A few weeks ago, after an upgrade to iOS 8, I became unable to connect to wifi on my iPhone 4S and the speed of the OS became pretty bad, after it had been perfectly responsive since I first got it nearly 3 years ago.
Combine this with the fact that my expensive purchased-for-durability phone case, the third in the phone's lifetime, was starting to crack, and I started looking at other phones.
My contract is up in a couple of months. I went to a store and looked at the Samsung Galaxy Note 4 and the iPhone 6.
I found the Note 4 intriguing because I've been occasionally following John Carmack's discussions about the Gear VR (Oculus Rift that connects to the phone) and I thought it was coming out in a consumer version, but it looks like they are still labeling it as a developer kit, which makes me think there must be a reason for that (i.e. it's not really ready for prime time). Also, the phone is just massively huge, and I don't want to buy it, especially since given my way of doing things I'd end up buying some horribly large case on top of it.
Then I looked at the iPhone 6. First of all I do think it's too big in terms of screen size -- though I do like the thickness and weight of it quite a bit. But the base model is 16GB, and getting either a 16GB or a 64GB on contract was $200+ or $375+ respectively. I thought about it and almost broke down and bought a 128GB model outright for over $1000. In the end, I just couldn't justify it.
I think it's time for me to go back to sending SMSs on the telephone keypad. And time for me to stop getting warnings that my damn phone is not backing up (no wifi and me not plugging it in), time for me to stop worrying that the phone will die if I forget to charge it for just one evening, and time for me to stop buying expensive, crappy cases.
I really want this phone. And if I don't get it, I'll probably get something that is just like it.
I like the concept but it is still targeting the market that can't afford smart phones.
They need a similar phone that is targeting the market that can afford smart phones but realized it doesn't need most of the features at the expense of battery life.
Like a phone with this feature set plus 3G/4G connectivity with WiFi tethering capability to say your tablet and a beefier battery.
Basically a classic Nokia phone and 3G/4G router to connect all your smart devices to while you're on the move and in need of a internet connection.
They have a few. I've owned the 515 (fell from the fourth story and kept working for a solid year), and I currently own the 208. Both have HSPA or something, 3.5G anyway.
No wifi though, you'll have to either use bluetooth or USB (USB works better).
> I like the concept but it is still targeting the market that can't afford smart phones.
Every market can afford smartphones. 3G, wifi, tethering, dual SIMs (quite important in some areas), etc.
If Nokia can sell it in targeted markets, it will match functionality of similarly priced phones with much larger screens and much extended functionality, but the Nokia brand will bring the premium price tag, and in my opinion cheap reliable Androids will continue to win, the price of reliability being word-of-mouth amongst unknown but become-known brands and models, vs known but insufficiently featureful mainstream branded phones.
Bought a Nexus 4 for $199 contract-free about two years ago. Seems pretty low cost to me, frequent OS updates, decent battery life, great build quality. The smart phone market honestly continues to mystify me.
the market that can afford smart phones but realized it doesn't need most of the features at the expense of battery life
I see what you mean, but that market still has different segments and what you talk about (phone with this feature set plus 3G/4G connectivity with WiFi tethering) is just one of them. I for instance couldn't care less about these features. And I'm pretty sure there's an entire segment which just wants a phone which just calls and texts without bells and whistles and a battery life that makes sense for a portable electronics device. Let's say at least 3 weeks. So yes with this one all I see is somthing which I can use to call and has 29 days of standby so I'm in :P Don't care about the price. Oh, it's ultra-cheap? WIN WIN :]
The Nokia Asha 210 is close to that, except it just have a 2.5G connectivity. I don't know if 3G is worth it on features phone. Don't you think it won't be powerful enough to take advantage of a 3G connection?
The phone wouldn't be but my tablet that I connect when I need a quick internet connection and a better more full featured experience would be.
I almost never use any of my smart phone's features except tethering.
The phone's screen is too small for comfort I would rather use my nexus 7 which I always have with me anyway however a phone of that size would be too awkward so why not just separate them.
A dumb phone with modem capabilities and great battery life and a smart device for everything else.
The point is not for the phone itself to use 3G/4G, but to enable it when the phone is used as an access point (or a tethered cellular modem) for a more powerful device.
> I think it's time for me to go back to sending SMSs on the telephone keypad.
Well if your primary use of a "phone" is to make GSM voice calls and send SMSs then what you're looking at is completely overkill. The vast majority of people that buy top end phones do so for things like: pocket sized, always available, excellent quality camera, near desktop-like internet browsing, and then the entire application ecosystem including maps, lifestyle applications, games, etc.
There are going to be tradeoffs to be made depending on what your requirements are, including price and battery life.
Facebook reports 78% of US daily users are mobile [1]; Twitter report 75% of monthly active users have used mobile [2]; and Amazon report 60% of customers shopped with a mobile device during the Christmas period [3].
Admittedly these headline figures appear to count users with any mobile activity, even if they have far more activity from other platforms.
I prefer desktop too, but I think it's a mistake to underestimate mobile.
The top end smartphones have cameras that are at least good enough to replace casual point and shoot cameras. Their excellent quality is worlds apart from the new Nokia phone's camera. While the vast majority of people use smartphones for calls, sms, and the camera, there is huge growth in mobile based purchasing, gaming, and social network usage. There are lots of different things that people do with smartphones, maybe not everyone uses the same app or game, but the flexibility of the smartphone makes it possible.
Top End smartphones might be able to replace a 8-10 year old P&S camera they still have respectively horrible cameras. But it doesn't really matter, no one prints photos any more, and with the amount of filters people stick on each photo it doesn't matter if you are making it with a 240p web cam or a 50MP DSLR it will all look the same.
The best camera is the one you have with you. Sure, my Canon DSLR takes nearly infinitely better pictures than my iPhone, but it's the iPhone that takes most of the pictures because it's the one in my pocket.
You are right, of course, that printing from a phone camera is futile, but printing from a P&S is much the same unless you've purchased something at the top of the line.
I think you would be surprised at how much closer a $200 Canon P&S is to your DSLR than your iPhone both in terms of image quality and precision of operation. If you know how to use one. Example: this was taken with a Canon Powershot A610 that cost me $250 around seven years ago: http://folk.ntnu.no/asmunder/files/images/nudibranch.jpg
Very nice pic from your Canon A610. Fully agree about P&S cameras today. I wouldn't run down the quality of today's top of the line phones, they're very good.
Me and my wife still do print a select number of photos. Whenever we travel we purposely take a couple of shots from her Lumix (a non DSLR but with replaceable lens) for the purpose of printing and putting it up on our "travel" wall. Not sure how it would look like if we used our phones to take those shots.
To counter an anecdote with an anecdote, almost everyone I know uses their phone more for Facebook/Twitter/Hangouts/Snapchat/etcetcetc than for SMS (and I can count the actual calls I've received in the last month on... 2 fingers).
Well then they are busy professionals. You almost make it sound like they are professional because they need a calendar :P That surely is not a criteria I'd use to consider one professional.
Well, that is not what I'm implying. If you work full time and aren't using email/calendar invites then I envy you. Many people in the corporate world have meetings with different people/departments/organizations on a frequent basis, even if you're not in a client facing role. Conference calls are also scheduled through calendar invites.
While this seems to be a battle of anecdotes, everyone I know who owns a smartphone uses it as their primary non-work email device, Facebook device, browsing device, LinkedIn device, etc. Many home personal computers no longer get turned on. It isn't a cell "phone" as much as it's simply a portal computing device.
It seems that HN now automatically applies a -1 to my posts. Add this to the cowardly slowban and I'm done with this site: The users have gotten stupider, the administrators are halfwits (I'm talking about you, dang), and its utility is gone.
A couple of years ago, I decided I wanted to simplify my life. Cut everything down to an iPad with keyboard, plus my work Blackberry.
It's romantic, but it sucks. I went the other direction: 15" MBP Retina with quad-core + 16GB and an iPhone 6+. Almost $3k in toys, but way more productive. And the Apple stuff has gotten good enough where I leave my chargers at the office. My 6+ was at 3% last night. Put it in airplane mode over night, and it lasted long enough to give me my alarm at 6:50 am, plus a few checks of e-mail in the morning and 15 minutes of hotspot around 8:30.
A really great middle ground is possible between those two extremes! For me personally, a really nice laptop is indispensable, but I really like the idea (from another commenter here) of a much simpler phone with 3g/4g tethering, phone, messaging, and maybe maps.
I've been running a candy bar for about 6 months in conjunction with a smart phone (work and personal sims). I did this as I got tired of having a smartphone on 5% battery when I needed to make/receive an important call. I now forward the smart phone number to the dumb phone so I'm always available on both numbers. This way I'm always available for calls and have removed the low battery stress from my life. The downside is getting texts on the candy bar. Using keypad is a pain so I tend to call people rather than text or give yes/no replies to anyone not on a messaging app like hangouts where I can text via the smartphone.
I can really recommend it. Also on a side note I feel like I'm leaving the world behind when I only take the dumb phone out.
I should have added that I was faster and didn't even need to watch the keyboard. There was that short period (where phones were acceptable for kids and there were no real smartphones yet) where kids in school were texting blind to each other under their tables (peaking only to read of course).
Depends which part of the world. I don't do it often enough, but leaving the online part of the world behind would hardly be a bad thing. More time for the real world around you.
You said it. I've been disillusioned with all-things-smartphones for years now. I've always had Android, no iOS, though the wife does.
I want a phone just like this. The only thing I want that smartphones brought us is turn by turn navigation. The rest can take a hike. Put Nokia's Snake game on there, the old ways that Nokias worked (such as the ability to turn the phone off, and have it wake itself as an alarm), keep the 10 digit "interface" for ideal texting and 100% lag-free dialing, the 10+ day battery life of no 3G/4G, maybe Opera Mini per this Nokia.. and we have a deal.
To me that is technology perfected. I don't want much more than a phone in my pocket. If technology that works and is pleasing makes me a Luddite, then so be it. But it's time to bring some sensibility and more usability to products. Nokia was that.
If anyone from Nokia/MS reads this, yes, please, the above and make a higher quality build version. A $100 or $150 phone that I described, preferably with old school Nokia quality or iPhone metal frame would be amazing.
Also, you wear your clothes at least 14 hours a day. That does not imply you need to buy the most expensive brands you can find, just that they need to fit their purpose. You can pay more than $1000 for an iPhone with 128 GB of storage, true. You can also buy an expandable device, add a 128GB (or bigger - up to 1 TB is available) and end up paying half that price (or less).
You do wear clothes everyday, but hopefully not the same ones everyday. If I only had one set of clothes to wear for 2 years you better believe I'll be willing to spend over $1000 for it.
The analogy just doesn't work, over a 2 year period the difference between $500 and $1000 isn't much. If in the US, the cost is usually hidden in the monthly cost. So the visible cost is $200, and even the free phones over same time period isn't much of a difference in price.
On the subject of spending, put money into your bed, you spend a lot of time there, well worth a few thousand.
Ah, but you forgot one of the 'special' aspects of that $1000 device: it comes with a lock to which you don't hold the key. Taking the clothes comparison further, you can only wash these clothes at one specific laundry. The manufacturer decides which clothes you get to wear on which day and which occasion. They also decide on what style of clothes you wear. Should you not like that style, tough luck. When they launch the 'new style', the laundry won't accept your old clothes anymore - good luck walking around in dirty clothes.
Apropos beds: I built mine, about 15 years ago. It cost me all of $30 in wood and sundry.
To summarise, throwing money at a problem is usually not the best solution. Throwing as much money at a problem as someone will take is hardly ever the best solution.
You must be terribly bored of all these "Why Not X" posts by now, but... why not the Nokia 105? I have the Nokia 100 and it does the job (texting, calling, playing Snake) just fine.
The 105 has even more standby & talk time per charge, allegedly, and I only charge my 100 once every week/fortnight depending on use.
Worth a look but not much cheaper so if having access to the internet, or having a torch, is important to you it won't be so appealing.
I bought a 105 last year in Thailand and love it.
I get about 2 weeks of battery life with moderate use.
The 215 actually has too many features for me - I just like the simplicity of talk, text and torch without having to worry about charging, so the 105 wins :)
Nokia 105 here as well. I love how so many people on HN have 'dumbphones'. It's gone through so much more abuse than a smartphone would be capable of taking.
After my HTC Desire started failing me I looked at my options wide and deep. I was inclined to just get "candy bar" device like this one. Fed up with the battery and fragility - tho I almost never carried my Desire in a case (and other stuff you mention).
But then as my phone gave up on me before I found a replacement I started using a "cand bar" phone and found out that I actually like some smartphone features - like a good autocomplete keyboard, the ability to track my post packages, check bus timetable and occasionally to look up something on the internet (I'm a patient man, it doesen't need to render webpages _that_ fast).
And I came to conclusion that I would enjoy a relatively small, well build and long lasting smartphone that doesen't need to run games (and many apps at once) or have GPS/Nav, voice control,... and whatnot features that I don't use (and can't even remove usually). I think that the technology itself is advanced enough for such a device - there're even some cheap Chinese ones that look promising for what I need (for example Xiaomi Redmi 1S or Redmi 2).
I had the same problem. The Desire simply was the perfect phone, age finally got it after over 4 years. I tried a Chinese one, don't go for it. The desire was a small flagship phone, you'll be disappointed at anything with less quality.
I can recommend the Moto G, it too is a flagship phone at a much too low price, they recently introduced a 2nd gen but it's more expensive. You can get the original second hand for around €100, I am certain it won't disappoint.
I was in the same position as you (upgraded iOS several times on a 4S) and experienced the same issues, but I found a clean install dramatically improved performance, though not to the same snappiness of iOS 6.
I love the feel of the hardware, but for >95% of the phone's life it's been wrapped in a waterproof case, so I don't really benefit from it much.
And I totally hear you about the way the phone feels. Every time I got a new case, I would leave it naked for a few hours, just -[fondling]-touching and admiring the damn thing.
Just something to try - have you tried doing a factory reset on the phone? I ran into the exact same problem both on my phone and a gen 2 iPad Mini after a direct upgrade, which was completely resolved after doing a fresh install.
Yeah, it isn't a thing you should have to do, but if it fixes the problem...
I've never had really good luck with system upgrades on Apple products.
Something like this could be a good upgrade for myself when my current phone breaks down.
I've been using an Xcover 271 for years. It gives me a couple of weeks of battery and, if I really need to, I can still use a simple web browser to look up timetables etc. (but it's enough of a burden that I won't use it for fun) and there's Google Maps preinstalled (also, a big slow for just browsing around but it has been a life-saver several times!)
But the Xcover is somewhat slow and because it has this 'ruggedised' brand image it costs more than it should. A very basic entry-level phone with technology that's five years newer but still costs nearly nothing is probably a good sweetspot. If it breaks the option of buying a replacement won't be considered any longer than one second.
I'm a huge Nokia fan for two main reasons: The phones are durable and they are so cheap that they're practically disposable.
I can't speak for this phone (the 215), but you can buy a Lumia 520 for ~$50 dollars and a 635 for ~$75. My son is 16 months old and constantly smashes the phone into the floor and I'm perfectly ok with that.
For the price you'd drop on an iPhone 6+, you could probably buy 10 Lumia 520s and break them on purpose at your leisure and it would still be cheaper. People will make fun of you for Windows Phone, but it does have Bluetooth, web browsing, really good contact integration, and good email integration. For me personally, using mobile websites is good enough that I don't care if there are apps or not.
if this phone takes a 32gb sd card like my nokia asha, it makes a mockery of the affordability of "smart phones" with "huge storage". and also battery life. and reading the article, it does, happy days.
was worried microsoft would do away with this line!
Keep in mind, though, that Nokia still exists outside Microsoft and they still own the mapping business ("Here", as it's called now). So it's not a given that Microsoft's 'Nokia' phones will actually use Nokia maps.
Why not buy a cheap android phone, a cheap case ,and a wifi, and maybe an extra battery to put in the car ? it will solve all your problems at a price far cheaper than the iphone , and you'll still get to retain the functionality ?
The inexpensive feature phones have much better battery life, less expensive than the cheapest smartphone, and are probably more rugged/durable. They do get the job done as a phone and a few other things. If you don't have much use for a smartphone, then this is perfect. I'm sure there are still a relatively large subset of people who would rather have a feature phone than a smartphone.
I bought LG G3 few days ago after my iPhone 4S lock button finally broke. I thought about iPhone 6 plus for it's larger battery. Unlocked GSM version is over $900 on Amazon. LG G3 unlock GSM is around $450... I hate 2-year contract thingy, using this $450 + $50 accessories + $1,200 Straight Talk 2 year no contract = $1,700
In comparison to Verizon 2-year contract $400 iPhone 6 plus + $1,920 2-year = $2,320 with god knows hidden fees and receipt of my soul... I think I made the right decision...
I completely agree about not being able to justify spending $700+ on a phone, but there are reasonably priced Android smartphones that give you a really good bang for your buck. I bought both my parents a MotoG - it's an LTE smartphone for ~ $200 - and they're really happy with it. My next phone is probably going to be that or the HTC One Mini (~$350).
I also got fed up with my iPhone 5 and the crazy cell phone bills I had and switched to a Moto G (2nd gen) on a cheapo prepaid GSM plan. I couldn't be happier and am ecstatic to pay less than $30/month for phone service and own the phone outright. The G is easily 80% of the iPhone functionality for about 20% the cost. It runs the latest Android OS really well and has good specs. Only downside is the camera is nowhere near as good as the iPhone, but it's not completely terrible.
your 4s wireless just broke.. it was not anything to do with upgrading the os. You had a good phone for it to last that long. - also bet you would not really like this phone.. it is slow and for people who cannot get a better faster phone. Its like saying you would really be ok with an outhouse because you dont mind the walk.
OK, i'll take the bait. To use the outhouse analogy, i actually prefer the outhouse, because i get a bit of fresh air and exercise on the way, and there aren't kids and flatmates bothering me through the door while i'm having a crap, and.. no, the analogy is broken.
I could perhaps afford an iPhone what-have-you (even though i am a poor PhD student -- maybe you have a point), but i genuinely like the fact that my phone lasts really long between charges and that i am not even tempted to have FaceApp or TwitBook, etc.
If my life was arranged a little differently (read: more stability) i wouldn't even have a mobile at all, but for the moment i can't rely on having only a home phone.
I seriously doubt the fact that this phone will be able to make a dent in the Indian market. Just look at its price tag, it costs you around Rs. 2000($30) The basic internet pack charges (2g) is around Rs 130($2) per month. A person who is ready to take a subscription of $2 per month, will be able to afford a better phone with Android which won't cost him more than 3k.
One thing that I want to see in such type of phones is whatsapp support with an extremely good battery life. If such a phone comes up, it will be second phone for every person who is suffering from the battery problem of android ecosystem.
MS needs to preinstall whatsapp , otherwise a lot of people will prefer a phone with whatsapp pre-installed, I know that most of us would laugh about it, but believe me, In my country people buy phones just because the box has these logos: whatsapp, FB, twitter.
>"will be able to afford a better phone with Android which won't cost him more than 3k."
You are assuming that a cheap Android would offer a good experience. I won't have another Android precisely because I had a poor experience with 2 cheap Android phones.
I don't know which OS this phone runs, but the Series 40 platform which used to ship on Nokia devices in this segment was able to run WhatsApp. The thing is, S40 never really felt "finished". It had these tiny little things which just made you drive nuts because there wasn't a way to fix it. Over time I thought it would be amazing if S40 would get open sourced for people to flash modified versions.
I travel a lot, and in addition to my iPhone w/AT&T International Roaming (Company picks it up - provides a constant phone number for people to call me wherever I am, and has all the smartphone goodness that is useful for a road warrior) - I also carry a Nokia 105 which I pop a local SIM into for all my local calling - Saves about $500-$1000/Month easily on calling charges. It looks like the Nokia 215 is the same price, with the addition of some basic Internet Connectivity as well. Same 30 Day battery life as well. Super happy to see Microsoft is continuing to make the super-low end Nokia phones, though hard to see how this fits their general business model, other than being "Mobile first"
I am sad that they don't carry on the line of phones like Nokia 1202 anymore. http://www.gsmarena.com/nokia_1202-2573.php For once, I liked the sunlight-readable monochrome display that doesn't have to turn off, the snappiness and lack of features. I guess the 105 and now 215 is the new 'lowest end' now.
Gates and Allen's original vision was "A computer on every desk at work and in every home." One of the first things Ballmer said to rankle the punditry after Gates' retirement is that Microsoft had to move beyond that. A computer in every pocket everywhere is part of that. That was how their strategic interests led them to Nokia. This is just the first part of a long play betting on the economic development of places where an iPhone is more than the yearly per capita income of most people.
The goal, in terms of business model, seems pretty obvious - get/keep people to use Microsoft services and don't lose any more of the low end to Android. While Facebook and Opera Mini are built-in, so are Bing Search and MSN Weather. I wouldn't be surprised if they eventually add other services also.
If they can sell this type of device at or near cost (which it seems like they are), and increase Bing marketshare at the expense of Android/Google, it's a win for them.
What would be nice is a phone like this with GPS and 3G/4G (with tethering). That way I could ditch my smartphone and use my tablet for actual browsing with the feature phone serving as a router only (whilst still being usable as a phone the rest of the time).
All the feature phones I've looked at don't have 3G/4G with tethering, which means they're unsuitable for my use case.
The 208 has 3.5 g as well. I have owned both the 515 and the 208. While the 515 is better in terms of hardware (aluminum and gorilla glass throughout) it has some software issues and half the ram of the 208, which seems to me has a better software stack.
I used to have an E71 and used that for tethering. It worked well, but it really drained the battery - I think it would last maybe an hour. You might be better off looking into a 'mifi' device, or just getting a tablet with mobile data.
You could look at the low-end Nokia smartphones. My Lumia 530 has dual SIM (one for personal use, one for business) and I only have to charge it once a week (sometimes I even forget and the thing stays alive for 9-10 days). Has all the smartphone capabilities if I ever need them.
Not sure how well it would fare against constant tethering though.
+1 on the Lumia 530. They sell them for $40 AUD outright in Australia (that's $32 USD).
I bought one on a whim and after playing around with it, i'm considering moving full time to it from an iPh6. The camera and screen are the biggest down grades, but otherwise it's just as functional.
I'd buy this phone if it had GPS & 3g/4g as well. It would be a great travel phone. Pop in a local sim, get connected with basic services, have directions available to me, and forget stressing about my expensive primary smartphone being either lost or stolen in another country.
I would argue that if you add 3G/4G and tethering it's no longer a feature phone. The Nokia 215 isn't really a feature phone either, it's a low-end smart phone.
A feature phone that doubles as a 3G hotspot seems like a weird idea. You would add semi-expensive 3G chip, but not use it for the phone is self.
Fair point. What I meant was a phone that does calls and texts the majority of the time (no need for 3G) but has the ability to connect to a 3G (or better) network if needed and can share that connection via some wireless means (wifi, bluetooth).
Perhaps I just mean a mifi device.
I kind of like the option of having a multi-day battery life too.
The phones that I really like seem to never be available in the US. Admittedly, I have a unique taste in phones. I love the idea of a minimal phone OS with a qwerty keypad (or number pad). The new Blackberry Classic looks really nice too, but it's not available in the US and Blackberry has all but abandoned ship in the US market.
Nokia is getting so close to scratching that itch with this phone. I really hope there's a US version with similar specs somewhere up the pipe.
I really want to switch back to a "dumb" phone once my contract is up on my iPhone 5. Im always at a computer or can have my iPad (which I never use anymore) with me in wifi everywhere I go except my car. The only reason to need internet in the car is for gps which convieniently they sell those too and I have one.
I just don't see the need to own a smart phone anymore for myself. If I wasn't at a computer all the time I could justify it but it no long serves a purpose.
I really hope they sell this in the us eventually. I suppose you can still buy an unlocked one and use that however. Just make sure it has the right keyboard and language.
I second that. I use my phone for two things - calling and texting - and I don't feel like I'm missing anything. I'm switching to a small, lightweight "dumbphone" (we got so used to the brick-sized smartphones we forgot how handy the old phones were), that can last a week without charging and has a physical keyboard which - in my opinion - is so much better than a virtual one.
From someone who switched to a smartphone only just last year (April 2014), there are still upsides. I'm almost always by a computer too, but I've found:
- I'm way more able to keep in touch with friends & arrange to meet up. Partly the onscreen keyboard (vs. T9), partly Yelp, partly Maps, partly the variety of messaging apps (half my friends don't use txt anymore)
- I'm actually able to use a cheaper phone plan by leveraging data & wifi (most dumbphones lack wifi)
- for whatever reason, having my email in my pocket has actually resulted in me spending less time looking at my email
I've recently bought an old Blackberry from eBay, and it's a refreshing change to not have the need to check multiple applications on your phone while having idle time and value actual conversation. The physical keyboard is also nice, having come from a fullscreen android phone.
Blackberry Passport (previously Q10) user here. BB10 is not a "minimal phone OS". Maybe this was true for older BBOS phones (don't know, never used one), but BB10 converted me from being a longtime Android user, and I've yet to feel like I'm missing out on anything (it does run Android apps too).
Also, Blackberry sells the Classic unlocked in the US through it's online store[1] and Amazon[2] and you can also get one on contract through US Mobile[3].
Expansys is a good source for acquiring non-US phones that I've used once or twice in the past. A bit expensive at times, but has a wide selection of unlocked phones that carriers in the US don't sell
As this is targeted internationally, they needed to account for some readers being familiar with the US English "flashlight" and some being familiar with UK English "torch". The compromise is a little awkward, but it gets the point across. I imagine local ads and marketing will adopt one or the other.
They probably have to find a non-technical way to make it clear its actually a physical light and not the brand name for some new service\app e.g. spotlight, greenlight, lightroom, lighttable etc.
This phone will come in handy for some of us in Africa. The African phone market is flooded with cheap dual sim chinese phones that "can perform more tasks" than what microsoft hopes to achieve with its phone. But for 29$ they are [the chinese phones] still a rip-off for many. Buggy software applications, short lifespan (3-6 months) and spread viruses like crazy.
I like how this phone includes that it's built to be durable as one of its major features. Phones should be tough. Waterproofing them should be standard. They should not break when dropped from 10+ feet. Their screens should not crack. On top of this, either optional or built-in warranty should include coverage for accidental damage. A phone like that would be worth quite a bit of money.
Another thing about the current generation of smartphones: unlike this Nokia offering, they are not yet "good enough". Chances are, you will replace your phone in 1-2 years, or at least you'll want to. Their speed is still growing very fast, and the demand on the CPU/GPU/RAM is growing very fast too. I can see buying this phone and keeping it for 5+ years: nothing in what it can do will see substantial improvements over that time period. Contrast this with the top of the line smartphones where simple things in 2017 will take 2x the processing power that they do now, because of the improved UI, etc.
Eventually, I think smartphones will settle down. I remember when PC's were getting faster and faster in the late 1990's, early 2000's. It seemed that you could upgrade every year and still not keep up. Eventually they got "good enough" where you can keep the same PC for 5-10 years (except power-users such as programmers, gamers, etc.) I look forward to a day when iPhones and such are a commodity such as this Nokia.
"It should be XXX, YYY, ZZZ". Not everyone shares your need. Some people a careful and want a pretty phone, light, and just awesome to use. Why would they need a heavier phone, with constrained design, and pay extra for an accidental damage coverage (you mentioned that it could be builtin)?
Moreover over these kind of phones exists, it is just that we have choice not to buy them.
I disagree. Show me a waterproof iPhone (IMO the only phone worth considering at the high end of the smartphone market). Lots of people would pay extra to ensure their phone is damage and water proof. For this reason the iPhone case industry is so huge. No, it's not everybody's need to have a durable phone, but I argue that it is the majority's need. The minority who wants fragile phones should switch places with the majority: that way everyone's needs will be satisfied in proportion to the popularity of the need.
> iPhone (IMO the only phone worth considering at the high end of the smartphone market)
Can't tell if blatant troll or not... the only phone worth considering? I went from a Moto X 2013 to an iPhone 6. I'm in the process of returning the 6. I heard everyone talk about the coherence of iOS and how rock solid an OS it is. This thing has crashed more on me, or just stopped passing data traffic via wifi or cellular more times in the last 2 months of ownership than my Moto X did in a year. The camera is outstanding and something I'll truly miss, but I can live without a camera in exchange for a phone that let's me put alerts on silence without being forced to silence my alarm as well...
I had a Lumia 920 that I dropped down three flights of stairs and it still worked with only minor scratches on the plastic and one scratch on the screen. I'm not sure you can do that with any of the Lumia flagships that followed that one though. They caved to the "thinner is better" market, even though the 920 was thinner and lighter than an iPhone with an Otterbox or Lifeproof that a lot of people have.
Looks great, I think I've found my new extra phone.
My backup travel phone is a dual-sim candybar, allowing me to leave my smartphone back at the hotel room while still taking my usual sim with me + a local sim of the country I'm visiting. This gives me a lot of freedom to really roam and still be reachable if I want to be, have some options if there's an emergency, to not really worry about my phone being lost or stolen, and not be tied to a power outlet.
My telephone company let's me have two sim cards which makes this really easy (whichever phone is turned on most recently is the active phone). I leave my spare phone in my car when I'm not traveling.
So here is the deal. If the phone has WiFi and Skype installed, nearly every single household in India will buy this in a heart beat. Plus they can get all those customers on Skype, for free.
I'm currently shopping around for a phone for my father, he doesn't want a smartphone. He needs a simple phone, through which he can make VOIP calls(Skype/Viber etc). Its perfectly alright if the phone doesn't have a camera, or GPS. But for sure it needs to have WiFi connectivity, you should be able to tether, should be rugged and durable and should be cheap.
Internet is taking off big time in India. And people want to make free calls over VOIP all the time. Smartphones are expensive, and aren't exactly very durable and rugged. Plus they get out of fashion very soon. A simple phone, Nokia standard, which you could use as a internet phone over WiFi with apps like Skype, Viber would sell like hotcakes here.
Nope, it doesn't have Wi-Fi, and with 8MB of ram Skype is out of the question. The device with the least amount of ram which ran Skype natively was the PlayStation Portable(and only the Slim model, which came with 64MB of ram instead of 32MB).
So it's a modern stick-phone. I'm actually flabbergasted that MS/Nokia made a non-windows-phone device.
To me, the big question is whether I can tether a tablet to it. A lightweight, convenient dumbphone with a tethered tablet in my backpack might be a nice form-factor.
Ya know it's funny. I used to write about the cell phone industry in the previous decade and this was exactly the vision at one point: a feature phone in your pocket creates a "Personal Area Network" over Bluetooth or similar that provides connectivity to your your watch, computer, etc.
> I'm actually flabbergasted that MS/Nokia made a non-windows-phone device
Why ?
Microsoft has made it crystal clear that they want to be an internet services company. Which means that whatever OS they use isn't that relevant if it means more users of their services.
Opera Mini doesn't render HTML, it renders OBML — essentially a binary serialisation of a device-specific render-tree. The HTML->OBML conversion is done in the cloud.
So I need to pay for data on a severely restricted phone? Why would I do that? I understand the allure of a cheap phone but why should it have internet access? I understand if I can get a data plan specifically tailored for this (as in cheap).
1) 2G does not provide much in the way of usable Internet these days 2) Many countries are working to actively decommission their 2G networks - which is a good thing because the sooner they do this the bands can be re-used for LTE
2G is fine for what this phone can display. Opera renders and reformats data on their server farm, so it's not loading megabytes of Javascript and high resolution images over 2G.
I would replace my old and trusty SonyErricson Naite and SO's cedar with this if only it'd come with WiFi and/or 3G connectivity and that weird but reliable google maps app.
They should be talking about battery life; and battery life with 3G on. They left it at "Exceptional battery life" and "Battery capacity: 1100 mAh"[1], the latter definitely didn't do anything to boost confidence.
This is too much to ask, I agree. But then if I just want a phone to make calls and text then I would buy something even cheaper than this phone.
Hm, this is a bit too full-featured for my tastes. I'm currently on a Nokia 101, and my gripes are few: if only the battery cover would stay on better (current solution: tape), and the build quality was $60 as opposed to the $10-20 currently, it'd be ideal. Other than that, it is perfection. I'm glad this type of thing is still being made, even if the trade-off between the triad [features, price, build quality] isn't exactly where i'd have liked it.
There are plenty in the 60 and up crowd for whom smartphones are confusing things because they obfuscate the entire purpose of owning a cell phone: making calls. My parents both still have clamshell style flip phones because they don't use their phones primarily as an entertainment or computing device, but as actual phones. This kind of phone would be a great halfway point for them: give them the functionality of a smart phone without making their phone confusing.
This brings back fond memories of the Nokia 5310 XpressMusic [1] that I used for two years. The battery lasted a week, and using T9 on that phone was the fastest I've ever typed on a mobile device. It's nice to know that the 215 exists if I ever want to return to those days.
'Europe' availability specified. 2G in UK for some years to come. Might get one on payg and I can listen to my music and take the odd low res pic of funny signs (what I mainly use the camera for).
The new Nokia model numbers keep getting smaller, along with the shrinking feature set and capabilities. They really are aiming for the low end/budget demographic. Although I wonder if the subsidies will help or hurt sales in the low end though. Its got the retro Nokia look which probably helps sales. Since it has only 8MB of RAM, it's no surprise that Microsoft didn't put WinPhone on it.
Commoditized cheap components, and economy of scale.
This phone has 8MB of RAM for example, which not only is a very cheap component to buy, but given the amount of phones Nokia will be producing, it will cost them even less. Same for camera, and every other component. In 2015 some things that used to be very expensive, like multi megapixel cameras, are worth less or more like a few peanuts nowadays if bought in large amounts.
A 2G phone touted as "our most affordable Internet-ready entry-level phone yet". Has Microsoft's "Nokia"/Windows Phone division lost it's mind completely?
I know it's a cheap phone, but then don't market it as an internet device. It's 2015. 3G even in a cheap phone should be standard if you call it an internet-ready device.
This or similar phones from MS, won't change anything. People will still go for android with a similar price range and more screen size. We got two such phones for our office to use on travel sometime back, but they just lie there with no takers. People still use their regular phones with the power backup on the go.
2G connectivity is slow... but I would love super-lite webpages. Like m.mobile; maybe w.watch? This could also use them. Needs less bandwidth, data, CPU, RAM, battery - and clearer because just the text.
If it has an x86 CPU (specs don't say), it could be the world's smallest DOSbox. 8MB RAM is plenty for DOS.
There's no way its x86. This is a classic Nokia phone as from the pre-smartphone era, it must be running a small ARM chip or something. The OS is called "Series 30+"
Nice, I was travelling recently and was looking for something like this.
It's very easy to get a cheap phone, but touch screen phones tend to have worse battery life, and many of the entry-level phones don't have a browser or location services (GPS functionality is a big plus when travelling.
I've been looking at those nokia asha's with keyboard. I think I would enjoy using something like that. I am a fan for sure, however, it is not likely I will abandon my OnePlus soon which also solves my main complaint, that battery dies quickly on 'modern' phones.
> Nokia 215 and Nokia 215 Dual-SIM will be available in select markets
This is not the first modern and cheap phone they have. Yet they are not available to purchase. So yeah, nice news, but not really relevant unless you live in Africa.
(Yes, I know they say Europe this time, but I don't really believe them)
old Nokia phones had a great UI before they added all the 'smartphone'-crap.
I hear you!
Those were the days, when your phone would react instantly to keypresses, and so reliably that you could type and send entire SMS without looking at the screen.
It certainly is targeting Indian market. Names and places in the Ad is Indian. Nokia still resonates with many Indians for its durability and Reliability. With Internet ready, it will for sure strike a chord with indians in low price segment and as back up phone.
I don't know whether the 29$ price tag (even when compared to other similar Nokias already in the market) is all that revolutionary but they certainly have pitched their product perfectly:
"or as a secondary phone for just about anyone... has the same durable build quality you’ve learned to rely on over the years... stand-by time of up to 29 days"
After Microsoft claimed to have banished the 'Nokia' name forever, they now evoking imaging from Nokia's days of glory. Of course, the question now on every Indian's mind is - Can the Nokia 215 hold a candle to the legendary 1100?
Maybe somebody could make a product and make money in this segment but the odds of that somebody being Microsoft are nil. The only context in which this makes sense is keeping this part of the former Nokia alive long enough to sell it.
Right now in Russia you can buy an Android 4.4 smartphone (Beeline Smart 3) with Wifi, GPS and 4 inch screen for $30. Not sure how Microsoft's phone can compete with similarly priced Chinese or Indian smartphones.
Sorry Microsoft, but that era has passed and pie was eaten by Nokia. (Well deserved by Nokia)
Building an affordable phone with Internet access capability is not biggest demand currently.
10 years ago, Nokia discovered what was missing in communication market. A cheap, good looking and everlasting phone. They sold it to literally everywhere in the world. It was like buy one and use forever.
I am not really sure what is the biggest gap in communication market but it is definitely not this. Here are the things i can list which i think the most important ones to focus on.
- Battery life
- Unique and beautiful designs (Phones are getting too similar to each other)
- Durability
- Making phones use cases wider to interact real life scenarios.
Lets see if we are gonna see something original in 2015 otherwise people will as usual wait for iPhone 7, Galaxy S6, and Nexus 10.
Been trying to buy a 3210 as a back-up phone for many years, but even now, I find the form factor to be pretty weird. Just go with the 3210 design, and I'm down for one.
I don't believe this to be something new. My mom had been using this ( very very similar - the OS) from Nokia since 2009. Nokia released many such cellphones in India.
No GPS, but will opera mini run maps at all do we think? Perhaps openstreetmap? I generally know where I am, it's going the right way I have trouble with...
Apparently it doesn't, and this is surprising to me because Nokia's Series 30 platform did support Java apps since around 2003.
But these new "Series 30+" phones are not based on the old Nokia OS any more. Instead they use a completely different feature phone platform licensed from MediaTek, and it doesn't seem to include Java ME at all (probably to save on license costs).
Can you cite a reference for "apparently it doesn't", and for the point that the "new Series 30+ phones are not based on the old Nokia OS any more"?
Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Series_30) calls Series 30+ "a little version upgrade of Series 30 platform" but I have no idea if that's true. If so, it would suggest that Series 30+ would support J2ME: the contrary would be surprising, as you said.
This info comes from poster Abi99, who seems to be a highly regarded member with over 11,000 posts on the official forums:
"The Nokia 220 is — after the Nokia 108 — the second phone from Nokia which uses MediaTek Feature Phone MAUI as operating system, called Nokia Series 30+."
"The new Nokia Series 30+ platform (MediaTek) does not allow to add apps."
This brings back fond memories of the Nokia 5310 XpressMusic [1] that I used for two years. The battery lasted a week, and using T9 on that phone was the fastest I've ever typed on a mobile device. It's nice to know that the 215 exists if I ever want to return to those days.
This brings back fond memories of the Nokia 5310 XpressMusic [1] that I used for two years. The battery lasted a week, and using T9 on that phone was the fastest I've ever typed on a mobile device. It's nice to know that the 215 exists if I ever want to return to those days.
This brings back fond memories of the Nokia 5310 XpressMusic [1] that I used for two years. The battery lasted a week, and using T9 on that phone was the fastest I've ever typed on a mobile device. It's nice to know that the 215 exists if I ever want to return to those days.
Not sure why Nokia keeps coming out with new phones but I like it. Yeah it may be expensive in 2nd / 3rd world countries still but I personally like the no distractions of a dumb phone. If they called a cellphone a tether when they first came out, they are handcuffs now and I like the feeling of breaking free from it all and focusing on other things in life like the people in my life, or self improvement etc...
They chose to ditch it a few months ago in favour of lumia for their windows phones. They still have the rights to use it though, for a couple years i think.
Series 30 and 40 are not Symbian, they're Nokia's in-house operating system (IIRC it was sometimes called Nokia OS by outsiders, but I don't know what the name inside the company was).
Edit: Looks like Series 30+ is not even Nokia OS anymore. It's a completely different OS licensed from MediaTek.
If it had whatsapp, it would have been displayed prominently. I think it is a push for Facebook messenger over whatsapp. A lack of whatsapp could be a deal-breaker, atleast here in India.
"Plus, a built-in torchlight provides convenience, whether it’s late at night or after you’ve turned off the lights. Or, for those who have no access to electricity (in 2014, that’s still almost 20% of the world’s population), the torch is a necessity!"
So how exactly is the Nokia 215 supposed to be charged in the first place?
Applying some imagination, I guess you head to your local internet/phone cafe and charge the thing before heading home, or you or your village have something like this:
some imagination is expected from MS not the poor people without electricity, and without the luxury of imagination. This is a typical example of senseless marketing. If you are targeting the 20% mentioned, i would expect a Solar panel based charger that would charge a battery during the day, and then transfer the stored energy to the phone during the night. Now that's the imagination i would love to see.
The "1 month of battery life" is such bullshit, and I'm surprised so many people, especially on Reddit, believe it without question. Nokia announced a phone like this a year ago, too, and the same happened.
The "2 weeks" of battery life or even 4 weeks thing is at least a decade old. It's nothing new. Old Nokias and Sony Ericsson's used to promise that all the time. The thing is that's just idle time. You're not going to keep your phone in idle that much.
This type of marketing definitely came from the Nokia guys themselves - this "old type of thinking". It reminds me of when laptop makers used to promise "8h of battery life" on their laptops 5 years ago, when their laptops only lasted 2-3h with normal use. They were also thinking idle/almost no usage-time, and being misleading about it in their marketing campaigns.
For most people here, I imagine that phone will last them 3-4 days, which is nothing to scoff at, but it's also not nearly as much as "1 month" of battery life as they imply, and you also lose so much more compared to a smartphone. Yes you get "Internet", but it will also be a pain to use it on that non-touch tiny screen.
The price is also not that special. There have been feature phones costing that much for years. The only difference is now some components have become cheap enough that they can also add some that make having Internet on it a little more usable than before.
People here are aware Firefox launched a $25 Firefox OS smartphone right?
Yeah, I'm going to go ahead and call BS on that too.
Here's the info about standby time you can find for iPhone6:"
"Up to 16 days (384 hours)"
I'm interested in knowing if anyone even got half of that. And if you actually start using your phone it'd go down a lot more (which you probably would want to, since you know... you bought it to have as a phone)
A few weeks ago, after an upgrade to iOS 8, I became unable to connect to wifi on my iPhone 4S and the speed of the OS became pretty bad, after it had been perfectly responsive since I first got it nearly 3 years ago.
Combine this with the fact that my expensive purchased-for-durability phone case, the third in the phone's lifetime, was starting to crack, and I started looking at other phones.
My contract is up in a couple of months. I went to a store and looked at the Samsung Galaxy Note 4 and the iPhone 6.
I found the Note 4 intriguing because I've been occasionally following John Carmack's discussions about the Gear VR (Oculus Rift that connects to the phone) and I thought it was coming out in a consumer version, but it looks like they are still labeling it as a developer kit, which makes me think there must be a reason for that (i.e. it's not really ready for prime time). Also, the phone is just massively huge, and I don't want to buy it, especially since given my way of doing things I'd end up buying some horribly large case on top of it.
Then I looked at the iPhone 6. First of all I do think it's too big in terms of screen size -- though I do like the thickness and weight of it quite a bit. But the base model is 16GB, and getting either a 16GB or a 64GB on contract was $200+ or $375+ respectively. I thought about it and almost broke down and bought a 128GB model outright for over $1000. In the end, I just couldn't justify it.
I think it's time for me to go back to sending SMSs on the telephone keypad. And time for me to stop getting warnings that my damn phone is not backing up (no wifi and me not plugging it in), time for me to stop worrying that the phone will die if I forget to charge it for just one evening, and time for me to stop buying expensive, crappy cases.
I really want this phone. And if I don't get it, I'll probably get something that is just like it.
TL;DR: I'm a fan.