>
New Topic
>
Reply<
Esato Forum Index
>
General discussions >
Other manufacturers
> nokia 3200
Bookmark topic
Well yeah I know about the speed I was just wondering which class was and masseur thanks for the link, though isn't t610's speed 53kilobits and if so how could it be in the same segment as nokia?
I've read some reviews that stated 6600 has 3+1 (in magazines so i can't give you a link) and 6600 has according to nokia the same download speed as 3650,
here are some links that says it has 3+1:
http://it.kelkoo.com/b/a/ss_nokia_3650.html
http://www.cellularshop.net/it/dept_6.html
http://www.westel900.hu/vallalati_portal/keszulekek/keszulek_11.html
http://www.factotus.it/it/catalog/Product.jhtml?productId=I3434
http://uk.gsmbox.com/news/mobile_news/all/95675.gsmbox
http://www.teledom.spb.ru/_nok_3650.htm
and the most important one nokia itself:
http://ncsp.forum.nokia.com/downloads/nokia/documents/3650_FAQ_1_02.pdf
edit:
@hurny: yeah i forget about the video camera , sorry about that as I said i don't really have it,
as for apps I think that about 90% apps that are for p800 are also for 3650 yet i found that playing doom or geopod or something like that is alot easier with p800
i have to say that i'm not very active in terms of apps that was only my opinion I had an impression that apps for the p800 are more complex and bigger but i can be wrong.........
and about the realone player, well i didn't mention it because the p800 has pv so i thought i was the same really..... but yes i found real one a litlle better.....
[ This Message was edited by: mmsman on 2003-12-11 16:50 ]
--
Posted: 2003-12-11 17:40:26
Edit :
Quote
Quote:about the realone player, well i didn't mention it because the p800 has pv so i thought i was the same really..... but yes i found real one a litlle better....
My 3650 has realone AND pv. I use PV for full screen movies, and realon for streaming.
--
Posted: 2003-12-11 18:00:55
Edit :
Quote
oh yeah i rememberd now,ok but this isn't anyway a big difference because you can get free programs from emule or such not that i use them
--
Posted: 2003-12-11 18:36:04
Edit :
Quote
Quote:
On 2003-12-11 10:55:03, Flying Finn wrote:
The newer Series 40 phones (3100, 3200, 5140, 6220, 6230, 6650, 6810, 6820, 7200, 7250i, 7600) have a grid view menu like SE phones if that's what you mean. Nothing historic about their UI, if only you had tried them before calling them that. 5140, 6230, 6820 and 7200 also have the newer Series 40 2.0 UI version which adds a 3rd softkey to the middle to compensate the small screen (the fonts are a little smaller too). 3G Series 40 phones - 6650 and 7600 so far - come with a 128 x 160 screen (65K colours in the 7600).
The Series 60 UI is INARGUABLY one of the best out there.
Overall appearance/design...don't you think that's a matter of opinion? "that nokia is ugly" isn't a very valid argument.
The Series 60 phones have always been said to have good screens. The older Series 40 phones didn't have that good screens but the new UI version (plus new components) and increasing the number of colours up to 65K has helped.
Games and covers are one of the most important evolutions in mobile phone history. Thanks to Nokia.
"Nobody in all honesty blah blah blah.." Come on. You have to put some effor to that.
apparantly you conveniently missed the part where i said that
recently there were exceptions to my comments, and that i was describing
tendencies, not immutable laws. the improvements in the Series 40 UI have only been in the past 6 months or so. There is no argument that Series 60 is one of the best phone OSs available, it too is a relatively recent development in terms of current functionality. all of your examples above are recent developments or as yet unreleased phones. but it took nokia
far too long to get there. this also goes for screens and polys (they are by no means a market leader in screens, and we're still waiting on the polys.....bueller?...bueller?....anyone? anyone?)
my point, and you can see this in my post on page 5, is that once nokia introduce something it has historically taken them a long time to offer any improvement or even change. the two most obvious were
and overall design.
i am in no way whatsoever discussing the aesthetics of the design, but the fact that for the best part of a decade IT DID NOT CHANGE. as for
there really was no excuse because the hard work had already been done.
i always find it amusing that nokia fans talk about covers and games, and even radios, as if they are God's Final Gift to His Creation. no compelling argument can be made that they are a vital or essential feature. they are toys and nothing more, designed to fool the ignorant masses into parting with their money. and while i admit they fulfill this function admirably, they are at best a marketing tool and at worst a frivolity.
_________________
Gee, does that beat me? I only got two pair - two aces, and another two.
[ This Message was edited by: gelfen on 2003-12-11 23:24 ]
--
Posted: 2003-12-12 00:22:37
Edit :
Quote
Incidentally,i've seen this nokia on the grey market here at 300$, while the same online shop has the t610 at the same price. Now u tell me:what kind o' craphead would buy this nokia if it were to compare it with the t610's features?
This message was posted from a T610
--
Posted: 2003-12-12 03:21:53
Edit :
Quote
but mummy, i want a cardboard cutout phone!
@ Flying Finn: happy anniversary
_________________
Gee, does that beat me? I only got two pair - two aces, and another two.
[ This Message was edited by: gelfen on 2003-12-12 02:27 ]
--
Posted: 2003-12-12 03:25:41
Edit :
Quote
Quote:i always find it amusing that nokia fans talk about covers and games, and even radios, as if they are God's Final Gift to His Creation. no compelling argument can be made that they are a vital or essential feature. they are toys and nothing more, designed to fool the ignorant masses into parting with their money. and while i admit they fulfill this function admirably, they are at best a marketing tool and at worst a frivolity.
Is that all your can come up with- that features like that arent 'vital/essential features'?
NO FEATURES ARE VITAL OR ESSENTIAL EXCEPT THE PHONE FUNCTION YOU TWAT!!
Swallow the fact that people WANT those features, and thats why more people will buy the 'horrible' Nokia phones such as the 3200 instead of SE phones.
Or do you just think that everyone else in the mobile consumer market is stupid except for yourself that 'sees the light' about getting a SE phone?
You ignorant git...
--
Posted: 2003-12-12 06:55:11
Edit :
Quote
jesus wept hurny! are you naturally gifted at misinterpretation or did you take lessons??
i've been trying to have a civilised debate over the pro's and cons of nokia and you have to get personal. who mentioned
? i'm just talking about what i have observed of nokia. i'm not on an
power trip for crying out loud. having only had one single mobile phone i haven't even developed brand loyalty yet, so don't try and turn this around on me. at no stage have i said anyone should go out and buy a specific brand. they should get the handset which best meets their needs. if john doe goes out and buys a nokia 3200 because that's what all his mates have and he can get changeable covers, and not because it's the right phone for him, then all that will happen is he will get disillusioned with nokias and probably not buy another one. that means he may well miss out on a phone that really
does meet his needs if, say, he should have got a 6230 and no other phone at the time meets that feature combination (which will be the case for a few months).
why does nearly every nokia nut go into apoplexy when someone tries to say that games and covers aren't a necessary part of the phone? don't give me that "is that the best you can do?" crap just because you can't construct a coherent rational argument to the contrary. i'm not denying people might want them, i'm just saying they don't need them. there's a lot of people out there who confuse the difference, which is why they are such a good marketing tool.
as for saying the only essential phone function is to make calls, i think a reasonalbe argument can be mounted for the necessity of an organiser, ability to sync with and transfer files/apps from/to a computer, and possibly email for certain users. a widely travelled person, for instance, may need a java currency converter, mobile email to keep in touch and organiser for appointments. such a person would probably need a 6600/6230/t6x0/z600/px00 depending on their specific situation.
the target market of the 3200 probably only needs it to make calls and send texts. all the rest (games, covers, camera) is just there as a marketing tool to get people in by appealing to their sense of (a)individuality and (b) vanity. that way they can boast about all the cool funky shit their phone has which they may never use and chews battery time like a garbage compacter. nobody needs those things in their phone, but because they are available companies need them to get people to buy the phone.
you'll notice i have a z600. sure it's got games, changeable covers, and even a camera, but that's not why i bought it. i got it for the screen, triband, bt, contacts, organsier and ability to sync. it also happens to be exactly the same colour as my car. do i need a phone that matches my car? not really, but once i saw it i
wanted it because i think it's a cool colour. it appealed to my (a) individuality and (b) vanity. but at least i am able to recognise it for what it is - a sales pitch. if somebody asked me if i recommend a z600, i'd say "yeah absolutely, but make sure you need all these features before you buy it otherwise you're probably wasting your money." if they confuse what they need with what they want, or think they want, then that's their business. if they really only need a 3100 then that's their choice too.
just because somebody mentions a general shortfall they perceive in nokia phones, it doesn't automatically mean they hate and despise all nokia handsets. i have said before i think the 3200 is a good phone in it's segment, although personally i don't like it's design. but that's a matter of individual taste so not really worth arguing over. a lot of people don't like clams, but i do. i'm not going to try to convince them otherwise. there are some very good nokias and vey bad ones, just as there are both great and lame-ass phones from every brand. it's all a matter of segment, target market, and individual consumer needs.
you're entitled to your opinion, but at least be courteous enough to let me have mine.
--
Posted: 2003-12-13 03:01:31
Edit :
Quote
the one point that seems to have been missed is that the Nokias have better signal quality over the Sonyericsson T610 which in my view was crap and in the UK you can get a nokia 3200 for only £149.99 on prepay compared to £229for the T610 as the nokia is aimed at youths who probaly have no bluetooth devices to connect to and not that bothered about it, the other point is the nokia 3200 allow the user to change the cover to their own tastes whithout paying for new covers
--
Posted: 2003-12-23 21:04:11
Edit :
Quote
@madinlife, i don't know what fiction you've been reading lately, but the t610 is generally better than most nokias when it comes to reception, even the much vaunted 3650. some of the early t610s did have rf issues, but later hardwares have been much improved. do not be fooled by the reception bars on the display. the t610, and
in genral, update the signal strength more often and tend to underestimate, while most other brands average signal strength over a broader time and overestimate. there are numerous reports of people making and holding clear calls with no signal bars on the display.
if you want more information, then check
this thread at HoFo. of course there will NEVER be an end to this particular argument.
--
Posted: 2003-12-23 23:09:02
Edit :
Quote
New Topic
Reply
