Slashdot Mirror


Sony Launches Phone With World's First 4K HDR Screen; Nokia Brings Back the 3310 Handset (wired.com)

Rumors were true. Nokia did launch its 3310 handset at MWC. It's been almost 17 years since the 3310 first came out. In that time the Nokia brand has been bought, sold, and stripped for parts. From a report on Wired: The 3310 is still very much a feature phone. It has a web browser, but only barely -- it's a dumbed-down version of Opera, basically there for emergency tweeting. It exists for you to make phone calls, send texts the way you did a decade ago (T9 FTW!), and play Snake. The 3310 weighs less than three ounces, and its battery lasts an absurd 31 days in standby time, or up to 22 hours of talk time. The new 3310 has a camera, for one thing, a 2-megapixel shooter. It also has a 2.4-inch, 240x320 screen, which is hilariously small and low-res but still a huge improvement over the original. It is priced at 49 Euros ($51). Also at the event, Sony announced that it is not done with putting a 4K screen on smartphones. From a report on The Verge: The XZ Premium has the world's first 4K HDR (2,160 x 3,840, High Dynamic Range) display in a smartphone. Sony has the latest and best Qualcomm chip while others are still offering the Snapdragon 820 and 821, but the Xperia XZ Premium won't be out until late spring or just ahead of the summer. Hell, the demo units shown off ahead of MWC weren't running anywhere close to final software -- so Sony is pre-announcing its new flagship device by a long margin. Other notable features include water resistance, rated to IP65 and IP68, a thinner profile at 7.9mm, and MicroSD storage expandability. The phone's battery is a reasonable 3,230mAh, and there's a fingerprint sensor integrated into the side-mounted power button as usual.

76 comments

  1. Wrong facts by vvaduva · · Score: 1

    Actually..the world's first phone with a 4K screen was the Sony Xperia Z5 Pro and it was launched in October 2015. The XZ is not the first 4K screen phone launched by Sony.

    1. Re:Wrong facts by Chrisq · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually..the world's first phone with a 4K screen was the Sony Xperia Z5 Pro and it was launched in October 2015. The XZ is not the first 4K screen phone launched by Sony.

      It's the first 4k HDR (High Dynamic Range) screen in a smartphone

    2. Re:Wrong facts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      4K HDR, not 4K

    3. Re:Wrong facts by vvaduva · · Score: 1

      Ok..my bad. I did not notice the HDR qualifier...

    4. Re:Wrong facts by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      The only reason for a 4K display in a smartphone would be to use it in a VR headset, otherwise it's pointless even for text anti-aliasing.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    5. Re:Wrong facts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you're missing the word "HDR." This is the first 4K **HDR** screen.

    6. Re:Wrong facts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Speaking of facts, gather ye one or three whilst ye are able.

    7. Re:Wrong facts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only because you were falling out your chair to hit reply as soon as you saw the first part of the sentence.

    8. Re: Wrong facts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With a little micro-USB to HDMI adapter cable, you can get the phone to drive a 4K screen. Totally stunned my relatives who couldn't believe that a phone was more powerful that an early 3D console game system. Then I showed them a bluetooth game controller and keyboard.

  2. Summer by arth1 · · Score: 1

    the Xperia XZ Premium won't be out until late spring or just ahead of the summer

    Would that be by American or old world definition of summer?
    I'm asking because that difference means a 1.5 month difference in when we can hope to see this.
    (American June 21 is first day of summer, old world June 21 is midsummer)

    1. Re:Summer by EvilSS · · Score: 1

      Neither. It's Australian summer.

      --
      I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
  3. The new Nokia 3310 is not a Nokia and not a 3310. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is a new phone which just superficially looks like the 3310 and is produced under license by another company (HMD Global).

  4. Come on guys, isn't this a bit rediculous? by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 4, Insightful

    '4K' TV is one thing (putting aside for a moment the lack of OTA broadcast 4K content), assuming your TV is gigantic, but a 4K display on a phone? Really? How does that even make sense? On the other hand I'm sure wireless companies love the idea, because of how much data you'll use up so fast watching online 4K content on a tiny little phone screen.

    1. Re:Come on guys, isn't this a bit rediculous? by vvaduva · · Score: 2

      It makes sense if your goal is to build something that your competition doesn't have and makes people buy it.

    2. Re:Come on guys, isn't this a bit rediculous? by ProfBooty · · Score: 2

      Or if you want cheaper displays to put into a VR setup.

      --
      Bring back the old version of slashdot.
    3. Re:Come on guys, isn't this a bit rediculous? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The only way it makes sense is for VR headsets... when the phone is inches away from your eyeball, then it makes sense... 8k makes sense at that point as I recall.

    4. Re:Come on guys, isn't this a bit rediculous? by stud9920 · · Score: 0

      Your spelling is rediculous.

    5. Re:Come on guys, isn't this a bit rediculous? by known_coward_69 · · Score: 1

      chances are they have a bunch of glass left over from making those new giant TV's and it's a waste of money to throw it away. along with the environmental costs. So they are selling it in phones. Apple was doing the same with Apple TV and it's older chips too.

      it's cheaper to sell your junk in a profitless product than throw it away and take the loss on your financial statments

    6. Re:Come on guys, isn't this a bit rediculous? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your pedantry is ridiculous. STFU and go take your meds, geek, or we'll give you another swirly.

    7. Re:Come on guys, isn't this a bit rediculous? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      4k on a 5.5" screen is a little over 800 DPI, which is a bit excessive. 500 DPI is where print looks pretty much perfect, printers go to 600 because it's double the old 300 de-facto standard. So yeah, a 1440p screen is about the reasonable limit for a 5.5" phone, although 1080p is visually perfect and uses less power for most people.

      In fact, previous 4k phones have rendered everything at 1080p anyway, except for video and photos which could use the full 4k.

      The only reason I can think of to have 4k on a phone is for when you want to screencast to a bigger display. Maybe Android has some limitation that the casted screen can only be the same or lower resolution than the main one.

      The HDR I can get behind, but the 4k resolution sounds like a gimmick.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    8. Re:Come on guys, isn't this a bit rediculous? by Ichijo · · Score: 2

      On a 5.5 inch smartphone, 4K is only about 800 pixels per inch, while laser printers are often 1200 or more dots per inch and nobody seems to think that's "rediculous".

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    9. Re: Come on guys, isn't this a bit rediculous? by enigma32 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I would love a 4k HDR screen on my phone.
      HD resolution is not quite enough for Asian characters... 4k would make them legible even at small sizes.
      (and HDR is a good thing for obvious reasons)

      apologies if this is a duplicate. browsing +3+ comments on my not-4k phone)

    10. Re:Come on guys, isn't this a bit rediculous? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hdr is a gimmick as well, if you have high enough contrast ratio then hdr is meaning less. but then again its tech for a big enough screen to matter.

      as a side note you would need a separate video processor to cast at two different resolutions. or some sort of multi stream processor, again over ill for a phone.

    11. Re:Come on guys, isn't this a bit rediculous? by SpiceWare · · Score: 2

      There is a major difference:

      • On color laser printers each C, Y, M or K dot is either either ON or OFF
      • On HDR display a single pixel can display any of 0-1073741823 colors. (Might also be 0-68719476735, the article doesn't specify which HDR spec the display is using, which is either 10-bits or 12-bits per RGB value)

      As such, significantly more printed dots are required to get the same effective range as a single display pixel.

    12. Re:Come on guys, isn't this a bit rediculous? by hankwang · · Score: 1

      Printer dots are binary; screen pixels have 256 shades of gray or 256^3 colors. When printing full color, the effective resolution of a laser printer is way lower than 1200 ppi.

    13. Re:Come on guys, isn't this a bit rediculous? by heson · · Score: 1

      Homeopathic pixels get more noticeable the smaller they are.

    14. Re:Come on guys, isn't this a bit rediculous? by locopuyo · · Score: 1

      I have a 2560x1440 5.5" phone. I can easily discern individual pixels at a normal viewing distance. We're not even close to true "retina" displays.

      We're to the point where each jump in resolution isn't as big of a deal as it was before but people saying it doesn't matter are probably using computers with 640K RAM.

    15. Re:Come on guys, isn't this a bit rediculous? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No way in hell. Either you're looking at a pixelated image thinking you can see the individual pixels on your screen, or your screen quality is so bad there's a border around the pixels.

    16. Re:Come on guys, isn't this a bit rediculous? by locopuyo · · Score: 1

      Right, I bet there is no way in hell I can see over 30 fps too.

    17. Re:Come on guys, isn't this a bit rediculous? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      How does that even make sense?

      With current trends towards using phones as a basis for VR, and the fact that current flagship phones with their already high-res screens are severely lacking in the image quality department when used in VR, it is the only thing that makes sense for a flagship device.

    18. Re:Come on guys, isn't this a bit rediculous? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      VR.

      No more needs to be said.

    19. Re:Come on guys, isn't this a bit rediculous? by AaronW · · Score: 1

      You just need a giant lens in front of it like those monitors in the movie Brazil.

      --
      This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
    20. Re:Come on guys, isn't this a bit rediculous? by xettera · · Score: 1

      Agreed. It's a step in the right direction but wake me up when they get 8K

  5. Not a great deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    $51 for that dinosaur? You can find similar featurephones for $15, and basic but usable Android phones for $60.

  6. Re:The new Nokia 3310 is not a Nokia and not a 331 by ickleberry · · Score: 2

    It's more of a homage really. It reminds me more of a 6300 than a 3310. I was hoping for a monochrome LCD with maybe a few extra menu options and voice over LTE. I always found the monochrome LCD much easier on the eye than the present-day colour ones. They could have gone e-ink if there wasn't a suitable LCD available without deviating too much from what the 3310 used to be.

  7. 2G is dead? by MarcAuslander · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The specs say 2G. ATT has shut down it's 2G GSM network and I assume others will follow. So this phone appears useless out of the box, at least in the US.

    1. Re:2G is dead? by 31eq · · Score: 2

      If only there were other countries where people could use phones

    2. Re:2G is dead? by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

      2G is being shut down in my country too! So in a limited sample size of 2 countries, it's junk! :)

  8. Re:The new Nokia 3310 is not a Nokia and not a 331 by xeoron · · Score: 1

    It also uses 2G, which ATT and others are dropping support for.... don't expect support in the US to be offered by many, if at all.

  9. Bring back the N900 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Give me an updated N900 with Maemo5+ Linux(x11f) and updated processor, NFC, memory, updated RF comms, and probably apk installation chroot layer.

  10. Let's examine this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The human eye can't differentiate 4K resolution. You do not need that. Not even on a TV.

    1. Re:Let's examine this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The human eye can't differentiate 4K resolution

      Depends on the screen size. FAKE NEWS!!

    2. Re:Let's examine this by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      Are you sure?

      My screen is only 2.5k, but when I fill my field of vision with it, it's pretty easy to see the pixels on diagonals, and tests with 1 pixel offsets are even easier.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    3. Re: Let's examine this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Human eyes have an optical resolutiin equivalent of a 100 Mpixel CCD array with builtin contrast enhancement (blue/yellow, red/green, black/white), motion detection, texture gradient analysis, edge and point detection. All that data doesn't make it through the optic nerve. It gets pre-compressed like a video stream.

  11. 3310 disappointing case-mod by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    So far as I can see, it's identical in every way to the Nokia/MS 110 - it's just a case mod. Can't believe they've got so much PR out of this.

    1. Re:3310 disappointing case-mod by chispito · · Score: 1

      So far as I can see, it's identical in every way to the Nokia/MS 110 - it's just a case mod. Can't believe they've got so much PR out of this.

      It's different. The camera is placed differently and has a flash, for one. I think the screen is bigger, too, at 2.4 vs 1.8 inches.

      --
      The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
    2. Re:3310 disappointing case-mod by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Doesn't really look a lot like the original to me. Looks like a zillion other basic phones. Somehow it looks cheap in the pics i've seen.

      Doesn't even look very retro. Looks like a blackberry and a smartphone had a baby phone, probably inherited all the bad genes ;p

      hmm, old Kyocera stick phone weighs almost 4 ounces. With a supposed bigger battery and screen they shaved off 25% of the weight :O
      I find lighter rarely equates to better unless I am flying it or throwing it!

      Sticking with real retro for now, nice try tho!

      Vintage LG flip-phone, I can't believe my battery is still holding for a week at 10 years old!

  12. Only one reason for a 4K screen on a phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is no plausible reason for putting a 4K screen in a phone other than to allow for the rapid consumption of limited data caps by cellular customers.

    This has collusion between cell carriers and manufacturers written all over it.

  13. Mostly marketing fluff, but not completely. by jjthegreat · · Score: 1

    The only real reason you would need this high of a DPI is if you strap the phone to your head and use it for VR purposes. Outside of that, I don't think you can see 4k of actual pixels.

    1. Re:Mostly marketing fluff, but not completely. by zlives · · Score: 1

      is this the replacement pocket protector tech?

  14. Pointless, is pointless by geekmux · · Score: 1

    Not sure who I want to slap more, idiot marketeers who think there's a point behind a pocket-sized 4K HDR screen...

    ...or the morons standing in line at midnight helping justify this shit with their wallets, while ironically bitching about the cost of tech today.

    1. Re:Pointless, is pointless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I suggest you start with yourself for displaying the dangerous narcissistic attitude that everyone's use case is exactly yours and anyone who disagrees is a paid shill.

      Useful resolution is determined by pixel arclength from a given viewing distance. I know people who hold their phones so close that it takes up a larger segment of their vision than a 60 inch high definition screen on the other side of the living room. I also know people who use their phones at arm's length. Different people, different habits, different value of a tech detail.

    2. Re:Pointless, is pointless by kamapuaa · · Score: 1

      Cell phones are ridiculously cheap, even the flasgships. People use them for hours a day, at an amortized price of maybe $1-$1.50/day.

      $40 phones do exist, just why save a dollar a day on something you use all the time? If you're able to afford the internet service that allows you to post on Slashdot, the only real reason not to get a quality phone is philosophical - you think having a powerful device that gives you access to everything easily actually distracts from quality of life.

      --
      Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
    3. Re:Pointless, is pointless by geekmux · · Score: 0

      I suggest you start with yourself for displaying the dangerous narcissistic attitude that everyone's use case is exactly yours and anyone who disagrees is a paid shill.

      Speaking of things that don't exist, feel free to provide the massive list of people who asked for a 4K HDR screen in a smartphone that justified this.

      As far as useful resolution, I'm quite certain screen technology will continue well beyond the capability of the human eye, in the name of profit.

    4. Re:Pointless, is pointless by naughtynaughty · · Score: 2

      Not everyone wants a phone to access the Internet. The $50 phones can be far more reliable, robust and have batteries that you can charge once a week instead of daily.

      They are also lighter and you don't cry when they fall on the floor and your amortized cost just jumped by another $150 because you cracked your screen.

    5. Re:Pointless, is pointless by ozduo · · Score: 1

      there are MILLIONS of workers around the globe who earn less than 10 a day. so 1 a day is a substantial amount.

      --
      I got to the chocolate box before you, that's why the hard ones have teeth marks.
    6. Re:Pointless, is pointless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Condescending BS, in those same countries an entry level android cost around the same or just a little bit more. On those countries the smartphone usually replaces the personal laptop or desktop so people rarely go for the cheapest one. This phone is for someone that dont want smart and is willing to pay against it, and a battery life that you can count on for real life. Oh and older people that just want a damn usable phone. ind

  15. Maybe a fingerprint scanner by b0bby · · Score: 1

    there's a fingerprint sensor integrated into the side-mounted power button as usual

    And it will probably be disabled on the US versions, as usual.

    1. Re: Maybe a fingerprint scanner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Disabled, in software, the hardware is still there! Is it a patent issue? I can only imagine they don't want to pay royalties or some such.

      That's why I bought from overseas.

    2. Re: Maybe a fingerprint scanner by b0bby · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I think it's a patent issue. I don't care enough to flash my firmware to a non-US version.

  16. A good Sony handset? by Jamlad · · Score: 1
    I had a Sony-Ericsson W800i back in the day. When on IRC men were men, women were men, etc. 3G, SD card, the whole nine yards.

    The thing never worked properly. It ate flash memory like crackers. Crashed while receiving phone-calls. I haven't trusted Sony since. Do they actually make good, trustworthy devices?

    1. Re:A good Sony handset? by b0bby · · Score: 1

      When I was looking to replace my old Moto X, I had a couple of criteria:

      - Camera had to be good. I end up taking a lot of pictures with my phone, and nothing else I do is going to stress a modern phone
      - Couldn't be too big. I like being able to use my phone one handed.
      - Couldn't be too expensive. I'm too cheap to spend $600+ on a device I might lose or break, plus I don't really do anything too demanding so I don't need the latest high end stuff.

      I ended up with the Sony Xperia X. The pictures, especially low light, are pretty darn good. They updated it to Nougat soon after I got it. It's generally pretty stable and there's not a ton of bloatware. It has an SD slot. Battery life is good. Overall, I'm happy. You can get an unlocked one for $340 from Amazon, probably less if you wait for a sale. As I commented above, they disable the fingerprint scanner in the US versions, but it it's terribly hard to flash a UK firmware if you really want it. I haven't bothered yet.

      I hadn't bought anything from Sony since the rootkit scandal days, but they seem to make solid phones, albeit somewhat overpriced for the specs.

    2. Re:A good Sony handset? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been using an Xperia Z3V since they came out, and it's been the best Android phone I've ever had, without question. Only caveat is that the battery isn't externally removable. It is li-poly though, and it's easy to disconnect if you pop the rear case off.

  17. Yes but... by bobzrkr · · Score: 2

    Is the new 3310 indestructible?

  18. just a new package by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Umm ... Nokia or Microsoft or HMD Global has been making and selling these feature phones for many years. While the new 3310 is styled to look somewhat like the original, the feature set appears to match the MRE (MAUI Runtime Environment from MediaTek) phones (such as the Nokia 220, which by the way retailed for ~$29 US) that have been available since the death of Series 40 phones. The real story would be the return of 3 & 3.5G S40 mobiles.

  19. lDIOTS by p51d007 · · Score: 1

    4K screen on a phone....morons...like you can really have a "better user experience" between a good 1080p screen and a 1,000,000,000,000,000p screen. Just sucking more battery life and money out of your wallet.

  20. Nokia hasn't sold it's name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    "Nokia brand has been bought, sold, and stripped for parts."
    No, Nokia has LEASED it's name for HMD for next 10 years for phones and tablets.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMD_Global

  21. That 3310 better be tough by GuB-42 · · Score: 1

    Due to its reputation, the first thing people will do do is throw it around and see if it breaks before the floor.

  22. Re:The new Nokia 3310 is not a Nokia and not a 331 by Ranbot · · Score: 2

    No one cares. It's a phone that caters to a particular consumer niche who only want a mobile phone for emergencies and traveling; or parents who prefer to give their children a non-smart or less-smart phone. The Nokia 3310 would be perfect for that, there's currently few options/competition in that niche, and this Nokia model has a recognizability/nostalgia edge over the few competitors.

    For example my father bought a phone about 2 years ago that rarely leaves his car's glove box. He has a smartphone because it was the cheapest phone he could find and there were little to no non-smart phone options, but he doesn't use or want those "smart" features. He would gladly trade the ability to surf the net for a much longer battery.

  23. 3310 is a great burner phone by naughtynaughty · · Score: 1

    Highly recommended for White House staffers leaking info to the press.

    1. Re:3310 is a great burner phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if it supported 3g..at 2g its only useful on tmobile for a few months till they refarm its remaining 2g to more 3g or lte.

  24. Butt phones! by Destoo · · Score: 1

    Seen on Boingboing. There are phones marketed for their "discretion", but the 3110 doesn't look "comfortable".

    The "Beat the Boss phone" is an £27 micro-telephone built into a Bluetooth headset with only trace amounts of metal in its construction; it is lozenge-shaped and is designed to be rectally smuggled into prisons, jails and courtrooms.

    The reviews are pretty excellent, as you might imagine: "The person this was bought for is very happy with it, as to whether it will beat the boss, time will tell"; "Trust me the smaller the better", etc.

    --
    Nouvelles de jeux et technologies en français. TC
  25. Re: The new Nokia 3310 is not a Nokia and not a 33 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does anyone know of this can do data tethering via e.g. Bluetooth? If it's true, I'll buy one of those and get rid of my smartphone in favor of a tablet + actual phone.

    I've been considering this kind of thing for a while but the linchpin is the phone with data tethering.

  26. Re:The new Nokia 3310 is not a Nokia and not a 331 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, same in Australia.

  27. Google Cardboard by xettera · · Score: 1

    So Google Cardboard will be the first 4K VR headset?? Didn't see that coming, but can't wait!!