAR to be 0.96W/kg (below the FCC's 1.6W/kg limit), and surface SAR for an operating microwave at roughly 8x that level.

Re:And a fifth

[justthinkit]

The SAR is for when it is stuck to a simulated (adult) head, attempting to simulate a person being "on a call".

When you are thumbing around the web on a phone, at arm's length, a reading at your ear is irrelevant. My "citation" is that these were the actual readings I recorded with my $450 Acoustimeter.

Honestly, I wanted to have a Nexus 5. I had ordered one for myself -- purchased from Google Play, max memory, and hooked up with Ting.com -- that was to arrive a few days after I worked on my wife's phone. After the readings I recorded, I sent it back and decided to cut back on cell phone use even more than I had.

Also, the readings I measured (that "pegged" my meter, by the way, with readings of 99,999 microwatts per meter squared -- the highest of anything I have ever measured, including the front of three different working microwave ovens) were for when I was setting up the phone. By contrast, when my wife has been using her phone, readings have been much lower. I've not wanted to be near the phone to exactly quantify how much better, but I would say the readings have been "totally different" once the phone was setup, with SIM & working phone number & all setup prompts answered.

Based on these two sets of data points, I would suggest there is no "HLT" command during setup, but things seem to be much better once it is configured. Pity those who do nothing but set up smartphones...

YMMV

Re:And a fifth

[Alioth]

You better not go outside then. You get a lot more than 100uW/ms of radiation from the sun.

Re:WTF Is "Dead"?

[Anne Thwacks]

Unfortunately "signed by symbian" DRM meant you could not actually install the Apps. And Nokia is now owned by MS - so Feature phone is dead - but could be revived by anyone who actually wanted to.

Re:WTF Is "Dead"?

[steelfood]

No, Blackberrys are their own special type. Namely, the type that's actually dead.

The feature phone wont die in the USA

[jonwil]

The feature phone wont die in the USA as long as carriers require people to purchase an overpriced "Data Plan" for even the most basic smartphone product (carriers will even do deep packet analysis on your traffic and detect that you are using a smartphone even when its a phone they haven't even heard of, much less sold)

Re: WTF Is "Dead"?

[lazybeam]

My Nokia c.2007 called itself a "smartphone" but would be a "featurephone" these days. It ran S40.

My wife has an android touch screen phone (ICS) that cost under $40 outright, so they are definitely cheap these days.

Re:WTF Is "Dead"?

[puto]

revionist history, check phonescoop.com. that nokia has been smaller and lighter than all the iphones released.

Battery, plan, privacy, and size

[KMSelf]

I've switched back to a feature phone after two smartphones -- the Palm Centro (I actually still miss its hard keyboard), and an HTC Incredible.

Reasons:

• Battery life. I've gone from 6-8 hours to weeks. Smartphones are power hogs.
• Plan. I'm prepaid, no data, and less than half my previous smartphone cost.
• Phone itself. $30 for the handset. I'm actually disappointed with some features, though if I can't hack the handset it's cheap enough that swapping for something I prefer isn't a big deal. Finding a more ruggedized device (I'm on water and other hard-wearing environments fairly often) wouldn't hurt either.
• Privacy. Yes, the usual mobile snoopage is an issue, but my impression of the Android environment is that I simply don't trust it.
• The phone's smaller than a smartphone and easier to carry. At the same time, a smartphone is really a poor size for a data device.

I've actually got some use for a decent tablet, but no real need for a phone data plan with wifi at the house and ready access most other places. Buying a separate tablet, rolling my own OS on it, and using that for some data + reading and apps makes sense. Possibly also VOIP when connected to data.

Research the Term Non-ionizing radiation

[glennrrr]

And maybe you'll find peace of mind.

Re:WTF Is "Dead"?

[sootman]

Sorry, I was off by one -- I had a 6800 first, then a 6820, then my iPhone, but the specs I posted were from the 6800, not the 6820. (Sorry for forgetting -- it's been 7 years.) The 6820 was indeed a bit shorter than narrower than the 6800 or iPhone, but still almost twice as thick as the iPhone.

Re:WTF Is "Dead"?

[IANAAC]

LG makes some decent touch feature phones - LG840G, LG305C, LG306G).

I have the 840G and still use it as a backup phone. All I really needed to do to make it feel really functional was install Opera Mini and GMaps on it, both of which are installable java apps. The battery lasts forever, too.

Re:WTF Is "Dead"?

[lsatenstein]

Apparently "Dead" means "still close to half the phones being sold", aka "doesn't want to go in the cart!" Sure, they aren't gettin' better, but they're not dead yet.

"Feature Phone" is a standard industry term - it means phones that do more than basic calling, and often have installable applications, but aren't based on the iPhone/Android touchscreen designs that have taken over the market and usually don't run general-purpose operating systems (except maybe Symbian.) Most of them either don't have web browsing, or have some crippled-HTML-substitute like WAP. They're usually smaller (remember when being the smallest phone you could get meant it was the fanciest and most expensive?), often have clamshell designs, sometimes keyboards, and actually fit in your pocket.

Here is how I handle my personal needs. I bought a $30.00 phone and took a basic North American calling, unlimited talk, and texting, for $25/mo. The phone is small, and fits in my shirt pocket, sharing the space with my eyeglass space.
When I need something special, I ask the man on the street if I can use his phone. What is special? Skype or high resolution camera. I don't eat and text at the same time. And if I lose the phone or it drops and breaks, I can buy another.
Do I need audio memos, tango, web browser and data plan? Nope. I have a tablet for those things and I can do what I need to do at the local coffee shop or fast food or mall food court.
And my phone has real buttons, not the touch keypad. Life without the Galaxy 5 that I gave away is great, because I have gained freedom.

Still a niche for non-smartphones

[Shirley Marquez]

The one remaining advantage of non-smartphones is battery life. Smartphones are fine for people who have regular access to electric power and can plug them in every night, but are unsuitable for locations where access to power is unreliable. A small niche should remain for a bit longer, though whether it will be enough to keep those phones in production remains to be seen.