Damn Vodafone/Ericsson K700i...

I just got me a new Ericsson K700i today... And I am NOT impressed. The
phone itself's okay I guess, though I WAS a bit disappointed with the pic
quality of its camera... (anyways you guys can probably guess from the
subject header WHY I am so pissed off...) Damn Vodafone! They have
disabled the using MP3 as ringtone feature?! Is there are way around this?

<=[BC]=>

---

› See More: Damn Vodafone/Ericsson K700i...

BC wrote:
> I just got me a new Ericsson K700i today... And I am NOT impressed. The
> phone itself's okay I guess, though I WAS a bit disappointed with the pic
> quality of its camera... (anyways you guys can probably guess from the
> subject header WHY I am so pissed off...) Damn Vodafone! They have
> disabled the using MP3 as ringtone feature?! Is there are way around this?
>
> <=[BC]=>
>
>
Buy a non-branded phone!!!

"BC" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I just got me a new Ericsson K700i today... And I am NOT impressed. The
> phone itself's okay I guess, though I WAS a bit disappointed with the pic
> quality of its camera... (anyways you guys can probably guess from the
> subject header WHY I am so pissed off...) Damn Vodafone! They have
> disabled the using MP3 as ringtone feature?! Is there are way around
this?
>
> <=[BC]=>
>
>

Can you send files to your phone ie bluetooth dongle??

If so can you try somthing for me or anyone with a k700i

rename the mp3 you want to copy to .mid

send it to the phone

try and assign it as a ringtone,

I dont know if it will work, but I can play .mid files on my pc ok so dont
see why it wont work

Its a long shot but worth a try, I have left my dongle at work so cant test
it, I only got my phone today as well

Ronny

www.fsplanes.net

On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 01:56:57 +1200, BC wrote:

> I just got me a new Ericsson K700i today... And I am NOT impressed. The
> phone itself's okay I guess, though I WAS a bit disappointed with the pic
> quality of its camera...

Well it is only a cheapo VGA(640x480) rez camera, so what do you expect ?
OK for picture messages, but not much else.

You want decent pics ? Then get a proper multi-megapixel digital camera.

> (anyways you guys can probably guess from the
> subject header WHY I am so pissed off...) Damn Vodafone! They have
> disabled the using MP3 as ringtone feature?!

....and all the Vodafone Live butchery.

> Is there are way around this?

Change it for a *non-branded* k700i.

--
Michael Turner
Email (ROT13)
[email protected]

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.ericsson - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <[email protected]> on Wed, 25 Aug 2004 22:13:30
+0100, michael turner <[email protected]> wrote:

>On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 01:56:57 +1200, BC wrote:
>
>> I just got me a new Ericsson K700i today... And I am NOT impressed. The
>> phone itself's okay I guess, though I WAS a bit disappointed with the pic
>> quality of its camera...
>
>Well it is only a cheapo VGA(640x480) rez camera, so what do you expect ?
>OK for picture messages, but not much else.
>
>You want decent pics ? Then get a proper multi-megapixel digital camera.

The number of pixels isn't the issue -- it's the crappy lens and sensor.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

"ronny" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> Can you send files to your phone ie bluetooth dongle??
>
> If so can you try somthing for me or anyone with a k700i
>
> rename the mp3 you want to copy to .mid
>
> send it to the phone
>
> try and assign it as a ringtone,
>
> I dont know if it will work, but I can play .mid files on my pc ok so dont
> see why it wont work
>
> Its a long shot but worth a try, I have left my dongle at work so cant
test
> it, I only got my phone today as well

neat idea... got me all exited for a sec here, but no, unfortunately it
didn't work. The file copied over okay, and the phone recognised the file
as a midi and all - it even allowed me to assign it as a ringtone... BUT,
it wasn't able to play the file.

Damn.

<=[BC]=>

"Harryville" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> > I just got me a new Ericsson K700i today... And I am NOT impressed.
The
> > phone itself's okay I guess, though I WAS a bit disappointed with the
pic
> > quality of its camera... (anyways you guys can probably guess from the
> > subject header WHY I am so pissed off...) Damn Vodafone! They have
> > disabled the using MP3 as ringtone feature?! Is there are way around
this?

> Buy a non-branded phone!!!

hey dude, got an unbranded k700i? wanna swap?

<=[BC]=>

On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 22:48:23 +0000, John Navas wrote:

> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.ericsson - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <[email protected]> on Wed, 25 Aug 2004 22:13:30
> +0100, michael turner <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 01:56:57 +1200, BC wrote:
>>
>>> I just got me a new Ericsson K700i today... And I am NOT impressed. The
>>> phone itself's okay I guess, though I WAS a bit disappointed with the pic
>>> quality of its camera...
>>
>>Well it is only a cheapo VGA(640x480) rez camera, so what do you expect ?
>>OK for picture messages, but not much else.
>>
>>You want decent pics ? Then get a proper multi-megapixel digital camera.
>
> The number of pixels isn't the issue -- it's the crappy lens and sensor.

.... or even all three... crappy lens, crappy sensor, and low rez.

--
Michael Turner
Email (ROT13)
[email protected]

"michael turner" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news[email protected]...
> On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 22:48:23 +0000, John Navas wrote:
>
> > [POSTED TO alt.cellular.ericsson - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
> >
> > In <[email protected]> on Wed, 25 Aug 2004
22:13:30
> > +0100, michael turner <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >>On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 01:56:57 +1200, BC wrote:
> >>
> >>> I just got me a new Ericsson K700i today... And I am NOT impressed.
The
> >>> phone itself's okay I guess, though I WAS a bit disappointed with the
pic
> >>> quality of its camera...
> >>
> >>Well it is only a cheapo VGA(640x480) rez camera, so what do you expect
?
> >>OK for picture messages, but not much else.
> >>
> >>You want decent pics ? Then get a proper multi-megapixel digital camera.
> >
> > The number of pixels isn't the issue -- it's the crappy lens and sensor.
>
> ... or even all three... crappy lens, crappy sensor, and low rez.
>

I got a the same phone on Vodaphone and am taking it back bue to the fact
its not what was advertised. You don't buy a car and then sudddenly they
remove the seats. Why should I get a phone with none of the features that
were advertised

On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 23:16:56 +0000, James Doble wrote:

>
> "michael turner" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news[email protected]...
>> On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 22:48:23 +0000, John Navas wrote:
>>
>> > [POSTED TO alt.cellular.ericsson - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>> >
>> > In <[email protected]> on Wed, 25 Aug 2004
> 22:13:30
>> > +0100, michael turner <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> >>On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 01:56:57 +1200, BC wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> I just got me a new Ericsson K700i today... And I am NOT impressed.
> The
>> >>> phone itself's okay I guess, though I WAS a bit disappointed with the
> pic
>> >>> quality of its camera...
>> >>
>> >>Well it is only a cheapo VGA(640x480) rez camera, so what do you expect
> ?
>> >>OK for picture messages, but not much else.
>> >>
>> >>You want decent pics ? Then get a proper multi-megapixel digital camera.
>> >
>> > The number of pixels isn't the issue -- it's the crappy lens and sensor.
>>
>> ... or even all three... crappy lens, crappy sensor, and low rez.
>>
>
> I got a the same phone on Vodaphone and am taking it back bue to the fact
> its not what was advertised.

It is as advertized, you get a phone with a built-in camera.

> You don't buy a car and then sudddenly they
> remove the seats. Why should I get a phone with none of the features that
> were advertised

The wording Vodafone used on the advertizing for the k700i is 'Built in
digital camera', and that's exactly what you got.

So to use your analogy. No seats have been removed from the car, it's just
that the seats you actually get are crap ;-) Just like the camera in the
k700i.

--
Michael Turner
Email (ROT13)
[email protected]

"michael turner" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news[email protected]...
> On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 23:16:56 +0000, James Doble wrote:
>


>> I got a the same phone on Vodaphone and am taking it back bue to the fact
>> its not what was advertised.
>
> It is as advertized, you get a phone with a built-in camera.
>
>> You don't buy a car and then sudddenly they
>> remove the seats. Why should I get a phone with none of the features that
>> were advertised
>
> The wording Vodafone used on the advertizing for the k700i is 'Built in
> digital camera', and that's exactly what you got.
>
> So to use your analogy. No seats have been removed from the car, it's just
> that the seats you actually get are crap ;-) Just like the camera in the
> k700i.
>
> --
> Michael Turner
> Email (ROT13)
> [email protected]

The camera in the k700i is infect very good, its certainly alot better then
all the other sub 1mp phones, it has a nice clear display, a big screen, it
does everything you could ever want from a phone.

If you want an ugly phone then go for the 1mp nokia 7610, it has more
features but looks like ****e.

The phone is not as advertised by Sony Ericsson, I see no mention of
Vodafone advertising anywhere?

The features have been removed because Vodafone want to cash in on its
customers and make them use Live to get ringtones, rather then using your
own, unfortunately this has backfired on them and are now having loads of
phones returned to them as they are not working as they should be.

If you don't like the K700i Michael then that is your opinion, but the phone
has had great reviews and is IMO the best looking and feature packed phone
out there.

Ronny

On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:45:10 +0100, Ronny wrote:

>
> "michael turner" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news[email protected]...
>> On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 23:16:56 +0000, James Doble wrote:
>>
>
>
>>> I got a the same phone on Vodaphone and am taking it back bue to the fact
>>> its not what was advertised.
>>
>> It is as advertized, you get a phone with a built-in camera.
>>
>>> You don't buy a car and then sudddenly they
>>> remove the seats. Why should I get a phone with none of the features that
>>> were advertised
>>
>> The wording Vodafone used on the advertizing for the k700i is 'Built in
>> digital camera', and that's exactly what you got.
>>
>> So to use your analogy. No seats have been removed from the car, it's just
>> that the seats you actually get are crap ;-) Just like the camera in the
>> k700i.
>>
>> --
>> Michael Turner
>> Email (ROT13)
>> [email protected]
>
> The camera in the k700i is infect very good, its certainly alot better then
> all the other sub 1mp phones, it has a nice clear display, a big screen, it
> does everything you could ever want from a phone.
>
> If you want an ugly phone then go for the 1mp nokia 7610, it has more
> features but looks like ****e.

Oh I agree, that is a hideous looking contraption. What where the Nokia
designers smoking ?

> The phone is not as advertised by Sony Ericsson, I see no mention of
> Vodafone advertising anywhere?

Well that's what 'James Doble' posted and I quote:
"I got a the same phone on Vodaphone and am taking it back bue to the fact
its not what was advertised.

BTW James it's Vodafone NOT Vodaphone ;-)

> The features have been removed because Vodafone want to cash in on its
> customers and make them use Live to get ringtones, rather then using
> your own, unfortunately this has backfired on them and are now having
> loads of phones returned to them as they are not working as they should
> be.
>
> If you don't like the K700i Michael then that is your opinion,

I've got nothing against the k700i, it's a well featured and very smart
looking phone.

BTW I've recently acquired a used SE t630, to use as an alternative to my
Nokia 6310i. I think it's a great phone, however the camera is really
crap, worse than the k700i's one. It might as well not be there.

> but the
> phone has had great reviews and is IMO the best looking and feature
> packed phone out there.

....however it's camera, with fixed-focus pinhole sized lens,
*web-cam* quality cheapo sensor, no flash. Should be considered a toy or
gimmick and nothing more. The same applies to all camera phones.

And I still say 'You want decent pics ? Then get a proper multi-megapixel
digital camera.' something like Pentax, Canon, Kodak, etc. They ain't
exactly expensive these days.

IMO even those cheap throw-away single-use film cameras, take pictures
many times better than any camera phone can.

--
Michael Turner
Email (ROT13)
[email protected]

"michael turner" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news[email protected]...
> On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:45:10 +0100, Ronny wrote:
>
>>
>> "michael turner" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news[email protected]...
>>> On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 23:16:56 +0000, James Doble wrote:
>>>
>>
>>
>>>> I got a the same phone on Vodaphone and am taking it back bue to the
>>>> fact
>>>> its not what was advertised.
>>>
>>> It is as advertized, you get a phone with a built-in camera.
>>>
>>>> You don't buy a car and then sudddenly they
>>>> remove the seats. Why should I get a phone with none of the features
>>>> that
>>>> were advertised
>>>
>>> The wording Vodafone used on the advertizing for the k700i is 'Built in
>>> digital camera', and that's exactly what you got.
>>>
>>> So to use your analogy. No seats have been removed from the car, it's
>>> just
>>> that the seats you actually get are crap ;-) Just like the camera in the
>>> k700i.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Michael Turner
>>> Email (ROT13)
>>> [email protected]
>>
>> The camera in the k700i is infect very good, its certainly alot better
>> then
>> all the other sub 1mp phones, it has a nice clear display, a big screen,
>> it
>> does everything you could ever want from a phone.
>>
>> If you want an ugly phone then go for the 1mp nokia 7610, it has more
>> features but looks like ****e.
>
> Oh I agree, that is a hideous looking contraption. What where the Nokia
> designers smoking ?
>
>> The phone is not as advertised by Sony Ericsson, I see no mention of
>> Vodafone advertising anywhere?
>
> Well that's what 'James Doble' posted and I quote:
> "I got a the same phone on Vodaphone and am taking it back bue to the fact
> its not what was advertised.
>
> BTW James it's Vodafone NOT Vodaphone ;-)
>
>> The features have been removed because Vodafone want to cash in on its
>> customers and make them use Live to get ringtones, rather then using
>> your own, unfortunately this has backfired on them and are now having
>> loads of phones returned to them as they are not working as they should
>> be.
>>
>> If you don't like the K700i Michael then that is your opinion,
>
> I've got nothing against the k700i, it's a well featured and very smart
> looking phone.
>
> BTW I've recently acquired a used SE t630, to use as an alternative to my
> Nokia 6310i. I think it's a great phone, however the camera is really
> crap, worse than the k700i's one. It might as well not be there.
>
>> but the
>> phone has had great reviews and is IMO the best looking and feature
>> packed phone out there.
>
> ...however it's camera, with fixed-focus pinhole sized lens,
> *web-cam* quality cheapo sensor, no flash. Should be considered a toy or
> gimmick and nothing more. The same applies to all camera phones.
>
> And I still say 'You want decent pics ? Then get a proper multi-megapixel
> digital camera.' something like Pentax, Canon, Kodak, etc. They ain't
> exactly expensive these days.
>
> IMO even those cheap throw-away single-use film cameras, take pictures
> many times better than any camera phone can.
>
> --

yeah agreed there is no comparison to a normal digi cam, but the whole ethos
in using a cam phone is to capture pic's at a time when you dont have a
camera with you, I think camera phones fill this gap perfectly, they also
make great pic's to use on the web as there small.

I had a Samsung E700 before and this had a great zoom which I miss, but the
quality was not as good as the K700.

Ronny

"michael turner" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news[email protected]...
> On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:45:10 +0100, Ronny wrote:

> > The camera in the k700i is infect very good, its certainly alot better
then
> > all the other sub 1mp phones, it has a nice clear display, a big screen,
it
> > does everything you could ever want from a phone.

My only other camera phone was an Alcatel 735... its camera and display
wasn't as high res, but IMO it took cleaner pictures. I haven't tried the
K700i outdoors in full light yet, but all of the indoor pics I've taken thus
far has been full of noise, and some even blurry... and don't get me
started on the video camera - it's a total waste of time. Worse than webcam
quality. I guess it's a nice gimmick to have though (makes showing off your
phone so much more satsifying).

> > If you want an ugly phone then go for the 1mp nokia 7610, it has more
> > features but looks like ****e.
>
> Oh I agree, that is a hideous looking contraption. What where the Nokia
> designers smoking ?

I've been avoiding the Nokia brand for a while now - can't stand their
designs.

> > The features have been removed because Vodafone want to cash in on its
> > customers and make them use Live to get ringtones, rather then using
> > your own, unfortunately this has backfired on them and are now having
> > loads of phones returned to them as they are not working as they should
> > be.

Anyone got a hack for this yet?

> I've got nothing against the k700i, it's a well featured and very smart
> looking phone.

It's a pretty good phone - good signal reception, 41mb memory allowing for
tons of JAVA games and files, WAP2 and GPRS, et cetera. I WAS expecting
better camera quality and more features though, considering the price I paid
for it. I'm actually missing a few features from my old Alcatel 735 (which
costs a fraction of the price), such as voice activation (not just for
calls, but for opening the voice memo, opening WAP, et cetera) and a
currencery converter. The K700i isn't the best phone out there, but there
are far worse...

> ...however it's camera, with fixed-focus pinhole sized lens,
> *web-cam* quality cheapo sensor, no flash. Should be considered a toy or
> gimmick and nothing more. The same applies to all camera phones.

On the plus side the builtin camera light mights a pretty good flashlight...

<=[BC]=>

"BC" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "michael turner" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news[email protected]...
>> On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:45:10 +0100, Ronny wrote:
>
>> > The camera in the k700i is infect very good, its certainly alot better
> then
>> > all the other sub 1mp phones, it has a nice clear display, a big
>> > screen,
> it
>> > does everything you could ever want from a phone.
>
> My only other camera phone was an Alcatel 735... its camera and display
> wasn't as high res, but IMO it took cleaner pictures. I haven't tried the
> K700i outdoors in full light yet, but all of the indoor pics I've taken
> thus
> far has been full of noise, and some even blurry... and don't get me
> started on the video camera - it's a total waste of time. Worse than
> webcam
> quality. I guess it's a nice gimmick to have though (makes showing off
> your
> phone so much more satsifying).
>
>> > If you want an ugly phone then go for the 1mp nokia 7610, it has more
>> > features but looks like ****e.
>>
>> Oh I agree, that is a hideous looking contraption. What where the Nokia
>> designers smoking ?
>
> I've been avoiding the Nokia brand for a while now - can't stand their
> designs.
>
>> > The features have been removed because Vodafone want to cash in on its
>> > customers and make them use Live to get ringtones, rather then using
>> > your own, unfortunately this has backfired on them and are now having
>> > loads of phones returned to them as they are not working as they should
>> > be.
>
> Anyone got a hack for this yet?
>
>> I've got nothing against the k700i, it's a well featured and very smart
>> looking phone.
>
> It's a pretty good phone - good signal reception, 41mb memory allowing for
> tons of JAVA games and files, WAP2 and GPRS, et cetera. I WAS expecting
> better camera quality and more features though, considering the price I
> paid
> for it. I'm actually missing a few features from my old Alcatel 735
> (which
> costs a fraction of the price), such as voice activation (not just for
> calls, but for opening the voice memo, opening WAP, et cetera) and a
> currencery converter. The K700i isn't the best phone out there, but there
> are far worse...
>
>> ...however it's camera, with fixed-focus pinhole sized lens,
>> *web-cam* quality cheapo sensor, no flash. Should be considered a toy or
>> gimmick and nothing more. The same applies to all camera phones.
>
> On the plus side the builtin camera light mights a pretty good
> flashlight...
>
> <=[BC]=>
>

I have taken some pics indoors, does yours look like this, as I dont think
there that bad

1 at 320x and one at 640

www.fsplanes.net/test.JPG
www.fsplanes.net/test1.JPG
www.fsplanes.net/test2.JPG


Just a pic of my desk at work lol


Ronny