In this feature, I look at the creeping size increases in modern 'phones' - at what point do they cease to become phones and turn into media 'tablets'? I postulate a definition that refers to the way in which these devices are used - proving that the Nokia N900 and HTC HD2 definitely aren't phones at all and throwing doubt on the N97 and iPhone in the process. Controversial? Moi?
Read on in the full article.
Probably one of your best articles Steve. Exactly spot on in my opinion. While the N900, N97, iPhone, et al have phones, I consider them to be platforms more so than phones in the traditional sense. My N86 is a phone, as is my E75, but my iPhone, and my soon to be purchased N900 will in my mind be media devices that use the telephony functions as enablers to access wider functions. Without the telephony aspects, these devices would be severely crippled as they rely on an Internet connection to round out the "complete" package. The fact that they require two hands to complete tasks is simply part of the game. I can do a few things one-handed on my iPhone but I also run the risk of dropping it as it is sort of too slippery to do things with one hand. Maybe we are seeing an reversion back to two-handed operation.
Good article Steve,if I may add a few phones to your examples listed,I feel they do make up more "than the numbers"
As 3.7" screens go,the most common phone is the i8910 Omnia HD followed the WM-powered Ominia II
3.8" would be the HTC Touch HD
4.1" would be the Toshiba TG01
and left-field would go to the LG BL40 New Chocolate with a 4.01" screen with an 21:9 aspect ratio and a (similar to E90) 800 x 345 revolution
The upcoming Android-powered SE XPERIA X10 is said to have a 4" screen.
Seems that all manufactures will be offer 4"+ screen in the not too distant future...
Thanks, I'll add a few of those to the main text....
slitchfield wrote:Thanks, I'll add a few of those to the main text....
Additionally, I think the iPod Touch proves your point as well. You see how limited it is without some sort of connection to the Internet. It becomes a self contained device with limited functionality, and is little more than a media player.
Ah, now there's something you can say that 'supports' your opinion - as in doesn't just restate it (like the article to which you referred on twitter), but actually provides some evidence and/or explanation; though, since you wrote it, I'm not sure you can claim it supports your argument - that's just cheating 😉
In any case, a nice article.
I still disagree though 😉 - and for two reasons :
1) When I forget my N900, I say "I left my phone at home" and such like. I've heard others say this too, so clearly users of the device thing it's a phone.
2) When I call my wife at home, she answers 'the phone'...it also requires two hands (for dialing) and it isn't even portable/mobile. Even the cordless ones are awkward to use single-handedly.
It seems to me you're back in the whole 'smartphone' vs 'phone' argument. I was curious at the time - the time prior to you renamed your 'smartphones show' to the 'phones show' - wondering if you were then going to include all those fixed land-line models too; or perhaps you're now claiming they're not phones too.
In any case. I'm not sure what the point is. Why would you want to say that the N900 isn't a phone? I suppose your motives are revealed when you say :
"The debate started because a number of people were pressing me to admit that the new Nokia N900 was a far better 'smartphone' than the N97. [snip] but the problem is that, despite including a GSM/3G antenna, earpiece and microphone, the N900 isn't (by my reckoning) a phone, and so by definition can't really be a smartphone."
Could it be that you just hate to admit to something being better than the N97? Resorting to the "it's not a phone" argument is quite tenuous, IMO. Better to actually say it isn't better for real reasons, like it only works in portrait mode (apart from when making phone calls), you can't use it two handedly (apart from for making phone calls), and you can't send/receive MMSes; and whatnot. How about just assuming it *is* a phone for the time being and comparing each on its merits. You might find that the N97 still wins.
sapporobaby wrote:Additionally, I think the iPod Touch proves your point as well. You see how limited it is without some sort of connection to the Internet. It becomes a self contained device with limited functionality, and is little more than a media player.
I don't get your point. Does 'phone' now mean 'connection to the internet'?
What happens if you remove the cell radio from an N97? Pretty much the same as removing the cell radio from an iPhone which results in an iPod touch, I'd say.
Great article Steve.
I have to agree with davidmaxwaterma though - trying to narrow the definition of "phone" quickly reveals your own preferences.
What is a phone? Anything that makes phone calls.
What sort of phone calls? Mobile, or fixed line, or VoIP.
This will include desktop computers, so you could narrow it down to mobile phones, i.e. those that include GSM/CDMA connectivity. But this still includes mobile-enabled netbooks.
You could also include non-cellular enabled devices such as the iPod Touch. It has wifi, but include a mic and Skype, and it's now a (limited) phone.
In short, what constitues a "phone" is now a moving target, and quite hard to define. An increasing number of devices will be given mobile connectivity, but may not allow person-to-person speech. Is it a phone if the device can make calls, but it's not a person making them?
On their own website, Nokia describe the N900 as this:
"the Nokia N900 - a high-performance mobile computer with a powerful processor, large internal storage, and sharp touch-screen display. "
However, if you use your Nokia N900 to make telephone calls whilst out and about, then you are using it as a mobile telephone.
The more I think about this, the less I care. It really doesn't matter.
I think Steve is trying to emphasise phone==one handed use, tablet/pda/pmp == two handed use. Best example would be use of BT headset with a two handed device, don't think anyone would call it a phone.
Having said that, you're likely to see (and already see) a number of crossover devices eg. with slide out keyboards / ebooks / UMPCs and looking at these, the n97 has been a bit of a dud compared to it's sibling the n97 mini. Given a choice between n97, n900 or n97 mini i'd be willing to bet nobody would choose the n97.
Great article Steve, and certainly one of my pet subjects of the last 2 years.
In my humble opinion the smartphone has been on borrowed time since January 2007.
"I appreciate that the vast majority of Nokia's fortunes are collected from the mid-tear smartphone market, but honestly this is of little interest to me. The smartphone (regardless of manufacturer) was only ever a stepping stone, a place to rest up while I waited for a powerful computer that would fit in my pocket.
This is one of reasons why I've champion the iPhone over the last couple of years. The iPhone, even the original version, was always more about pocket computing than smart phoning."
http://web.me.com/jamesburland/Nokia_Creative/Blog/Entries/2008/12/4_Comment%3A_Pocket_Computer.html
http://web.me.com/jamesburland/Nokia_Creative/Blog/Entries/2009/8/28_N900__Captain_Maemo!.html
http://web.me.com/jamesburland/Nokia_Creative/Blog/Entries/2008/7/1_Comment%3A_Is_Everything_Converging_on_The_Pocket_Computer.html
http://web.me.com/jamesburland/Nokia_Creative/Blog/Entries/2008/6/19_Comment%3A_Can_Nokia_really_make_the_jump_from_Smartphone_to_Pocket_Computer_.html
Unregistered wrote:I think Steve is trying to emphasise phone==one handed use, tablet/pda/pmp == two handed use.
Fair enough, but *why*?
Best example would be use of BT headset with a two handed device, don't think anyone would call it a phone.
As someone who uses a BT headset (actually two, though not at the same time) with N900, I'm not sure I get your point. I am sure I'm missing something though...
Having said that, you're likely to see (and already see) a number of crossover devices eg. with slide out keyboards / ebooks / UMPCs and looking at these, the n97 has been a bit of a dud compared to it's sibling the n97 mini. Given a choice between n97, n900 or n97 mini i'd be willing to bet nobody would choose the n97.
I'm not sure. I had a quick try of an N97 the other day and found it quite nice actually - I feel like it's had a bad rap. I wonder what the new firmware will do for this.
"When is a phone not a phone?"
When it doesn't make/receive phone calls!
Seriously, they are all 'phones', but the 'phone' evolutionary tree has been forking all over the place in recent years. Only one branch of which are still just 'phones'. Mobile devices that make/receive calls and the occasional text.
All other branches of this tree have grown in different directions. Some more business-centric, some media-centric, others in other directions. For instance, phones that been developed as (almost) strictly SatNav devices. Most of these branches sprouted off due to different user demands. Now that we KNOW phones can do more than we expected 5-6 years ago, we all want them to do different things.
This branch, the one Steve's discussing, is the one where people wanted larger screens built onto heavy duty, multi-use devices. I blame the Iphone for this. Apple produced a big TOUCHABLE screen that had a QWERTY keyboard and the ability to *gasp* watch movies, in a reasonable resolution (and frame rate!). Since then, this new branch of the tree has just shot up.
Now there are a mulititude of large screen touch phones. And some are getting larger than others.
Are they all getting too big? No, i don't think so. With the increasing number of features and options being shoehorned into most 'modern' mobile phones it's only logical that they increase in size. Especially being one of the most common features being touchscreen. People want the real estate to be able to work on their screen. How many of you are still using 15" monitors (by choice)? Another feature is media and games. People want a bigger screen to watch movies and play games. A lot of phones (the good ones anyway!) now have hardware graphics accelerators, just for this purpose. And of course we're all now accustomed to surfing almost full size, flash enabled web pages.
But this is only one branch on the family tree. For those that don't want/need a large (huge) screen there are plenty of other options.
As far as one handed use, perhaps i have large hands, but i can use my Samsung one handed (one thumbed?) for almost anything. If i switched to a T9 display instead of QWERTY, i'd don't think i'd ever need to use two hands.
Is it a pain to have to use a phone two handed? Not for me, but i made a concious decision to accept that, if i wanted a phone as big as the one i have, with a QWERTY, that i may have to use it two handed.
Does the phone 'feel big'? No, not really (to me). But then i'm coming from an E90 and i have a TP2 here at work. When the Samsung is in my pocket i have to keep checking it's there!
Victorinox make a Swiss Army Knife that has one blade, a can opener, and a screwdriver. They also make the 'Champ', which has EVERYTHING!. The Champ is 4 or 5 times the size of the basic model, even though it also has the same basic features that you require in a pocket knife. I've had a large, heavy, often two hand required, Champ on my belt for 18 years.
Finally, look on the bright side. If Apple hadn't created their version of a large screen tablet form factor, we might all be walking around with HTC Advantages! 😮
I think Nokia have been quite careful in their description of the N900, mainly because it is quite large as phones go, and also because it generally works only in landscape mode, which is clearly quite a restriction when considering (potential) one-handed operation.
The N900 is described as a sort of computer-platform which CAN make calls, in the same way that a laptop can be used to make calls (ie. Skype). By making this distinction, even if the general public don't buy into it, Nokia can theoretically avoid complaints that it is too big to be a phone, or is too hard to use as a phone, by stating that it is not actually a phone. It's a subtle distinction, but a clever one nevertheless....
Totally agree, i'm the same vintage as Steve, and in my mind, proven advancements in technology meant squeezing more functions and better performance in to SMALLER units, these days the penchant for making devices ever larger seems somewhat neanderthal to me.
My personal rule of thumb, is anything larger than the iphone is just too damned big!
UKJeeper wrote:
Are they all getting too big? No, i don't think so.
Yes they are. It's an unfortunate trend and it won't last.
UKJeeper wrote:
How many of you are still using 15" monitors (by choice)?
I don't carry a monitor around with me all the time. However, 15.6 inch is a very popular laptop format.
UKJeeper wrote:Finally, look on the bright side. If Apple hadn't created their version of a large screen tablet form factor, we might all be walking around with HTC Advantages! 😮
Don't you mean Archos created that kind of portable media player, long before Apple copied it ?
MWEB wrote:Totally agree, i'm the same vintage as Steve, and in my mind, proven advancements in technology meant squeezing more functions and better performance in to SMALLER units, these days the penchant for making devices ever larger seems somewhat neanderthal to me.
My personal rule of thumb, is anything larger than the iphone is just too damned big!
I find the iPhone oversize and cumbersome. Too uncomfortable for permanent carrying.
On their previous range of products Apple created the Nano version and it was very popular. Why?
The nerds that feel they need the earth in their pocket will put up with carrying a jacket-sagging housebrick around, but normal human beings will always prefer small, neat and comfortable.
Unregistered wrote: Yes they are. It's an unfortunate trend and it won't last.
We'll see.
Unregistered wrote:I don't carry a monitor around with me all the time. However, 15.6 inch is a very popular laptop format.
The point is that some people prefer to have a larger screen.
Unregistered wrote:Don't you mean Archos created that kind of portable media player, long before Apple copied it ?
Finally, look on the bright side. If Apple hadn't created their version of a large screen tablet MOBILE PHONE form factor, we might all be walking around with HTC Advantages!
Better? We were after all, discussing the increase in size of a branch of mobile phones. BTW, haven't Archos devices also been increasing in size and ability recently? Seven and nine inch screen's instead of just five inch? Certainly adds credance to the claim people want larger screens (which means bigger devices).
quote: "I'm not sure. I had a quick try of an N97 the other day and found it quite nice actually - I feel like it's had a bad rap. I wonder what the new firmware will do for this."
Surely you cannot be 100% serious. The N97 has been a disaster almost from word go. A short recap if you will:
1. The pre v20 software. Can you say with a straight face that this software was ready for public consumption? Many within Nokia knew that this software was at best beta but they released it anyway.
2. GPS issues. Still not completely resolved.
3. The infamous protective lens issue that Nokia finally was forced to acknowledge.
4. No support for the Mac community until version 20. Once again, Nokia insiders knew that the firmware was so screwed up that 3rd party developers nor even Nokia could develop iSync plugins.
5. Various keylock issues.
6. Out of memory issues.
7. Installation of applications that cannot be removed.
8. Memory mapping of applications that forced installation on the already limited c://
9. Ovi Maps issues.
10. Ovi store issues.
With all of this being said, I do not want to start an argument about the N97 but you have to admit, even since the upgrade, there is not really much hope for this device. Hopefully the N97 Mini and N900 can redeem Nokia.
Of course it's a phone! I use my "smartphone" most of the time as a "mobile computer" - it's still a phone though, and hasn't changed definition by my primary use of it!
A car doesn't become a mobile computer with the addition of CPU engine management, GPS, etc. Neither does a phone. It just has additional functionality. It's also certainly still a car whether you drive it with one hand or two!
And what about hands-free? How does that feature in the phone definitions?
Pedantically, a phone no longer was a phone as soon as SMS was added! Clearly it was though. The first mobiles required 2 hands to pick the thing up - it was still a phone.
I think people are over-analysing things, and getting confused by definitions and making up their own in the process.
Just call it a "mobile" and be done with it.
The word Tele-Phone was introduced by the German Mr. Philipp Reis (1860) Wikipedia . It is Greek for Far - Sound or Distant Sound Transmitting . When out of reach of vocal sound , a device still enabling to hear that voice is a Tele-Phone e.g. London - Edinburgh .
My first Tele-Phone consisted of Two empty baked beans Cans , connected through a hole in the bottom with a simple rope . Could hear my friend very well talking .
In this definition anything enabling to hear a sound "real time" from a normally unhearable distant is a Tele-Phone .
Strictly : Phone = Sound = anything producing a sound is a phone !
Also my car with carkit is a Tele-Phone , no matter , how many buttons , sizes of screen , (un) handy , (un) smart , multitasking or whatever : I am be able to talk to my friend , who is at distant .
I think there is some confusion , since there are so many types of devices , that can actually do the same : distant calling .
BTW : N900 is a Tele-Phone !
😊 Regards jApi NL
UKJeeper wrote:The point is that some people prefer to have a larger screen.
Well if you feel the need to state the obvious. Many prefer a more portable device.
UKJeeper wrote:
Finally, look on the bright side. If Apple hadn't created their version of a large screen tablet MOBILE PHONE form factor, we might all be walking around with HTC Advantages!
So Apple added phone fuctionality to the iPod touch. I don't think we would all be using HTC advantages, just as we are not all using piePhones.
UKJeeper wrote:
Better? We were after all, discussing the increase in size of a branch of mobile phones.
It wasn't me that brought up 15 inch monitors.
UKJeeper wrote:
BTW, haven't Archos devices also been increasing in size and ability recently? Seven and nine inch screen's instead of just five inch? Certainly adds credance to the claim people want larger screens (which means bigger devices).
And millions are carrying seven and nine inch devices in their pockets? These are niche.
Unregistered wrote:I find the iPhone oversize and cumbersome. Too uncomfortable for permanent carrying.On their previous range of products Apple created the Nano version and it was very popular. Why?
The nerds that feel they need the earth in their pocket will put up with carrying a jacket-sagging housebrick around, but normal human beings will always prefer small, neat and comfortable.
In my hands the iPhone is pretty smallish I can certainly operate it one handed.
I could probably operate a larger device than that such as the Droid/Milestone or the Infinity.
In this latest instalment of OldsMobile, the article series dedicated to people who would like those darn kids off their lawns, Steve Litchfield reminisces on the good ol' times when we watched video on postage stamp-sized screens and were forced to use T9 to text.
rvirga wrote:In this latest instalment of OldsMobile, the article series dedicated to people who would like those darn kids off their lawns, Steve Litchfield reminisces on the good ol' times when we watched video on postage stamp-sized screens and were forced to use T9 to text.
Yes, yes, issue 194 of OldsMobile is out today, comes with free shotgun!! 8-)
Darn it but you guys understand me well!
It is either a phone or a Pda.
If you go out to buy a phone and it happens to have a lot of other stuff built in, like a symbian S60 opperating system, then it IS a phone.
If you go out to buy a Pda because of all the stuff that's is built into it, which includes bits to allow you to make and receive calls; then it's a Pda.
'proving that the Nokia N900 and HTC HD2 definitely aren't phones at all'
Steve - can't you see the madness in that statement? Imagine you are out with your daughter and the device rings. You ignore it for a little while and then she says 'Dad, aren't you going to answer the phone?'
Are you then going to launch into a ten minute lecture to the poor child on why the thing isn't a phone?
Face it Steve - it looks like a phone, it functions like a phone, it is a phone.
It just does a load of other stuff too. Big deal, we've been in that situation for years now.
And what's that about one-handed and two-handed use? That's got nothing to do with the price of fish whatsoever! :tongue:
Steve, by your definition the UIQ 2 and some 3 devices from SonyEricsson aren't phones either, as they are designed to be operated with two hands, apart probably for the phone function.
And your 50% usage citeria is peculiar. I gather that most people use the other functions of a smartphone more than the phone (and sms) function, and this also makes all current smartphones something else than phones.
Remove the SIM card, which makes the device an un-phone, but all other functions are still as usable nowadays as with the SIM card.
AFAIAC, it's a smartphone if it is a mobile computer in a phone-like form factor that can connect to the phone network, and this makes the N900 a smartphone. If it cannot connect to the phone network, and it is a mobile computer in a phone like form factor (like the N810 or the iPod touch) it's a WID, or whatever.
Unregistered wrote:quote: "I'm not sure. I had a quick try of an N97 the other day and found it quite nice actually - I feel like it's had a bad rap. I wonder what the new firmware will do for this."Surely you cannot be 100% serious. The N97 has been a disaster almost from word go. A short recap if you will:
1. The pre v20 software. Can you say with a straight face that this software was ready for public consumption? Many within Nokia knew that this software was at best beta but they released it anyway.
2. GPS issues. Still not completely resolved.
3. The infamous protective lens issue that Nokia finally was forced to acknowledge.
4. No support for the Mac community until version 20. Once again, Nokia insiders knew that the firmware was so screwed up that 3rd party developers nor even Nokia could develop iSync plugins.
5. Various keylock issues.
6. Out of memory issues.
7. Installation of applications that cannot be removed.
8. Memory mapping of applications that forced installation on the already limited c://
9. Ovi Maps issues.
10. Ovi store issues.With all of this being said, I do not want to start an argument about the N97 but you have to admit, even since the upgrade, there is not really much hope for this device. Hopefully the N97 Mini and N900 can redeem Nokia.
I'd have to agree, it got a bad rap because it WAS bad. Having said that, I need to point out that it WAS bad, not it IS bad. Since the 2.0 firmware, (and undocumented voip application installation) it's been a 180 turnaround. This is now a phone I'm happy with, and will do me nicely for the next year. I just wish they didn't need to copy apple with everything, like adding basic functionality later in a firmware update (copy and paste, anyone?), and trumpeting it as a step forward, rather than calling a spade a spade, ie, this is a catchup. Still, catch up they have (imo), my n97 is once again a great PHONE! (because it makes calls 😉)
Steve is Da Man!