| Author |
Good old discussions.. they are gone :( |
tranced
Joined: Jan 19, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: Santo Domingo, wonDeRland
PM |
You know, frequencies is a thing to talk about. There are a lot of phones who lack quadband, specially in 3g mode. See my p990. It's an UMTS phone, but only in the 2100 frequency, which is not available here in DR but edge.
When i said that battery wasnt a thing to discuss i meant that things like camera sensors, audio/video formats supported, gps, wifi, etc are the things that we usually talk about these days.
Most of the forums members are from children, teens and young adults to adults and full grown up adults. The majority is children and teens that spend more time at home and have the possibility to keep their phones charged.
Maybe am wrong in the last part though.
|
|
|
QVGA
Joined: May 23, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: Pakistan
PM, WWW
|
10 years later we'll talk about the good ol days when people talked about mega pixels and the number of colors the screen supports, ah the simple times!
|
Sammy_boy
Joined: Mar 31, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Staffordshire, United Kingdom
PM, WWW
|
I agree about the battery issue, it seems mobile phones have moved on in leaps and bounds but apart from widespread use of Li-Ion technology, battery technology hasn't moved on much so I'd say it is still worthy of discussion. My old N95 couldn't go a day without a charge if I used it even moderately. I miss the days of going a week between charges!
It is a shame some of these old topics for discussion aren't talked about more as they're still relevant. Reception quality still is an issue - not for making calls but 3G/HSDPA reception for using the mobile internet, and size I guess is as some phones/'multimedia computers' seem to be becoming dirty great bricks, not much smaller than those of the late '90s (though of course much better functionality wise  ).
People do seem a little obsessed with camera megapixels (Which annoys me as megapixel count is NOT linked to image quality) or what version of the Walkman player a phone has. These are perhaps important in their own right, but how good are they if you can only take a few pictures or listen to a few tracks before you get the low battery warning, or you can't blog/upload your latest pic to Facebook without it taking ages because you can't get an HSDPA signal?
"All it takes for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing" - Edmund Burke
|
djin
Joined: Jun 13, 2007
Posts: > 500
PM |
well from what i observe, battery is still discussed, and is very important to me...
Xperia T + N 96 R.I.P Desire  |
Aivar
Joined: Jan 14, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Estonia
PM |
But what about the shape / design of mobile phone. Are you used to this nowadays similar shape? I mean, almost all phones look like a (small) brick. In my opinion the title "Best shape mobile phones ever have had" belongs to T68. It's very beautiful!
I really hope that one day SE will decide to release one new mobile phone based on the look of elegant Ericsson T68 / Sony Ericsson T68i. |
Aivar
Joined: Jan 14, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Estonia
PM |
So, nobody is interested in elegant design and shape of mobile phone anymore? Am I the only one?
|
Tsepz_GP
Joined: Dec 27, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: Johannesburg, South Africa
PM |
Personaly im very happy with the shape of my N81. Yes it weighs 140g and is 17.9mm thick but it feels great in my hand, love the way it looks and on top of all that its a highly functional multimedia smartphone so that makes up for it being a "brick".
If you want a phone the size of a T68 look at the lower end models like the T303 and T280 lol, i doubt we'll ever see a T68 type phone again.
Phone: Apple iPhone 17 Pro Max Silver
Tablet: Apple iPad Pro 11” Space Grey
Previously owned SEs: W800,W900,W880,K850 & Xperia X10 |
QVGA
Joined: May 23, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: Pakistan
PM, WWW
|
On 2008-12-16 09:38:39, Aivar wrote:
I really hope that one day SE will decide to release one new mobile phone based on the look of elegant Ericsson T68 / Sony Ericsson T68i.
it clearly seems as if you really want someone here to agree with that. sadly i really think T68 is quite ugly. the nokia 8xxx series phone of the same era were much more exclusive looking.
and you couldnt be more wrong about the designs of current phones. They are all good and unique in their own respective ways and they DONT look alike. N96 doesnt look like a N97 now does it? C905 doesnt look like a U900 does it?
T68 was a 20mm thick phone, thats what i call a brick!
_________________
HBH-DS970
[ This Message was edited by: QVGA on 2008-12-18 12:24 ] |
Aivar
Joined: Jan 14, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Estonia
PM |
I talk about the elegant curves of T68. Nowadays almost all phones are like blocks. The curves of T68 are unique!
Yes, the T68i is ca 20 mm thick. But it's quite small at the same time and weight is only 84 grams. Meny new phones are really thin, but more wide and "long".
Anyway, one block phone i still miss is Ericsson T66m. Really small phone and only 66 grams!
|
marty mcfly
Joined: May 20, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: England
PM |
On 2008-12-18 13:22:43, QVGA wrote:
N96 doesnt look like a N97 now does it? C905 doesnt look like a U900 does it?
But why use them as a comparison? That's a bit like me saying my car doesn't look much like a tree.
Here's a quick sample of how 'original' design is nowadays. I'm sure the general public would have no problem telling these apart at a glance  :
_________________
My Flickr Pics! Check them out! They're great, honest!
[ This Message was edited by: marty mcfly on 2008-12-18 13:43 ]
[ This Message was edited by: marty mcfly on 2008-12-18 14:05 ] |
Aivar
Joined: Jan 14, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Estonia
PM |
Thank, Marty_mcfly.
But in my opinion are those phones pretty same about the look. Sure, some are sliders or clam shell and some not. But still like blocks. That's what I am talking about. No elegant shapes / curves anymore (like T68i has).
Sure the taste is different. But it's weird that almost all phones are like blocks. Why not to have more elegan shapes? Just a bit more phones with different look.
[ This Message was edited by: Aivar on 2008-12-18 13:58 ] |
marty mcfly
Joined: May 20, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: England
PM |
I was being sarcastic...I think they all look the same too!
|
Aivar
Joined: Jan 14, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Estonia
PM |
Thanks.. Silly me  |
QVGA
Joined: May 23, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: Pakistan
PM, WWW
|
So you want feature rich phones today to weigh 80g and be as small as a T68? I'm sorry but technology has really moved on and its quite difficult to pack that much into a tiny phone.
And while its your opinion, you forget the millions of people who prefer whatever it is that is being offered today. Most people would prefer the design and looks of a U900 over T68.
Technology progresses, things change, they evolve. And while 90% of the people move along with that, some don't, including you i think  (no offense intended in that)
|
Tsepz_GP
Joined: Dec 27, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: Johannesburg, South Africa
PM |
Aivar
Yes i get what you mean, all phones these days seen to be all strictly blocky and rectangular, maybe its cause its easier to fit the hardaware etc. . . .into a rectangular casing than a weirdly shaped casing like the T68's, the T68's design just wont be right on a phone with a 2.4inch or larger screen, it would ACTUALY be more bulky.
Phone: Apple iPhone 17 Pro Max Silver
Tablet: Apple iPad Pro 11” Space Grey
Previously owned SEs: W800,W900,W880,K850 & Xperia X10 |
|
|
Posted: 2008-12-12 12:21
jay0726 | 
