News Forum Phone database

> New Topic
> Reply
< Esato Forum Index > General discussions > Other manufacturers > Nokia 3G phone (6650) is... Bookmark topic

Ah, I like Prom1's objective comments

Though on the T68 design I must disagree!
To me the 6650 looks very much like it was designed at the same time as the 8210. In fact they both look from the same family (e.g. the soft keys, the small arc under the keypad, etc), hence 6650 looks somewhat outdated.
The 6650's color would be metallic grey with some black buttons, it would be so much nicer.

--
Posted: 2002-09-27 10:42:00
Edit : Quote


@Super G

Since Wap2.0 supports color it would be much better to have in a phone with a color screen especially when we are talking 3G. And no I don't think the Nokia 6650 supports HTML. The press release says nothing about HTML, and since that would be a major feature it would probably be mentioned in the pressrelease
--
Posted: 2002-09-27 11:45:00
Edit : Quote


(in reply to Prom1)

Quote:
Features......First and foremost is an UPGRADE to any phone on the market, that anyone can buy worldwide right now! Proof?: W-CDMA & GSM and giving you
128kbps maximum (although less that EDGE, but EDGE


To begin with here, that phone is not on the market and you can't buy it. We don't know when we will be able to buy it. All we know is it will cost too much.

CDMA-2000 phones offer a transfer rate of 153 kbps. Have a look at this fine device.

While your at it, look here
and search for "384 kbps".

Quote:
allows you to be talking and SEND a SMS/MMS message SIMULTANEOUSLY!!!!!! No phone right now can do that


Boy, have I missed that feature.

Quote:
The antenna, external, is necessary as I'm not aware of ANY W-CDMA or CDMA2000 phone that doesnt have an external antenna.


Although ugly, you should look into Sony Ericsson T206.
--
Posted: 2002-09-27 12:09:00
Edit : Quote


@faca

Do you know anything about Transmission coding schemes at all? I'm not saying that they are the same. But the difference in the transmission coding primarily affect the radio part of the phone.
Do you know how few components there actually is in a phone like the T68. The T68 is primarily 3 ASIC's, the circuit board is not that crowded as you might think. Sure there are quite a few layers on the circuit board but there are quite few components..

And the sarcastic comment about Win98 and 3G networks was quite funny BTW if Windows where used in the mobile networks I would not be using them....since they would have crashed half the time.

What makes it harder to build a GSM network than a W-CDMA network? Of course it's not a question of just upgrading the software, and nowhere did I ever imply that. But when you build a GSM or W-CDMA network from scratch the development required is about the same I would guess.

I'm not saying that these chips grow on trees but they are probably not that hard to get hold of. But my guess is that the big players make thier own ASIC's. And the smaller companies can license the platforms from Motorola or Ericsson.

Regarding your comment on my software comment. My point was (and still is) that the software development/debugging takes longer than finishing the hardware.

Well I do agree with your comment about handover of calls between GSM and WCDMA networks. I was just saying that it would be a requirement in the beginning when the W-CDMA coverage will be limited . BTW nothing in the pressrelease actually says that the Nokia 6650 actually handles handover between the 2 networks. It is just stated that it supports GSM/WCDMA, it doesn't say that it can switch networks during call/data transmission. I really hope that it can do that though....
--
Posted: 2002-09-27 12:16:00
Edit : Quote


Quote:
On 2002-09-27 10:14, faca wrote:

Oh, man... I can't believe I'm actually discussing about 3G with you... You know what? You're right, GSM and WCDMA are absolutely the same... And, if you want to upgrade you network to 3G, you just go to a cell station,


Ehm, obviously the difficulties with 3G lie in

1) Building the network to offer enough coverage and bandwidth
2) Building small devices that can utilize this bandwidth in a useful and attractive way

The difficulties ARE NOT to actually make or get hold of the radio chips. And probably most phone-makers license (if don't, they should) the radio-platform so they shouldn't have to worry about it.

We agree that Nokia should receive some credit for managing to implement the wcdma/gsm transparent handover. What disturbs us is the giant size and the useless specs.

Quote:
sometimes wonder what are all those engineers doing in Nokia, Motorola, SE, etc. when it it soooo simple to make 3G networks and phones.


As we said, radio-chips is not the only thing to worry about when you make phones. I believe wcdma-test-units have been around since at least 2001, so there shouldn't be any unclearities as to WHAT wcdma really is and WHAT to put in the devices.

The difficulties are in making them in volumes and making them attractive. For 700-800 EUR nokia and this new phone have not achieved that.

You can be sure this was not nokias first try at making wcdma-chips. Be sure however that they don't have an optimized factory for spitting out millions of these. If they at all make them themselves.

Quote:
Really? I thought that they just put in Windows Media

You thought wrong, man =)

Quote:
milestone'? Why would they call it 'milestone' if GSM/WCDMA handover is so simple and not inovative like


I believe his point was; once you reach a milestone you can't reach it again.

Quote:
you claim it to be? And, where is that mysterios SE 3G
phone? The last 3G 'mobile phone' I saw from Ericsson


I think that releasing 3G-phones at this time would disturb the demand for 2.5G-phones. Maybe that is why the features of this new nokia are so lousy.

[ This Message was edited by: jb on 2002-09-27 12:00 ]
--
Posted: 2002-09-27 12:49:00
Edit : Quote


@jb

I totally agree with you about the 3G difficulties, coverage and bandwith aswell as ahndset size are the main challenges.

My question is just does it anywhere states that the 6650 handles transparent handovers? I have my doubts...


Quote:
I think that releasing 3G-phones at this time would disturb the demand for 2.5G-phones. Maybe that is why the features of this new nokia are so lousy.

That could actually be one of the reasons

[ This Message was edited by: ppcrockar on 2002-09-27 12:09 ]
--
Posted: 2002-09-27 13:05:00
Edit : Quote


Quote:
On 2002-09-27 13:05, ppcrockar wrote:
My question is just does it anywhere states that the 6650 handles transparent handovers? I have my doubts...


Uhm. Yeah. They don't mention that it is capable of transferring an ongoing call between the two; however it says:

* WCDMA and GSM 900/1800 networks
* Automatic switching between bands and modes

Since there has been some controversy around transparent handovers, it probably doesn't support it.

I see a demand for this phone from people who want fast data transfers while they are out running ("business professionals"); but there are a number of problems:

* it is marketed as a movie-phone (eh?)
* It does not seem to support GPRS
(which means only circuit switched data outside of 3G-coverage)
* It does not seem to support GSM 1900
* 128 kbps is only about twice the speed of GPRS, so it's not that big a gain in speed. For wap this doesn't matter. Essentially all you can do anyway is check email and maybe surf the internet a bit faster.

When all comes around your T68 will do the job just as good and in addition it gives you:

* color wap (WAP 2.0)
* cost-effective data-transfer _everywhere_ (GPRS)
* ability to use phone in the americas (GSM 1900)
* good looks (half the size)
* and it saves you 750 EUR

"Half the price and size but twice the device"
bha ha ha.
--
Posted: 2002-09-27 15:12:00
Edit : Quote


Right, nothing about some HTML support. But I hope it does support it.... considering it has only wap 1.2.1

It supports GPRS (see press release).
It supports multitasking.
It has a USB port, Bluetooth.
It has Java.
Note that movie clips are 20 seconds only (100kB), because of MMS specifications which limits the movies to 100kB.

Etc etc.

--
Posted: 2002-09-27 15:51:00
Edit : Quote


128kbps is not much?!?!? What about 64kbps upload???

You must be joking
--
Posted: 2002-09-27 15:53:00
Edit : Quote


Quote:
On 2002-09-27 15:51, Super G wrote:
Right, nothing about some HTML support. But I hope it does support it.... considering it has only wap 1.2.1


Nothing about a pIII with overclocking possibilities, but I hope it supports that. Since it has java-support.

--
Posted: 2002-09-27 18:13:00
Edit : Quote

---

New Topic   Reply

Forum Index