Welcome to Esato.com



News Articles:

Related

Technical details:
• Ericsson R380
• Ericsson R520
• Ericsson R600
• Ericsson T29s
• Ericsson T39
• Ericsson T60d
• Sony Xperia A
• Sony Xperia Acro S
• Sony Xperia Advance
• Sony Xperia C
• Sony Xperia E
• Sony Xperia E Dual
• Sony Xperia E1
• Sony Xperia E1 Dual
• Sony Xperia Ion LT28at
• Sony Xperia J
• Sony Xperia L
• Sony Xperia M2
• Sony Xperia Miro
• Sony Xperia Neo L
• Sony Xperia P
• Sony Xperia S
• Sony Xperia SL
• Sony Xperia Sola
• Sony Xperia SP
• Sony Xperia SX
• Sony Xperia T
• Sony Xperia T2 Ultra
• Sony Xperia Tipo
• Sony Xperia Tipo Dual
• Sony Xperia TL
• Sony Xperia TX
• Sony Xperia U
• Sony Xperia V
• Sony Xperia VL
• Sony Xperia X Performance
• Sony Xperia Z
• Sony Xperia Z Ultra
• Sony Xperia Z1
• Sony Xperia Z1 Compact
• Sony Xperia Z2
• Sony Xperia Z3
• Sony Xperia Z3 Compact
• Sony Xperia ZL
• Sony Xperia ZQ
• Sony Xperia ZR
• Sony Ericsson Xperia Active
• Sony Ericsson Xperia Arc
• Sony Ericsson Xperia Neo
• Sony Ericsson Xperia Neo V
• Sony Ericsson Xperia Play
• Sony Ericsson Xperia Pro
• Sony Ericsson Xperia Pureness
• Sony Ericsson Xperia Ray
• Sony Ericsson Xperia X10
• Sony Ericsson Xperia X10 Mini
• Sony Ericsson Xperia X10 Mini Pro
• Sony Ericsson Xperia X2
• Sony Ericsson Xperia X8

Sony Ericsson Xperia Pureness Unboxing Pictures & Review


Click to view updated thread with images




Posted by Plemix.com
Mobile phone manufacturers seem to be getting more aggressive in exploring virgin land that telecommunication technology has yet to reach. After LG’s bold wristwatch, Sony Ericsson joins the adventure and launches Pureness X5 under the royal name of Xperia. Having an incredibly short specs list, Pureness X5 clearly ain’t targeting at the tech-savvy. Instead, it favors the gallery and art museum goers because it looks like a modern experimental avant-garde exhibit.

Along with the artsy phone in the package are a velvety pouch, a charger, a handsfree headset, a data cable, a novelty Bluetooth earphone IS800 and a user’s guide.


The design of the phone is everything but conventional. The underwhelming 1.8-inch monochrome TFT is made up for by the crystalline scratch-proof finish that bears the gracious quality that the autonym Pureness suggests. It juxtaposes serenity and vogue in one entity. On top of that, the phone is small, feather-light and pocket-friendly. You know that is a money making body at very first glance.


The terrace of keys is are very tactile and give very responsive clicking feedback.


I like how the SIM card slot is placed on the side of the phone instead of hidden in the battery compartment because for Pureness, you can’t access the battery compartment. Changing the battery is not a DIY job.


The square buttons you see here is the volume rocker. You have each on either side and you also find the data transfer portal here on the left side.


The back looks kind of ponderous to me and it takes away some of the sleekness that the front impresses us with. You find the power button here at the back as well which is another unconventional choice.


You can envisage the how the “pure” screen would work under broad daylight, but it will be the showstopper at any night-outs. You’ve got 88MB of phone memory and 2GB of media memory, but no extended memory by any form.


You can play audio and video with the phone. With the 3G connectivity, you can also surf the net. Of course you have to do it on a somehow white-washed display (but it’s CHIC!)


The phone comes with a wireless around-the-neck IS800 Bluetooth earphone to match its extravagance. It’s all about being a piece of (consumer) art.


Looking at the price tag, you have quite a good idea of how is the phone positioned. Its prestigious and Xperia after-sale service and Pureness Concierge Service is a proof of privilege. The phone is not everyone’s cup of tea. But you just know there will be people falling for it. A fashion forward design with extremely tailored functions- I already see blood on the floor from all the artsy fashion victims!
[ This Message was edited by: tranced on 2009-12-22 12:04 ]



Posted by mode
It's a stunning beauty! Not in a conventional way though, just to those with too much money and those who's in the design industry. Unfortunately I belong to the 2nd category with not enough motivation (or some refer to it as money heheh) at my disposal
[ This Message was edited by: mode on 2009-12-22 09:09 ]


Posted by Dups!
This phone does look good I must say. Sexy and classy!

I am now really tempted after seeing these 'complete' pictures of it and this wonderful mini-review.

Great job Plemix!

Posted by ryuriel
Great new phone!thumbs up for this one...

Posted by anonymuser
Thumbs down for me - I just don't see it. I'm guessing there's supposed to be some universally recognisable classiness to the design, but to me it just looks a bit industrial, a bit cheap, and very boring. On the one hand it's supposed to be "sleek" and has a built-in battery presumably to avoid the need for an unsightly battery door, but then on the other hand - as a direct result - it has a flimsy SIM flap on the side that looks like it will fall open or even fall off at the first opportunity.

The screen, meanwhile, would have been impressive and clever ten years ago - but these days, married to a modern-day phone and a modern-day phone user, it's just impractical and more than a little silly. A novelty that's bound to wear VERY thin VERY quickly.

Again, if it was genuinely all wrapped up in a sleek SE-signature design that maybe said something about the brand I'd understand it - but IMHO it really misses the mark there. And if a style-over-substance phone like this can't even get the style right, it's really got nothing.

Posted by thesun
see-through screen is cool, but not on a phone where you might spent most of your time with.
and i i believe, my t610i look is better than this phone.

the way i see this phone is same like Nokia 7280,
the design is unique, but out of 1000 people on the street, chances you find one using it is slim..



Posted by phonecrzy
I like the phone but I would not pay £600 for it. BUT ITS SOOOO NICE, but stresfull if you depend on your phones screen

Posted by Bonovox
Do know fashion or what? That is one ugly phone

Posted by Geframa
This phone looks UGLY for me.......

This is the first i don't like.

Posted by mallaccra
it looks like a parfum bottle and its box

Posted by se_dude
As plemix pointed out. Its a phone for the guys who want to keep apart. If you carry this phone around you are sure to get stares. Something which people in the industry are ready to pay for. Its a piece of art which no other has accomplished before.

@boinng- Dude. 10 years ago? Are you joking here? This isnt a circus and you get no brownie points by playing the fool here. Those of you who are commenting on the looks without even having a hands on experience are being too extravagant. there are things which do not catch the eye unless you see them in person. ALL reviewers who did a hands on praised the phone.

Posted by julias
Stands out from the crowd that's for sure and for that reason alone i love it



Posted by Bonovox
Yeah stands out in the crowd for being ugly That keypad is horrible hardly what i would call good looking or fashionable. Looks square & boxy its simply awful. Much prefer my c902 for looking smart Them headphones look big can imagine them poking out your ears even managing to clear wax
[ This Message was edited by: Bonovox on 2009-12-22 14:22 ]


Posted by anonymuser

On 2009-12-22 15:03:16, se_dude wrote:
@boinng- Dude. 10 years ago? Are you joking here? This isnt a circus and you get no brownie points by playing the fool here.


No fooling, just sense. 10 years ago, all phones had small, black and white screens. Amongst those, the screen of the "Pureness" would be innovative, eyecatching, technically impressive, and - crucially - perfectly suited to the monochromatic job at hand. I can't help wondering whether that's when this concept was first born - somewhere in an Ericsson lab perhaps. Maybe there's even a prototype out there somewhere, dated 1999.

Fast forward ten years, where mobile browsing, video, picture messaging (and taking) is not only commonplace but a day-to-day requirement for the majority of phone users (particularly the wealthier users this is aimed at), and suddenly it's a quaint novelty whose time is long past. A bit like making a new phone with no 3G or GPRS hardware but a really fast CSD connection - pointless and out of date.
[ This Message was edited by: Boinng on 2009-12-22 14:34 ]


Posted by Bonovox
The battery life will be good though with no colour screen

Posted by Dups!
@Boinng

Usually, no, make that most of the times I tend to agree with you but recently all you do is just bash SE for the sake of it.

What happened to your good criticism? Fair enough, looks of a particular product won't appeal to everyone but some of the things you write are really silly and unlike you.

Don't get me wrong, I still think SE are screwing up more than any other manufacturer and they are (to me at least) going to be extinct if they carry on like this but this phone is/was intended to be a 'simple' phone that does a basic job of a phone with no frills and thrills and that's exactly what it is.

The transparent screen is a novelty in cellphones no matter how you look at it and this will appeal to some people.

To me, like others, it looks good enough to buy for its simplicity. I may just buy it seeing that I always use one 'dumb' phone plus a 'smart' one and in my engagements I often need a camera-less phone.



Posted by mode
Art geniuses usually get posthumous recognition simply because the masses don't understand them in their lifetime. Some who actually do, give them the value they deserve while they are living. I see the same thing happening here. Most who criticize without having the slightest knowledge in design don't even see the values of balance, proportion, contrast, repetition, trend, styling in this device. And furthermore, blatantly disregarding their pioneering effort simply to feed on their lust to condemn. It's an effort nevertheless if you can't see it as a successful one. It has 'exclusivity' written all over it so excuse SE for not tickling your fancy. The 'concierge' concept is groundbreaking if you ask me, A+ on the effort, A on design. I'd buy it in a heartbeat if I had the means for it
[ This Message was edited by: mode on 2009-12-25 05:39 ]


Posted by gregpot2000
Sorry but I really can't see the appeal of this...yet ok its supposed to be a fashion phone etc.

But we are living in 2009, who would really pay £600 for a phone with a black and white screen and extremely basic features?

I have a Satio, and think it's great that I can carry a Music player, Camera, Sat Nav and Internet Browser, And Video player all in my pocket in one box, I paid £400 for my Satio which may sound expensive, but when you consider how it enhances my life, and makes things easier for me it is worth it.
But to spend £600 on a phone that doesnt do any of these things, I cant see why you would want to, It is more suited to buying for my mum or someone for £20, as she would just want basic features, but that price is outrageous.

Posted by mode
People still seem to dwell within the mindset that this phone is for everyone. Pffh... It's for filthy rich people and people who can appreciate its aesthetics (translation: NOT YOU)

Posted by anonymuser

On 2009-12-22 16:45:30, Dups! wrote:
@Boinng

Usually, no, make that most of the times I tend to agree with you but recently all you do is just bash SE for the sake of it.


Honestly, and truthfully, I tell it how it seems to me, no more no less. You're welcome to disagree with me, but if it seems like I'm "bashing" SE it's because they keep on dissapointing me, no other reason than that. The "Pureness" is, IMHO, a misguided attempt at a design statement that just doesn't work, and more importantly does nothing for the brand as a whole - as such it's an expensive distraction from the hard work that SE really needs to do in bringing the rest of its range up to 2010 standards. Look at the delays on the X2, the bodged release of the Satio, the punting of the X10 off into the new year, and then tell me that the "Pureness" was a worthwhile project for SE's design and R&D teams to take on right now...

What happened to your good criticism? Fair enough, looks of a particular product won't appeal to everyone but some of the things you write are really silly and unlike you.


Sure the looks are subjective and I've never implied that my opinion of those looks will be shared by everyone. I do fundamentally disagree with the supposed "concept" of this phone as a talk and text-only device in the year 2009 - I think it's completely underestimating how essential features like media and web browsing are in the here and now, and I don't believe the novelty value of the screen will overcome that. When I say this phone would have done well in 1999, I mean it, because that's where this concept (and screen technology) belongs IMHO.

It's worth noting that the same "exclusive" translucent LCD effect is also utilised by countless tacky calculators and alarm clocks to be found in pound shops everywhere, often to much more readable effect.
[ This Message was edited by: Boinng on 2009-12-22 16:25 ]


Posted by Bonovox
I cannot understand how this costs so much what is so expensive about it except that see through screen. wasting money hardly anyone will buy it & only people with more money than sense
[ This Message was edited by: Bonovox on 2009-12-22 16:38 ]


Posted by mode
@Boinng
You're criticizing in ignorance if you're thinking it doesn't support media (particularly video playback) and web browsing. The experience may be modest, but the bare essentials are nevertheless there

@Bonovox
You absolutely nailed it with your last point. You seem to understand the strategy despite claiming that you don't
[ This Message was edited by: mode on 2009-12-22 16:39 ]


Posted by Bonovox
Well I do understand what target market its for cos Nokia do the same with 8800 range. But I can't see many people buying this even if they want a basic phone cos its not only expensive for a basic phone but even I think people with money will go for something more flashy that can do more & has a colour screen.

Posted by anonymuser

On 2009-12-22 17:28:19, mode wrote:
@Boinng
You're criticizing in ignorance if you're thinking it doesn't support media (particularly video playback) and web browsing. The experience may be modest, but the bare essentials are nevertheless there


But in truth it doesn't support them - they're possible, because underneath the "concept" it's just the same old A200 platform in an otherwise unremarkable form factor, but they stink, because the hardware design doesn't really support what the software is trying to do. The "xperiance" is notably poor, second rate, sub-standard by anyone's reckoning. Was that really the intended aim of this £600 phone?

What most irks me about it is the fact that the "concept" and the hardware design are so clearly two different things - not married together at all. Which came first do you think, the idea of a retro-phone that concentrates on talk and text, or the "zany" idea of a translucent display that's not really that readable even for text, let alone media? If it was genuinely about the former, why not go for an e-ink display that really would have been unique, and actually offered a real advantage to the dedicated texter? Did the "concept" demand an LCD display with the reflective backing removed, or was that just the unit price?

Posted by mode
@Boinng
It does say in Plemix's review that it plays audio and video, can't be bothered to quote though since i'm too lazy to reply this on my notebook. And I have seen an image of the netfront browser being used on its screen, very cool actually. It's an evening phone obviously. But I do somewhat agree with you that the 'concept' seems to be a bit of an afterthought which had been nagging me subconciously. But at the end of the day I do love what came out of it
[ This Message was edited by: mode on 2009-12-22 17:08 ]


Posted by goldenface
That's how much a concierge costs these days? Could I ring up for fish n chips? :)

This message was posted from a C905


Posted by Dups!
@Boinng

What's your take on Vertu or the Motorola swivel phone (forgot its name) that costs just over £1000?

Other than the materials what is so special about them?

You say the translucent screen has been used in calculators but has it been used in any phone? That's what sets this phone apart from any phone out there and that's what the rich or well off people will be buying into on top of the no fuss, non smartphone A200 os. That is also what SE is aiming at, the exclusivity label attached to this phone.

It may seem fickle but those that buy it will not think so.

I think it looks beautiful, but then, that just me.

Posted by mode

On 2009-12-22 18:06:28, goldenface wrote:
That's how much a concierge costs these days? Could I ring up for fish n chips?


This message was posted from a C905


Actually, from what I know, yes you can

Posted by carkitter
Boinng was right; this phone failed as an effective fashion statement.
The design probably would have worked better had it been taller, thinner and wider like a modern smartphone. Considering the lack of features inside, there was no obvious reason for the phone to have such brick-like proportions. The most obvious omission in my view is a touchpad. Those hideous keys look like the remnants of a 1980's Alfa Romeo dashboard and the type face is standard SE font - it should have been a custom font or better still, a user selectable one. This phone really shows no discernible trace of value for its ₤600 price.


Click to view updated thread with images


© Esato.com - From the Esato mobile phone discussion forum