Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    Perry Webb
    Guest
    Are flip phones worth the extra cost? Do they make a different with screen
    damage? Does it make a difference covering the buttons so they can't be
    pushed? Do flip phones wear out quicker because of opening and closing them
    often?





    See More: flip phones verses no moving parts




  2. #2
    Notan
    Guest

    Re: flip phones verses no moving parts

    Perry Webb wrote:
    >
    > Are flip phones worth the extra cost? Do they make a different with screen
    > damage? Does it make a difference covering the buttons so they can't be
    > pushed? Do flip phones wear out quicker because of opening and closing them
    > often?


    Personal preference, personal preference, personal preference.

    Notan



  3. #3
    Perry Webb
    Guest

    Re: flip phones verses no moving parts

    I have experience with PDA's but not with cell phones. What happens if you
    put a cell phone that doesn't fold up in your front pocket so that the
    screen and buttons are exposed? Does a cell phone turn on accidentally very
    easily? Is there more to a flip phone than being a little smaller?



    "Notan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > Perry Webb wrote:
    >>
    >> Are flip phones worth the extra cost? Do they make a different with
    >> screen
    >> damage? Does it make a difference covering the buttons so they can't be
    >> pushed? Do flip phones wear out quicker because of opening and closing
    >> them
    >> often?

    >
    > Personal preference, personal preference, personal preference.
    >
    > Notan






  4. #4
    Notan
    Guest

    Re: flip phones verses no moving parts

    Perry Webb wrote:
    >
    > I have experience with PDA's but not with cell phones. What happens if you
    > put a cell phone that doesn't fold up in your front pocket so that the
    > screen and buttons are exposed? Does a cell phone turn on accidentally very
    > easily? Is there more to a flip phone than being a little smaller?


    I was serious about "personal preference."

    Most "candybar" phones, i.e., non-flip, have some type of "button protect"
    feature, which keeps an accidental button press from doing anything. Most
    also have internal antennas, as opposed to flip-phones, which have external.

    Other than that, it's mostly about how the phone feels *in your hand.*

    Notan



  5. #5
    Notan
    Guest

    Re: flip phones verses no moving parts

    Notan wrote:
    >
    > Perry Webb wrote:
    > >
    > > I have experience with PDA's but not with cell phones. What happens if you
    > > put a cell phone that doesn't fold up in your front pocket so that the
    > > screen and buttons are exposed? Does a cell phone turn on accidentally very
    > > easily? Is there more to a flip phone than being a little smaller?

    >
    > I was serious about "personal preference."
    >
    > Most "candybar" phones, i.e., non-flip, have some type of "button protect"
    > feature, which keeps an accidental button press from doing anything. Most
    > also have internal antennas, as opposed to flip-phones, which have external.
    >
    > Other than that, it's mostly about how the phone feels *in your hand.*


    Oh yeah, there's also the fact that a flip-phone will protect the screen
    better than a non-flip without some type of screen protector.

    Notan



  6. #6

    Re: flip phones verses no moving parts

    Flip phones aren't smaller. The reason Nokia didn't make flip phones
    when every other company did is because they thought people would care
    more about small than flip.

    Think about it like an engineer: to make a phone flip open, you are
    essentially cutting a line down the middle of a cell phone. Internal
    components have to pick one side or the other. That constraint usually
    makes the phone bigger. The reason they flip isn't for the sake of
    your ear and mouth, they flip because users think flipping is smaller
    and cooler even though it's not.

    Well, and to protect the screen better, I admit.




  7. #7
    B. Peg
    Guest

    Re: flip phones verses no moving parts

    > <[email protected]> wrote: <snip>
    > The reason Nokia didn't make flip phones
    > when every other company did is because they thought people would care
    > more about small than flip.


    ????

    Mine is a Nokia flip.


    > Think about it like an engineer: to make a phone flip open, you are
    > essentially cutting a line down the middle of a cell phone. Internal
    > components have to pick one side or the other. That constraint usually
    > makes the phone bigger. The reason they flip isn't for the sake of
    > your ear and mouth, they flip because users think flipping is smaller
    > and cooler even though it's not.
    >
    > Well, and to protect the screen better, I admit.


    To protect the thing from whatever. Voice also seems - to the receiver -
    amplified on the flipper as well. Too bad I loaned it to someone who
    flipped it open (HARD!) and busted the hinge. A traveling Nokia repairman
    who goes from dealer-to-dealer fixed it with a new case and added a new
    window for $32.

    Okay, I sat on it a few times and tweaked the LCD display so it does weird
    things at times until I twist it this way and that.

    Look at the Motorola Razor if want a thin flipper.

    B~





  8. #8

    Re: flip phones verses no moving parts



    B. Peg wrote:
    > > <[email protected]> wrote: <snip>
    > > The reason Nokia didn't make flip phones
    > > when every other company did is because they thought people would care
    > > more about small than flip.

    >
    > ????
    >
    > Mine is a Nokia flip.
    >
    >


    Why the question marks? I didn't say nokia doesn't make flip phones
    now.




  • Similar Threads

    1. alt.cellular.cingular
    2. alt.cellular.sprintpcs
    3. alt.cellular.motorola