When is a phone not a phone? (rant)

Oh dear.. "I only want it to be a phone."

Maybe most people who say this are using toy-phones like Samsungs and all,
that just make a lot of noise and show pretty colors without offering solid
business tools like Symbian based phones do.

Fine, suit yourself. But for me I will never ever go back to not having
e-mail, MSN Messenger and basic web/wap services with me all the time, on a
screen that's capable of displaying all this clearly. Even the crap camera
was useful recently when taking some supporting pictures of a traffic mishap.

Why anyone would NOT want email in his/her communication device is beyond me.
Well, me grandmum, maybe, but she's been dead 3 years.

Cheers,
Chanchao

---

› See More: When is a phone not a phone? (rant)

Oh yes: "Business phone, not toy phone"

What business man would NOT want to check email while in a taxi or waiting for
a flight, etc, etc. (no question mark; it's not a question. :-P)

Even the camera, while ****ty quality but with adequate resolution can be used
to take some pictures of a whiteboard brainstorming session and similar uses.

Nokia 7610 is currently the best 'business phone' money can buy, no doubt
about it. OF COURSE Nokia's presentation/marketing blurb is too infantile for
words. I can't even look it up on their website without feeling sick. BUT the
people who actually made this phone, and it's Symbian OS, knew VERY well what
they were doing!! Cudos to them, and death to trendy-kiddie advertising!!

Mobileburn.com did an excellent review of it, actually going into details that
NO mobile phone salesman would know or tell you about even if his life
depended on it.

Cheers,
Chanchao

Chanchao wrote:
> Oh dear.. "I only want it to be a phone."

If you're going to reply to my post with what appears to be a quotation,
then can you at least make sure that it is something I said, rather than
something you completely made up?

Thanks.

Ben
--
Questions by email will likely be ignored, please use the newsgroups.
I'm not just a number. To many, I'm known as a String...

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

[snip]
> Even the crap camera was useful recently when taking some
> supporting pictures of a traffic mishap.

I carry a disposable camera in the car for precisely this purpose. £5 from
Woolworths or wherever.

> Why anyone would NOT want email in his/her communication device is
beyond me.
> Well, me grandmum, maybe, but she's been dead 3 years.

I carry a phone to make and receive phone calls. I find speaking to people
easier than fiddling around typing messages on miniscule keyboards and
reading tiny text on equally tiny screens.

Ivor

Chanchao <[email protected]> wrote:

>Oh yes: "Business phone, not toy phone"

>What business man would NOT want to check email while in a taxi or waiting for
>a flight, etc, etc. (no question mark; it's not a question. :-P)

The e-mail facilities on any mobile phone yet to hit the market are
far from useful for most business people. They're too slow, have too
small a screen and don't handle file attachments adequately to handle
the type or volume of e-mails that many people in business routinely
receive. The interface, screen size or speed of input don't make them
viable for replying to e-mails. The only devices I'd suggest which
come close are perhaps the PDA devices with GSM features, such as the
Blackberry and Palm device, but everyone I know who uses one has it in
*addition* to a mobile phone, not instead of. Which would also, IMHO,
support the case for a "minimalist" mobile phone.

Phones which include these features tend to have more complex software
and larger screens, adding size and weight to the device and reducing
battery life, thus reducing it's effectiveness at performing it's core
function - that of being of mobile phone.

>Even the camera, while ****ty quality but with adequate resolution can be used
>to take some pictures of a whiteboard brainstorming session and similar uses.

As has been discussed in here, it also restricts the areas in which
the phone might be carried. A phone which is switched off, left in a
glove box or confiscated by security is as good as no phone!

The more I think of it the more useful it would be for PDAs to come
with inbuilt cameras, but not phones.

--
>iv< Paul >iv<

On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 12:32:10 +0100, "Ben Pope" <[email protected]> wrote some
stuff about "Re: When is a phone not a phone? (rant)", to which I would like
to add the following:

>Chanchao wrote:
>> Oh dear.. "I only want it to be a phone."
>
>If you're going to reply to my post with what appears to be a quotation,
>then can you at least make sure that it is something I said, rather than
>something you completely made up?
>
>Thanks.
>
>Ben

Well thank you too for leaving my actual point? Also I was replying to
general sentiment, not to anyone in particular. If I was then I would have
left a quote or user-reference in there.

Thanks. :P

(Also one has to simplify and overstate sometimes in discussions to keep
things lively.. And the point was, summed up in one line: "also serious
business people need many of the features of today's top-end phones." Not the
marketing spiel, admittedly, but older phones also never had the great
organizer, connectivity and internet/email features of todays phones.)

Cheers,
Chanchao

On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 12:32:38 -0000, "Ivor Jones" <[email protected]>
wrote some stuff about "Re: When is a phone not a phone? (rant)", to which I
would like to add the following:

>> Why anyone would NOT want email in his/her communication device is
>> beyond me. Well, me grandmum, maybe, but she's been dead 3 years.

>I carry a phone to make and receive phone calls. I find speaking to people
>easier than fiddling around typing messages on miniscule keyboards and
>reading tiny text on equally tiny screens.

I'm not too likely either to go type a major email into a phone (though I have
done so at times in screaming emergencies), but just to be able to catch up
with email during what otherwise would be dead time (waiting for something) is
benefitial to me.

Cheers,
Chanchao

On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 15:09:36 +0100, Paul Hopwood <[email protected]> wrote
some stuff about "Re: When is a phone not a phone? (rant)", to which I would
like to add the following:

>>What business man would NOT want to check email while in a taxi or waiting for
>>a flight, etc, etc. (no question mark; it's not a question. :-P)
>
>The e-mail facilities on any mobile phone yet to hit the market are
>far from useful for most business people. They're too slow, have too
>small a screen and don't handle file attachments adequately to handle
>the type or volume of e-mails that many people in business routinely
>receive.

That's a very valid argument. And willing to bet that many companies are
working right now to improve email features of their next phones. Note though
that I greatly prefer checking email on a phone like 6600 compared to a PDA.
And I type way faster using T9 than with a stylus. Also I reorganized the way
I receive email to keep it manageable by phone, i.e. got some extra pop3
mailboxes because 6600 doesn't filter mail, but DOES support multiple
addresses.

>The only devices I'd suggest which
>come close are perhaps the PDA devices with GSM features, such as the
>Blackberry and Palm device, but everyone I know who uses one has it in
>*addition* to a mobile phone, not instead of. Which would also, IMHO,
>support the case for a "minimalist" mobile phone.

That's fair. For me I *personally* don't like Pocket-PC type devices. They're
still big so you don't carry them with you *always* like you would with a
phone. And the stylus is just not as fast as T9. (for me). Detachable
keyboards will solve that for both phones as well as 'proper' PDA's. I
actually do own a Pocket PC but stopped using it since I got a 6600.

>Phones which include these features tend to have more complex software
>and larger screens, adding size and weight to the device and reducing
>battery life, thus reducing it's effectiveness at performing it's core
>function - that of being of mobile phone.

PDA batteries don't last all that long either, though. The main culprit in
terms of battery life is big, bright color screens. All the other features
don't drain the battery so much (when not in use). Batteries are improving all
the time though, I don't mind charging a phone every 2-3 days as opposed to
every week. Given the functionality and the incredibly small size of the
battery, I think 6600 is actually pretty amazing. And the tiny spare battery
does actually fit in your wallet without noticing it. :-)))

>>Even the camera, while ****ty quality but with adequate resolution can be used
>>to take some pictures of a whiteboard brainstorming session and similar uses.

>As has been discussed in here, it also restricts the areas in which
>the phone might be carried. A phone which is switched off, left in a
>glove box or confiscated by security is as good as no phone!

Fortunately this is changing too as more phones have cameras. At first I also
ran into some paranoid people but by now they know it's very obvious when
someone is actually taking pictures. Also people who actually want to take
pictures for illegal purposes can do so FAR better with other conceiled little
cameras. But like you said, let's not do that discussion again. (Same for
why PDA's are allowed in flight but phones in flight-mode are not. :-))
(Oops..)

>The more I think of it the more useful it would be for PDAs to come
>with inbuilt cameras, but not phones.

Yes and GSM phone capability, and in a smaller and more sturdier form factor.
:-) (!) (Y'know'msayng? ;-)

Seriously, I can totally relate to people just wanting a basic phone with
incredible battery life AND GPRS+bluetooth. If I was a PDA manufacturer I
might even contact a mobile phone company and decide on a combo package. My
issue was merely with just slagging off current top end phones as mere toys,
because they do offer serious functionality which is getting better and more
useful and convenient to use pretty much on a monthly basis. You have to look
beyong the marketing crap to see the actual improvments. MMS is a F'ing joke
of course, I DO actually send picture messages with my phone, but then as
emails!! Far cheaper and more reliable!

Cheers,
Chanchao

"Chanchao" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 12:32:38 -0000, "Ivor Jones"
<[email protected]>
> wrote some stuff about "Re: When is a phone not a phone? (rant)", to
which I
> would like to add the following:
>
> >> Why anyone would NOT want email in his/her communication device is
> >> beyond me. Well, me grandmum, maybe, but she's been dead 3 years.
>
> >I carry a phone to make and receive phone calls. I find speaking to
people
> >easier than fiddling around typing messages on miniscule keyboards and
> >reading tiny text on equally tiny screens.
>
> I'm not too likely either to go type a major email into a phone (though
I have
> done so at times in screaming emergencies), but just to be able to catch
up
> with email during what otherwise would be dead time (waiting for
something) is
> benefitial to me.

Ah well, there you go. When I'm away from a PC, I'm glad to be..! If
anyone wants me that desperately, then they can phone me..!

Ivor

Chanchao <[email protected]> wrote:

>>The e-mail facilities on any mobile phone yet to hit the market are
>>far from useful for most business people. They're too slow, have too
>>small a screen and don't handle file attachments adequately to handle
>>the type or volume of e-mails that many people in business routinely
>>receive.

>That's a very valid argument. And willing to bet that many companies are
>working right now to improve email features of their next phones. Note though
>that I greatly prefer checking email on a phone like 6600 compared to a PDA.
>And I type way faster using T9 than with a stylus. Also I reorganized the way
>I receive email to keep it manageable by phone, i.e. got some extra pop3
>mailboxes because 6600 doesn't filter mail, but DOES support multiple
>addresses.

While I have access to POP3 at home my company, like many others, uses
Exchange and it isn't "exposed" to the outside world so the usefulness
of such devices is somewhat limited.

>That's fair. For me I *personally* don't like Pocket-PC type devices. They're
>still big so you don't carry them with you *always* like you would with a
>phone.

Fair enough, although some of the more modern Pocket PC models are
hardly much bigger recent phones; the former are getting smaller while
phones are getting larger! I'm personally not all that keen on the
PocketPC interface myself; I prefer Palm OS and the devices it runs on
are typically smaller, but it's purely a personal preference.

>>Phones which include these features tend to have more complex software
>>and larger screens, adding size and weight to the device and reducing
>>battery life, thus reducing it's effectiveness at performing it's core
>>function - that of being of mobile phone.

>PDA batteries don't last all that long either, though. The main culprit in
>terms of battery life is big, bright color screens. All the other features
>don't drain the battery so much (when not in use).

The difference being when you're using a PDA you're not draining your
phone battery. I could probably manage without my PDA much longer
than my phone, but if you're spreading the "load" across two separate
devices with their own batteries you have, in effect, twice the
battery life or thereabouts.

>Batteries are improving all
>the time though, I don't mind charging a phone every 2-3 days as opposed to
>every week.

Would be a pain for me as it's not uncommon for me to spend 4-5 days
away from a convenient mains supply, besides it being a pain having to
carry a charger. I've not carried one for about four or five years
and not sure I want to get back into the habit. I don't even use one
in the home or office anymore; my handset charges in my car cradle
during journeys and it charges quickly enough and sufficient battery
life that it's never necessary to top it up.

Perhaps if I had to compromise to get features I actually *wanted* I'd
be happier to accept poorer battery life but, as yet, none of these
extra battery-draining, weight-adding, size-increasing features
actually add any value.

>>As has been discussed in here, it also restricts the areas in which
>>the phone might be carried. A phone which is switched off, left in a
>>glove box or confiscated by security is as good as no phone!

>Fortunately this is changing too as more phones have cameras. At first I also
>ran into some paranoid people but by now they know it's very obvious when
>someone is actually taking pictures. Also people who actually want to take
>pictures for illegal purposes can do so FAR better with other conceiled little
>cameras. But like you said, let's not do that discussion again. (Same for
>why PDA's are allowed in flight but phones in flight-mode are not. :-))

It's not just paranoia and privacy (although the later is a valid
issue) but also a necessity to protect commercial or national
interests in many business environments.


--
>iv< Paul >iv<

Chanchao <[email protected]> wrote:

>I'm not too likely either to go type a major email into a phone (though I have
>done so at times in screaming emergencies), but just to be able to catch up
>with email during what otherwise would be dead time (waiting for something) is
>benefitial to me.

See, that's what I don't really understand; what could be such a
screaming emergency that you *need* to send an email from a phone?

You have a device which allows you to actually *talk* to someone, so
why on earth spend 30 minutes getting RSI of the thumb to type a two
line message you could say in 10 seconds!!?!? ;-))

Okay, I know their are situations where that's not always convenient
but there are text messages for that. Both are more immediate than
e-mail; I don't think I know anyone who is likely to get and read an
e-mail quicker than an SMS or phone call.

--
>iv< Paul >iv<

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 00:33:30 +0100, Paul Hopwood <[email protected]> wrote
some stuff about "Re: When is a phone not a phone? (rant)", to which I would
like to add the following:

>>That's a very valid argument. And willing to bet that many companies are
>>working right now to improve email features of their next phones. Note though
>>that I greatly prefer checking email on a phone like 6600 compared to a PDA.
>>And I type way faster using T9 than with a stylus. Also I reorganized the way
>>I receive email to keep it manageable by phone, i.e. got some extra pop3
>>mailboxes because 6600 doesn't filter mail, but DOES support multiple
>>addresses.

>While I have access to POP3 at home my company, like many others, uses
>Exchange and it isn't "exposed" to the outside world so the usefulness
>of such devices is somewhat limited.

Ouch.. Well what can I say.. If it's company policy to not have people on
company e-mail on weekends or evenings or when they're on the road then
there's indeed not much need for email on mobile phones. Or computers at home
for that matter. I think companies should think twice though before
preventing their staff from working at home or on the road.. Like you're at a
convention, trade show, somewhere else half way around the world... hm.

If I'm totally honest I don't actually check company email normally, (though I
do have it set up if there's a need) but I do regularly check emails from
friends and family. Oh and I'm subscribed to some news bulletin emails, those
are great too, gives you something to read that's cheaper and more convenient
and more up to date than a newspaper. (Small phone is for me a lot easier to
read than a full size newspaper when in public transport and all.)

Cheers,
Chanchao

When it's a door stop (no signal).

The Mole wrote:
> When it's a door stop (no signal).

You may be able to use it as a wedge but it's long gone since you could keep
a door open by using a phone as a door stop...

When it's a paperweight...
"Kráftéé" <kraftee@spam_off_&_die_ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> The Mole wrote:
>> When it's a door stop (no signal).
>
> You may be able to use it as a wedge but it's long gone since you could
> keep
> a door open by using a phone as a door stop...