Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Hasn't Given Up On the Non-Smart Phones It Inherited From Nokia

Posted by samzenpus on from the no-phone-left-behind dept.

jfruh writes: Microsoft's acquisition of Nokia's handset business was mostly focused on gaining a hardware line that ran the company's Windows Phone OS; but in the process, Microsoft also gained ownership of some model lines that are classified as "feature phones" and some that are straight up dumb, and they're still coming out with new models, confusingly still bearing the "Nokia" brand. The $20 Nokia 105 as billed as "long-lasting backup device" and comes with an FM radio, while the $30 Nokia 215 is "Internet-ready" and comes with Facebook and Twitter apps.

42 of 66 comments (clear)

  1. Cheap Nokia have great reputation by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 5, Insightful
    These dumb phones have very good reputation in third world countries. I use a cheap 15$ Nokia in India. It supports texting in local languages, Indian astrological calenders, etc. Incredibly some of these cheap phones are meant for families, not individuals. They would support multiple "user profiles" with independent call logs and contact lists. And the battery! Lasts for ever.

    It would actually make sense to use a smart phone as a digital assistant and carry these cheap phones for voice and text. Many of us still wear watches right? Same way, the smart phones are actually personal computers, it is better to have an independent device with its own long lasting battery for voice and text.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    1. Re:Cheap Nokia have great reputation by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      possibly the best selling microsoft device from last year was running android.

      the nokia X series.

      microsoft axed it. of course.

      microsoft(or nokia) had these featurephones in the pipeline already and they're profitable.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    2. Re:Cheap Nokia have great reputation by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      There may be some models that don't live up to it; but cheap Nokias tend to have a good reputation because they are good. Dumbphones, sure; but Nokia did a good deal of work hammering out the basic 'rugged and durable(no specific MIL-STD-whatever quoted; but hard to kill even with some splashes and a lot of clutzy dropping onto rocky, dusty ground); reasonably usable UI, battery lasts for ages' candybar; and until we reach the point where we make things out of nanoprinted computronium because it's cheaper than injection moulded plastic, that's about as close to 'timeless' as cellphone designs get.

      I assume that Microsoft won't be too eager to knife-fight with some of the cut price offbrand dumbphones, and will attempt to drive adoption of devices at least smart enough to talk to their online services in some capacity, even if they don't yet run WP8/10/whatever; but they'd be insane to not at least continue selling Nokia's good work, and at least doing incremental refreshes, until people stop buying. (Plus, after what happened when MS bought Danger and decided that the Sidekick Must Run WinCE; thereby turning a ready-made success into 'project pink', I assume that they learned something about the virtues of not fixing what isn't broken.)

    3. Re:Cheap Nokia have great reputation by fraxinus-tree · · Score: 1

      Nokia dumb phones also have a good reputation in the first and the second world countries. They are good for older people or for those who prefer simplicity and battery life.

    4. Re:Cheap Nokia have great reputation by gnasher719 · · Score: 2

      Nokia dumb phones also have a good reputation in the first and the second world countries. They are good for older people or for those who prefer simplicity and battery life.

      They are good for people who want a phone to make phone calls and nothing else. They are also good for people who want to have an emergency phone in the car, for example, with a battery that lasts forever. Mine used to last more than half a year while not used. The carriers hated PAYG customers without a monthly contract. But for £20 + £10 one time payment for some minutes, you are always in contact with the world if everything else goes wrong.

    5. Re:Cheap Nokia have great reputation by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      Just remember to actually use the phone from time to time or the carrier will deactivate it (i'm assuing from your use of £ that you are in the UK like me) and at least with O2 a deactivation means you lose all your credit.

      From what I can gather americans get much worse terms on payg than we do.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    6. Re:Cheap Nokia have great reputation by mlts · · Score: 1

      Not just in third world countries. I used a $14 candybar Nokia when camping where my smartphone would remain in the car, or at home, and that the cell number used was only known to a few people.

      I'd not hesitate to buy one. Since it is a dual-SIM model, it can always have its own line, and when I don't need to carry a smartphone with me, I can move my main phone's SIM into it just in case I needed to call out.

    7. Re: Cheap Nokia have great reputation by jae471 · · Score: 2

      80s landline quality is a vast improvement over every cell phone I've talked on in the past 20 years.

    8. Re: Cheap Nokia have great reputation by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 2

      Try amr wideband then, also called HD Voice. I've had it happen one time where a person had the phone on speaker, and I could hear somebody whispering to them from across the room.

      Both devices must support the feature though, and so must your carrier. T-Mobile has supported it for about 3 years now, not sure about Sprint, but Verizon and AT&T have picked it up recently I'm pretty sure.

    9. Re: Cheap Nokia have great reputation by luvirini · · Score: 1

      Did you buy a Nokia or some other brand? As in general I have found Nokia cheap phones to have a much better voice quality than most of the expensive smart phones and the battery life to be good

      I have a 3-4 year old Nokia 101 as backup phone that I got via an Indian acquaintance and even with the original old battery it lasts "forever" as in 2+ weeks of standby, it used to last closer to a month as new. And the voice quality is better than my nexus 5..

    10. Re:Cheap Nokia have great reputation by stooo · · Score: 1

      >> and some that are straight up dumb, and they're still coming out with new models, confusingly still bearing the "Nokia" brand.

      Why should they give up or rename their most profitable business (as of phones)?

      http://communities-dominate.bl...

      --
      aaaaaaa
    11. Re: Cheap Nokia have great reputation by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 1

      I still regularly enter phone boxes to use my cell phone. They are nice, quiet places - especially near main roads - and keep the rain off too!

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
  2. Long battery life plus ease of use by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 2

    are some advantages. If all someone wants is the ability to make calls dumb phones are a great choice. Many of my friends have them for elderly parents so the always have a phone handy. Using a smart phone touch screen can be overwhelming as the have to unlock it, touch the phone app, then dial using a non tactile screen. OTOH a dumb phone keys mimic the landline they have been using so it's simply a matter of making sure they know how to charge the phone and use green button to dial and red to hangup.

    --
    I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    1. Re:Long battery life plus ease of use by ripvlan · · Score: 1

      After having a smartphone for ~5 years - I'm growing tired of the touch screen concept. My first smartphone had a slide out keyboard - my current iPhone is 100% touch. Before that a flip phone.

      Oh how I yearn for the simple "UI" of the flip phone. It rings?! flip it open. Works whether your hands are wet or dry. My slide out Palm Pre - when it was wet the touch screen didn't work well --- but okay just slide out the keyboard and it acted like a flip to answer the call. iPhone doesn't have plan B.

      Last week I had an emergency and the on-call doctor called me. It was lightly raining and I couldn't swipe to answer the call. It was a panicked few minutes while I attempted to dry my fingers and screen to answer the call. Normally I can wait a few minutes for these screen problems (i.e. change my env). But in an emergency it needs to work.

      Having a second dumb phone with a battery that lasts all week would be nice. Maybe I just need a "Mini" tablet and simple phone. Imagine that - a dumb phone with wifi hotspot (because two data plans are expensive).

  3. hit submit too early by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They also tend to be more durable than a smartphone. You can carry it in a pocket or drop it with much less chance of damaging it. If you lose it you're out $20 rather than several hundred. I know contracters that use them for that reason as well as give them to employees for use on site for similar reasons.

    --
    I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
  4. What actually happened by robi5 · · Score: 2

    Right after the acquisition, they decided to lay off the team responsible for the 'non-smart' phones so that all development funds can be channeled into the 'non-dumb' phones.

    However, due to a glitch at accounting, they forgot to hand out slips or cancel payroll. The team members were already prohibited from mingling with the rest of the crew, lest some smartish feature creeps into the product ideation. So they lived their corporate lives unknowingly and developed the goodies and then it was too late.

    1. Re:What actually happened by gnupun · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, some mingling did occur resulting in some smartphone features:

      the $30 Nokia 215 is "Internet-ready" and comes with Facebook and Twitter apps.

    2. Re:What actually happened by ebh · · Score: 2

      They made everybody move to the basement, and took away their red staplers.

    3. Re:What actually happened by desdinova+216 · · Score: 1

      did they ever "fix the glitch"?

  5. Why are "feature phones" still a thing? by jonwil · · Score: 1

    With the costs of low-end Android handsets (even those aimed at the developing world) being so cheap these days, why does it still make sense for manufacturers to make a phone in between a "dumb phone" (that has no internet access, no installable apps, no Java and just does calls, text and maybe music playback and some built-in crappy games) and a full-on smartphone?

    1. Re:Why are "feature phones" still a thing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      two words: battery life

    2. Re:Why are "feature phones" still a thing? by Dwedit · · Score: 1

      Because carriers are assholes and charge you more for using a smartphone on their network than using a feature phone.

    3. Re:Why are "feature phones" still a thing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Only in America...
      Seriously, only on America.

    4. Re:Why are "feature phones" still a thing? by CastrTroy · · Score: 3, Informative

      No kidding. I recently replaced my old Android 2.3 phone. Part of the reason I replaced it was because it wouldn't make it past 2:00 PM most days if I didn't charge it. After getting my new phone I did a factory reset on the old one. I charged it up, unplugged it, and left it on the night table. Came back 2 days later to be pleasantly surprised that it still had over 50% battery life. Because it didn't have anything to do, the battery lasted quite long. Then I decided I wanted to use it for a few simple games. I registered the device with my Google account and installed Minecraft. And that is all I installed. Now it only lasts about 12 hours for a charge. Somehow, simply having the thing connected to my Google account means that the battery life goes down from 3+ days to 12 hours. The device is pretty much completely useless as a "smart phone" but acting as dumb phone it works pretty well. I assume If I only loaded programs on it that didn't run in the background so much, that battery life would be fine, and I'd still be able to use it as a feature phone. I'll have to disconnect my Google account to see if that clears it up. Hopefully the installed programs will still work after I've disconnected my account.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    5. Re:Why are "feature phones" still a thing? by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      Because smartphones have batteries that suck and are generally awful when it comes to the basic task of making and receiving calls.

      I ended up switching to a dumb/feature phone as my primary mobile phone, with my old smartphone relegated to the role of Wifi-linked tablet. My stress levels and blood pressure has improved dramatically :)

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    6. Re:Why are "feature phones" still a thing? by desdinova+216 · · Score: 1

      I would think reliability and battery Life would be at the lowest 2 and 3 on that list. but YMMV

    7. Re:Why are "feature phones" still a thing? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      I'd second that question. Genuine 'dumbphones' are still way too cheap(and very easy on the battery) for Android to be relevant; but 'featurephone' BoM and specs start to head toward the land of Allwinner, Mediatek, and other somewhat downmarket but adequately punchy Android-oriented SoCs.

      I imagine that one barrier to reasonably stock android is screen: all the default Android UI/UX very strongly assumes that you have a screen of decent resolution, typically multiple point touch is expected unless it's a set top box setup. Dumbphones, by contrast, frequently still have smaller, lousier, screens, non-touch, and a UI that depends on buttons only(or a blackberry-style little touch area).

      As long as you don't care about Google's blessing, there's no reason you couldn't build your horrible little ecosystem of crap on top of Android, rather than BREW(and whatever its analogs are in GSM land) and one of the dinky JVMs, so I have to imagine that licensing costs for those components are something that vendors don't try their luck on, so maybe that keeps them in the market?

    8. Re:Why are "feature phones" still a thing? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      Those 'quality assurance' requirements, and various other kissing of Google's pinkie ring, only apply if you want a shot at Google Play Services and the official Google app store. It is pretty grim and spartan; but you can do whatever you want with AOSP(subject to GPL2 for the linux kernel stuff, Apache for most of the rest, some proprietary blobs in a lot of BSPs).

      Google's pressure (probably sensible, some low-end Android devices are utterly goddamn awful and you wouldn't want your name within a mile of them) would prevent "Android-Google Blessed" from making it into the cheap seats; but it would not, necessarily, prevent the annihilation of various historical 'featurephone'/'quasi-smart' phone OSes, and the assorted cut-down JVMs; in favor of firmware that is android underneath with a skin and preinstalled apps suited to whatever dreadful screen the phone has.

    9. Re:Why are "feature phones" still a thing? by Alumoi · · Score: 1

      With the costs of low-end Android handsets (even those aimed at the developing world) being so cheap these days, why does it still make sense for manufacturers to make a phone in between a "dumb phone" (that has no internet access, no installable apps, no Java and just does calls, text and maybe music playback and some built-in crappy games) and a full-on smartphone?

      Because there are still people who don't give a shit about internet/apps/java on a small screen mobile computer?
      I want my phone to be able to do calls/sms. For the rest I have a tablet and a computer.

    10. Re:Why are "feature phones" still a thing? by Etcetera · · Score: 1

      I'd second that question. Genuine 'dumbphones' are still way too cheap(and very easy on the battery) for Android to be relevant; but 'featurephone' BoM and specs start to head toward the land of Allwinner, Mediatek, and other somewhat downmarket but adequately punchy Android-oriented SoCs.

      I imagine that one barrier to reasonably stock android is screen: all the default Android UI/UX very strongly assumes that you have a screen of decent resolution, typically multiple point touch is expected unless it's a set top box setup. Dumbphones, by contrast, frequently still have smaller, lousier, screens, non-touch, and a UI that depends on buttons only(or a blackberry-style little touch area).

      As long as you don't care about Google's blessing, there's no reason you couldn't build your horrible little ecosystem of crap on top of Android, rather than BREW(and whatever its analogs are in GSM land) and one of the dinky JVMs, so I have to imagine that licensing costs for those components are something that vendors don't try their luck on, so maybe that keeps them in the market?

      It's hard to beat the truly "dumb" phones in terms of ruggedness and reliability, but I truly loved the "high end phones" of the 2005-2010 era. My EnV / LG Voyager and related ones (candybar, but flipped open to a chiclet QWERTY keyboard) had a good mix of "advanced" features for the time, while still getting a good 2-3 days between charges. (The camera on one of those had a configurable exposure time, which allowed for some pretty amazing starry-night shots when set to 15s... Hell, my current phones can't do that!)

      I only broke down and got a smartphone (HTC Thunderbolt) when I started getting SMS-of-Deaths on occasion, that would cause it to freeze up when it was received. (And given what recently happened with iOS, it's hard to blame them too much for that.)

      Smartphones are awesome, but I hope more basic (read: more reliable) communication devices stick around for use cases where they're appropriate.

      --
      Hire a Linux system administrator, systems engineer,
    11. Re:Why are "feature phones" still a thing? by thsths · · Score: 1

      The problem is "Google Play Services". Once you sign up with your Google account, it starts phoning home and reporting your GPS position. Especially on older hardware that causes serious battery drain.

    12. Re:Why are "feature phones" still a thing? by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      The problem is getting the apps I already paid for on the phone without signing up for Google Play Services. I'll have to sign up, download all the apps I want, including something like Titanium backup. Then I have to backup the applications I want to use. Then I'll have to factory reset the phone again, to remove google play services. Then I'll have to re-install the apps using ADB, because there isn't even a file manager that comes default on the device that will allow apps to be installed directly from the phone. Amazing complicated process just to get a phone that doesn't die after 12 hours.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
  6. When You Just Need a Phone by tomxor · · Score: 1

    Whether or not you like smart phones, there are plenty of attributes that give basic phones with no bells and whistles a clear advantage, making them suited to purposes smart phones fail miserably in:

    • Reliability
    • Durability
    • Simplicity
    • Power
    • Cost

    It all hinges on simplicity - Good designs tend to have a single purpose which makes the design simple, and all of the above advantages are a results of that attribute. My one annoyance with basic phones today is that their OS (while small and simple) are extremely pretentious, because the marketers (who might as well be designing the OS) think that everyone wants a smart phone.

    Nokia is currently as good as basic phones get, but there is plenty of room for a better basic phone that is true to it's purpose, i'm not sure Microsoft is up to that task as they would probably be more interested in using basic phones as tool to channel users into buying smart phones.

  7. I reverted back to a dumb phone by pjw2072 · · Score: 1

    I was one of the first people I knew to get a smart phone (Treo 270). I later had another smart phone, but I switched back to a dumb phone because it was less disruptive to my life. My problem is that I tend to use technologies when they're readily available to me. If I don't have an internet connection on my phone, I don't have the constant temptation to get on it and ignore the people I love.

    1. Re:I reverted back to a dumb phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Windows smart phones are basically the same since they are no apps for it and the IE browser isn't compatible with any mobile-friendly sites. The Nokia Maps is nice though.

  8. Related by Grizzley9 · · Score: 1

    What Microsoft really did was fund Nokia's purchase of Alcatel-Lucent.

  9. Very popular in third world countries .... by kbahey · · Score: 1

    The cheap Nokia feature phones are very popular in developing countries.

    They are inexpensive, durable, the battery last for many days, and they do the job. Moreover, accessories are dirt cheap as well.

    Need a charger? Need a battery? They are sold in haberdasheries and corner stores for very little local money.

    It would be really dumb if Microsoft just killed that revenue stream.

    --
    2bits.com, Inc: Drupal, WordPress, and LAMP performance tuning.
  10. Re:Great backup phones. by luvirini · · Score: 2

    In some other countries there are cheap plans.

    In Finland I pay 69 cents/month for my basic phone plan that does not include anything. Any time I call or text It costs me 6.9 cents/minute or text message.
    (Incoming texts/calls are free as in our system the caller pays more to call to mobiles from landlines).

    Such a plan is great for a backup phone.

  11. In the UK, it's free by UpnAtom · · Score: 1

    Pay-As-You-Go phones don't have a monthly tariff.

    One network, GiffGaff, you get free 0800 calls, free calls to other GiffGaff users for 6 months after you topup and you can even get free minutes for helping people. Calls are 8p a min though.
    With the other one I use, 3, it's 3p a text, 3p a min to phone.

  12. Do they sell these in US or EU? by billstewart · · Score: 1

    It's nice that there are cheap 2G phones in India, but I need a phone that works in the US, and wouldn't mind having a cheap phone that can also work in Europe. These days that means at least 3G, or maybe LTE, because the US carriers are phasing out 2G as fast as they can to recycle the spectrum. And it would be really nice to have a $30 spare dumb-phone to keep in the car or to use at times it's not convenient to keep my smartphone charged.

    My last dumb-phone had a 2-week battery life. 90% of the time, I want a phone to make phone calls and send text, and I'd rather have something that's 1/4 as large as the pocket computer I'm carrying around. The other 10% of the time, I either want to check my email, or I want a camera, and yeah, I never bother using my camera any more, even though it takes better pictures than my phone, because it is convenient to only carry one device around.

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  13. Re: HD VOIP by billstewart · · Score: 1

    It's apparently more complicated than that. AT&T and Verizon have started offering it, on LTE phones, but it's rolling out slowly on a geography-by-geography basis, rather than being available everywhere at once.

    * (Disclaimer: I work for AT&T, so I should probably know this stuff, but I do network security, not mobile phones.)

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  14. Oh, also Bluetooth by billstewart · · Score: 1

    Somebody else mentioned Bluetooth, and yeah, I do want that, because my car radio now supports it, so it lets me have a decent speakerphone in the car instead of having a wired headset, and that probably adds $5 to the cost of the phone.

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks