| Author |
Nokia N90 Success in Doubt? |
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
if the n90 is marketed as a camera phone, then it will compete well against w800/k750.
If they push the smartphone aspect, peeps will go well I can get a much smaller 1.3 megapixel smartphone...
However, it will be interesting to see how N90 sales compare to W800/K750.... | |
|
mib1800
Joined: Mar 18, 2004
Posts: > 500
PM |
of course N90 sales would be much lower than K750.
yes, N90 is marketed as multimedia phone and the multimedia capabilities itself far surpassed the K750. And the fact it is 3G would further enhance it further.
To those who find the size of N90 too much, there is still the N70 and N91 or even the 6680/1/2. So Nokia has the high end mostly covered. SE on the other hand is still very lacking in this segment. |
korbindallis
Joined: Jun 18, 2004
Posts: > 500
PM |
 i may be goin off topic hear but did any one check out the cam or the N91 its really horrible
I cant understand the design of the N91 its got connectors form the top and on the side lol
nokia should rethink the design and the cam is useless at least in the one that was given to the press first time around the battery quality also needs a rethink next time around
ok for the N90 nokia should think of the size and battery quality and put a vibratory in it next time around
as for the K750i which I have been using for 3 months now and only think I would like to see is the k750i put in the body of a k600 cause I checked that phone out and its excellent built wise with the latch able back cover and solid feel but for now i just treat my k750 very carefully |
mario2002
Joined: Feb 15, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Jeffrey's-Bay ,South Africa
PM, WWW
|
Please don't confuse yourself buddy. If you think - I will buy the N91 because its capability of taking pictures you are 'a bit' wrong ! Yes the K750i is a camera phone and one will buy it to take pics and make phone calls. It can't really do much als anyway. Not even SE is arguing about this.On the other hand the N91 is a one hand controled pc equivalent ! In other words is in a different liga/class altogether. Think more in terms of the P-series and you may have a horse (albeit a bit old) to ride on ;-) Greetings from South Africa. Mario.
This message was posted from a Nokia 7650 |
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
mario, both you and mib have compared smartphones to a PC. 
I mean seriously, you say K750 can't be compared to a smartphone (fair enough it can't be technically speaking other than camera comparisons), but then you compare a smartphone to a fully fledged computer!!!!
The ONLY THING that a smartphone shares with a computer (and the only reason you can call it a computer) is it's multitasking ability. In terms of gaming, image editing, audio engineering, CAD, desktop publishing, and a whole host of other functions that a desktop computer or laptop computer can perform, smartphones have more in common with non-smartphones.  |
mib1800
Joined: Mar 18, 2004
Posts: > 500
PM |
max:
not sure your point, but a smartphone is a PC albeit a less powerful one.
K750 on the other hand is not, because it cannot do basic things like multitasking and creation of procesess/threads/semaphore/file/background services/process communication/network services etc. A smartphone like Series60 can do all these.
So please get your fact right before trying to put down others.
|
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
mate I'm not putting you down. You cannot compare a computer to any phone in terms of processing power. It's a no brainer.
You are the one who puts people down for their personal opinions about smartphones. You are continually lording it over anyone who dares claim any sort of comparison on any grounds between non-smartphones and smartphones.
So if you are going to be that way, then I will be just as pedantic. A computer and a smartphone are light years apart, and share ONLY a very basic operating system and hardware methodology, in all other respects they are completely different beasts.
I agree, a smartphone is a mini-computer of sorts, but to compare it to a desktop or laptop computer is just arrogance. The processing power of a computer is so far advanced compared to smartphones that it can be considered not just quantitatively different, but qualitatively different as well.
I have NEVER not even ONCE claimed that a K750 can multitask, not once mate. I have never claimed that a K750 is as good a platform for applications as smartphones, NOT ONCE. I have only ever compared non-smartphones to smartphones in terms of market saturation and user preferences.
That's what you can't grasp, that most user's don't care if it is a smartphone or not. Well that's the way of it buddy, I haven't seen a single phone advertisement for mid range Nokia s60 phones that even starts to mention the fact that it is a smartphone - proving that no one cares.
It is only the high end "PDA" phones that have appeal as a smartphone in the general market, and then only because owners can read their word documents and collect their email and browse the web. Well news mate, two of those options, are available on non-smartphones.
People like you, who like to tweak and install stuff and have shitloads of apps running in the background, are few and far between. Most of us are happy to do our tweaking on a real computer, leaving our phones for basic mobility needs (phone calls, camera, internet, email, mp3 playing).
[ This Message was edited by: max_wedge on 2005-08-23 11:08 ] |
mib1800
Joined: Mar 18, 2004
Posts: > 500
PM |
max:
what is wrong in using PC as an ANALOGY of smartphone!!?
Their core O/S concept is the same. there is more similarity between a smartphone and a PC than between a smart and non-smartphone. But you're disputing this fact.
like i said before, majority of users like you would not care or know how to exploit the full potential of a smartphone. hence you dont see a need for it. I have concurred with you on this. but there are the minority (actual numbers is substantial) who would want something more than a "dumb" phone like K750.
Of course Nokia don't specifically market the smartphone just as a smartphone just like Apple would not market the Mac as just a mere "computer".
|
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
my problem with the pc/smartphone analogy is not with the practical comparison of os or processor methodologies. What I'm saying is that the massive processing power of a PC (or MAC or Linux) is so far advanced compared to a smartphone that it's like comparing a ferrari to a 50cc vespa. Both use an internal combustion engine, and on the road they are "roughly" comparable in their ability to get from one place to another, but on the track they can not be compared at all.
Likewise, a smartphone can be compared to a non-smartphone, in the sense that "on the road" (in general use) are roughly comparable, but "on the track" (power user use) they are not comparable at all.
Otherwise mate, I agree with everything you just said BTW, I know full well what a smartphone can do and how to exploit it. Because of the processing power I need in my PC, there is no point in me using a smartphone. When I need a portable "computer", then unfortunantly only a laptop is powerful enough or useful enough for the tasks I use a computer for. That is the core reason that for me computers and smartphones are not comparable, even though I understand and accept their technical comparability
All I need a phone for (until they can do what my laptop does) is calls/sms, camera, mp3 player/radio, email, occasional browsing (btw operamini works a treat) and that's it. I can do all that with the K750 in a nice small form factor.
|
goldenface
Joined: Dec 17, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Liverpool City Centre
PM |
So what is it about the N90 that makes it special? The analysis in the 1st post reckons it may have to rely heavily on the brand name.
This message was posted from a S700 |
mib1800
Joined: Mar 18, 2004
Posts: > 500
PM |
max:
(1) Processing Power
PC<->Smartphone : PC
Smartphone<->Non-Smart : Smartphone
(2) Functionalities
PC <-> Smartphone : PC
Smartphone<->Non-Smart : Smartphone
(3) Computing Technology (install prog, O/S, processes etc)
PC<->Smartphone : Similar
Smartphone<->Non-Smart : Smartphone.
(4) Basic Telephony (make calls, sms, take picture)
PC<->Smartphone : Smartphone
Smartphone<->Non Smart : Similar
(5) Mobility
PC<->Smartphone : Smartphone
Smartphone<->Non Smart : Similar (Smartphone slightly bigger)
Am I right in my assessment for the above 5 points? As you can see a smartphone does come out on top.
Your statement that you would only consider smartphone if the computing power equal to your Pentium xxGHz. That is YOU ONLY. For others, having a certain subset of their desktop computing power in their phone is more desirable (and much more practical) than lugging along a laptop everywhere you go.
Another thing is that you always associate functionalities of a smartphone to what a PC can provide. This is not entirely correct. There are many new applications which we have not seen on the PC being developed for smartphone. These apps exploit the telephony (WAN + wireless) and the mobility of smartphone.
So all I am saying is that a smartphone is not just about camera + telephony like K750. Many consumers are discovering the power and flexibility of smartphone. This is evident in the growth of smartphone sales in the chart I provided in previous (even if you dispute Nokia's figures).
Basically consumers based their buying on trend. 3G phones sales now make up something like 5% of all phones. Do all those who bought 3G really know or use 3G? Many bought just because they dont want to have the feeling of being "left behind" if they did not. Similarly for smartphone. The first step is knowing its existence. Second is that once you got hold of phone, you will start discovering the capabilities. Then you tell your friends and so on.
So the anti-smartphone fans point that consumers will only buy a gadget if and only if they truly understood everything that it can do, then we would see the industry at a standstill.
So if a consumer is confronted with a choice of a 3G+smartphone (N90/70/91) and the K750 that is neither, well ....
[ This Message was edited by: mib1800 on 2005-08-25 05:15 ]
[ This Message was edited by: mib1800 on 2005-08-25 05:27 ] |
Gigs
Joined: Jan 19, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: The planet Snibertron!
PM, WWW
|
... well then it will come down to what they want.
Despite what gets argued every time, don't we look at phone shops for.. *gasp* a phone?
One telecommunications body commented here recently "Everybodys always talking about the killer application for the phone, well that application is voice"
I actually happen to agree with that, smartphone or not, people will then choose on what phone they like and meets their BASIC needs. Not their high end needs but the basic fact of storing numbers, texting, and calling people.
Anything more is just candy.
While your sided comparison chart would give it to the smartphones its also pretty inaccurate in that it comes down to the customers wants. The phone doesn't dictate that, the customer does.
I'd almost consistantly bet that if you take a group of people, remove all the ones that know the word esato and any that are geeks/gadgetheads and are left with "joe public" that they're not going to give a toss if you can install a web browser as well as an application to monitor biorythm as they are with how it looks, how quickly they get used to it and does it call people oh and cost.
I'd also bet Joe Public out numbers us by alot.
Saying that joe public is more and more wanting smart phones because nokia's figures are up is a little misleading isn't it? How many of nokia's phones released this year aren't smart phones?
Heck by the same token "most  user's do not wish to own a smart phone as their non smart phone sales are consistantly high"
If you think the majority of people buying both smart and non smart phones buy a phone because they know all of its functions, then I think you're in for one heck of a surprise mib.
Lets face it, Nokia is known for mass producing smartphones. This doesn't mean that every member of the public wants one, it means that those buying nokias will more often than not get one. It'd be interesting to see an independant poll of nokia customers to see just how many exploit the smart side of their phone.
Don't these smart phone / non smart phone comparisons end up going in the same circles with the same posters?
|
mib1800
Joined: Mar 18, 2004
Posts: > 500
PM |
Gigs:
Quote:
| One telecommunications body commented here recently "Everybodys always talking about the killer application for the phone, well that application is voice" |
|
True. In a big part of the world, many people are just starting to use a cell phone. But in mature market like Europe and Japan, do people ONLY just want voice?
Quote:
|
I'd almost consistantly bet that if you take a group of people, remove all the ones that know the word esato and any that are geeks/gadgetheads and are left with "joe public" that they're not going to give a toss if you can install a web browser as well as an application to monitor biorythm as they are with how it looks, how quickly they get used to it and does it call people oh and cost.
|
|
I have said this same thing many times. Now the question is what is the percentage of those who are non-Joe Public? 5%? 10%? 15%?. Even at 5% we are talking about 35 million per year. How many phones does SE sell a year?
Quote:
|
Saying that joe public is more and more wanting smart phones because nokia's figures are up is a little misleading isn't it? How many of nokia's phones released this year aren't smart phones?
|
|
this is not what I'm saying. I am saying the proportion of Joe Public will drop in a mature market when more new technology is introduce like 3G and add-on services. Well, 10% of Nokia's are smartphones.
Quote:
|
Heck by the same token "most user's do not wish to own a smart phone as their non smart phone sales are consistantly high"
|
|
well that's because less than 2% of SE phones sold are smartphone Could this fact contribute to SE fans vehement rejection of smartphone?
Quote:
|
If you think the majority of people buying both smart and non smart phones buy a phone because they know all of its functions, then I think you're in for one heck of a surprise mib.
|
|
didnt I say if this happens the industry will come to a standstill
So most people do not know what they need. If you dont know, then get everything. So a smartphone would have big advantage because so many functions can be thrown in compared to a non-smart.
[ This Message was edited by: mib1800 on 2005-08-25 11:35 ]
[ This Message was edited by: mib1800 on 2005-08-25 11:36 ] |
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
mib
"Your statement that you would only consider smartphone if the computing power equal to your Pentium xxGHz. That is YOU ONLY. For others, having a certain subset of their desktop computing power in their phone is more desirable (and much more practical) than lugging along a laptop everywhere you go. "
Agree. I don't actualy need a computer other than for the things a computer does that a smartphone doesn't. It's as simple as that. I don't actually care what other peeps want and how they want it. But you keep jumping in and taking great offence whenever anyone tries to claim that a non-smartphone is just as useful (for their needs) as a smartphone.
"Another thing is that you always associate functionalities of a smartphone to what a PC can provide. This is not entirely correct. There are many new applications which we have not seen on the PC being developed for smartphone"
Crap. 3D gaming on full screen? 3D Computer Assisted Design? Image processing aka Photoshop? Audio Engineering? It's gonna be a long time before smartphones can do that shit well I'm not talking about mobile or network applications. My mobile/networking needs are served perfectly by my K750, and so are many other peoples.
"Many consumers are discovering the power and flexibility of smartphone. This is evident in the growth of smartphone sales in the chart I provided in previous (even if you dispute Nokia's figures). "
More and more Nokia handsets are smartphones, so of course smartphones will appear to be more popular, but it doesn't mean peeps are buying them BECAUSE they are smartphones. However I agree that as time goes by, smartphones will probably become more useful as networks realise that they can value add their services better on smartphone platforms. That time is coming. And Nokia will help this come about by converting their range to smartphones.
"So if a consumer is confronted with a choice of a 3G+smartphone (N90/70/91) and the K750 that is neither, well .... "
Because the market is still not geared to exploit the smartphone platform, peeps will see no advantage in a phone that is bulky or expensive compared to non-smartphones. Again, this time will come...
AT THIS STAGE of the mobile phone game, the smartphone platform is still not much more useful to THE GENERAL CONSUMER than a non-smartphone.
I have never dissed your personal choice, in fact as I have said before, I respect the fact that you and people like you are there pushing the boundaries. You are helping bring the day closer when smartphones are so common that they are no longer bulky expensive options for a mobile handset. What I can't understand, is why you seem to think that it has to be either smartphones or not. Why can't the majority of us be happy with our very useful cheap small convergence devices until smartphones are smaller and services/apps for them are more inline with what we expect from our computer?
Why do you always take offence when people DARE to compare a smartphone to a non-smartphone? The only reason I brought the computer analogy into the argument, is because you keep dissing my choice of technology. I've studied, built and used computers for 20 years. It is laughable to me to compare them to a phone. I wouldn't have mentioned it but for you consistantly dumping on peoples choices as if they were somehow deficient because they couldn't see the advantage of smartphones. I can't remember a single person who has said that non-smartphones are more technicaly competent than smartphones, yet you always seem to construe peeps statements as if that is what they are saying. You think being a smartphone alone is enough to make a phone better than any other compared phone, despite user preferences, features, hardware or any other relevant factor that a person feels makes their phone better than a smartphone FOR THEIR NEEDS.
In terms of the N90, the K750 has some very real advantages, yet you take that statement as some great offence. Why can't you just accept that in some ways the K750 is better than the N90? Not in all ways, just in some ways that matter to a lot of people on this thread? |
mib1800
Joined: Mar 18, 2004
Posts: > 500
PM |
max:
very interesting indeed your response.
Quote:
|
But you keep jumping in and taking great offence whenever anyone tries to claim that a non-smartphone is just as useful (for their needs) as a smartphone.
|
|
I am taking offence? Are you sure? I am just responding (as a Nokia fan would) to those SE fans who dissed the N90 because the size and camera is slightly worse than K750. Unfortunately, it seems that many here just cannot accept the fact that N90 can be better than K750 in other aspects (such as smartphone capability). So what do you (i'm speaking in general terms here) do if you cannot accept this fact than N90 is better? As expected, the response were:- "nobody needs smartphone capability"
Like you say a non-smart can be useful to some. Likewise a "slightly worse size and camera" N90 can also be useful to others. Follow-on from this is that if you criticise other's choice, expect the same to come your way.
Quote:
|
You think being a smartphone alone is enough to make a phone better than any other compared phone, despite user preferences, features, hardware or any other relevant factor that a person feels makes their phone better than a smartphone FOR THEIR NEEDS. |
|
Nope. I didnt said (or think) this. What I said was, smartphone is more desirable for those who want to do more with the phone than making calls and taking picture. And the market is growing rapidly for this convergence device.
You keep using smartphone like it is something out of the ordinary. In fact, it is just like any other phone. To those less tech-inert joe public it is just: "ah! this phone can install program", "ah! this phone can read Office doc", "ah! this phone has a full web browser".
Does smart have any advantage over a non-smart when selling to ave Joe Public? NO!!.
Does smart have any advantage over non-smart when selling to a IT professional? YES!!
Does smart have any advantage over non-smart when selling to a matured 3G-enabled market? YES!!
Personally I think K750 is a good phone and it should do very well but it is not my cup of tea. I would only take offence if someone tries push tea to me saying it is the best drink in the world but in fact I'm a coffee drinker. | |
|
Access the forum with a mobile phone via esato.mobi
|
Posted: 2005-08-22 05:19
