| Author |
What da hell is the SE T316?!?!?!? |
jplacson
Joined: Apr 21, 2002
Posts: > 500
From: Philippines
PM, WWW
|
I just saw this model on Esato's phone list... looks like the T300 with a different case... but why has this model been given a different name? And why haven't we seen this case anywhere else? It's not even on SE's site.
I like the case though... I hope they make this available for the T300. |
|
|
jcpsad
Joined: Oct 15, 2002
Posts: > 500
PM, WWW
|
It simply sucks! |
Ulukai
Joined: Jan 27, 2002
Posts: 372
From: Sweden
PM, WWW
|
Do you have a pic.?
|
jalu
Joined: Oct 25, 2002
Posts: > 500
PM |
I've never heard of it either but if the specification on Esato is correct, its not worth having.
No camera, no java, no radio, no bluetooth, no voice dialing... doesn't look all that good.
Plus, simply as a personal thing, I think it looks terrible.
What happened to the good styling behind the t68m/i?
Did SE fire their design staff and employ a blind hobo, or what?
Jalu
|
jellyellie
Joined: Dec 27, 2002
Posts: > 500
From: England
PM, WWW
|
http://www.esato.com/phones/index.php?phone=60
i thought before seeing that picture of it that it would be released only in continents other than europe but i must be wrong as thereis an orange logo on it.
www.jellyellie.com |
jalu
Joined: Oct 25, 2002
Posts: > 500
PM |
Orange logo...
/Another good reason not to buy the phone!!
Jalu - o2 fan
_________________
t68i + hbh 20 + mca 20 =  Land
[ This Message was edited by: jalu on 2003-01-01 16:35 ] |
jellyellie
Joined: Dec 27, 2002
Posts: > 500
From: England
PM, WWW
|
yeah, lol. i reckon the orange logos put people off buying the phones- it certainly puts me off.
www.jellyellie.com |
2tangy
Joined: Oct 26, 2002
Posts: 459
From: UK
PM |
OMG That's one Fugly phone! Don't buy it for godsakes! |
jalu
Joined: Oct 25, 2002
Posts: > 500
PM |
How can a mix of a high class phone maker and an electronics giant renouned for its stylish designs produce *that* ?
The mind boggles. will never survive if they are going to churn out things like that.
Jalu |
2tangy
Joined: Oct 26, 2002
Posts: 459
From: UK
PM |
I think with that phone SE are trying to aim at the budget market in much the same way as Nokia, who will also be bringing out a budget phone -> http://www.nokia-asia.com/apc/phones/0,,119,00.html
These budgets phones will mostly have mono screens and advanced features such as MMS and GPRS will be left out. They are supposed to appeal to those that want a phone JUST for txing and calling... there must be a niche for it  |
jalu
Joined: Oct 25, 2002
Posts: > 500
PM |
Alright,
I can understand there being a market niche for cheap, entry level phones however surely they should be nice to carry around.
I don't rate the new Nokia's look but I would rather carry around one of those than that (as already described) fugly thing have thrown out.
I mean really, it looks terrible.
There's no excuse for cutting back on style in a product designed to be hand held and in sight all the time. People just won't buy it.
Jalu
|
Eamonn
Joined: Nov 30, 2001
Posts: > 500
PM |
Not as ugly as the T100!
|
jalu
Joined: Oct 25, 2002
Posts: > 500
PM |
The t100...
Another SE phone.
Things go from bad to worse 
Sony made good looking phones....
Ericsson made good looking phones....
SonyEricsson make crap looking phones....
How does that work?
|
jplacson
Joined: Apr 21, 2002
Posts: > 500
From: Philippines
PM, WWW
|
Niche market for budget phones? I think you mean, MAIN market. Nokia didn't get to be number 1 by concentrating on the high-end market (niche)... they made it big with their 5110 series... then the 3210, ...etc...etc... mostly low-end, mass-market phones.
I do agree that both SE and Nokia designs are starting to really really suck... dunno what they were all thinking. |
JwY
Joined: Dec 03, 2002
Posts: 500
From: Canada GTA
PM |
yeah i agree,
i think they're putting too much thought into making it "look different".
they should stick to their roots and keep designs simple instead of some fashion statment or trying to make it look futuristic.
Remeber, K.I.S.S. |
|
|
Posted: 2003-01-01 17:11
