N900 Thickness
 

The cellphone news has been jumping on the new Motorola Droid Android 2.0 phone. At 60.0mm x 115.8mm x 13.7mm and 169g it packs a 3.7" WVGA capacitive screen and 1400mAh battery. The rest of the specs are comparable to the N900 as well.

The N900 is 59.8mm x 110.9mm × 18.0mm (19.55 at thickest) and 181g with a 3.5" WVGA screen and 1320mAh battery.

13.7mm thick vs 19.55 is a big difference.

At first I thought the slider design of the N900 was the reason for the extra thickness but that isn't the case.

This leaves me wondering why the N900 is so thick.

Re: N900 Thickness
 

Don't tell anyone that it was ME that told you, but I know for a fact that extra thickness is taken up by a flux capacitor.

Its an easter egg.

Re: N900 Thickness
 

Its too late now, but there should have been enough space for a larger battery. That would have been a killer feature.

Re: N900 Thickness
 

Being this thick but not being able to fit the larger BP-4L 1500 mah battery but managing to fit space for a stylus... and with a UI design requires a stylus maybe 5-10% of the time.... bizarre design decision!

Re: N900 Thickness
 

Er, yeah, because you know for sure that the stylus made all the difference. :rolleyes:

Re: N900 Thickness
 

C'mon that stylus is pretty long.
I'm pretty sure they didn't design the phone and found so much empty space that they said.. lets stick the stylus in there!

Re: N900 Thickness
 

I was reading at Engadget that the keyboard is supposed to completely suck on the Droid (according to more than one person). And someone else noted that the camera is less than stellar. I don't really know how the engineering on these things works, but I wonder if Motorola skimped on a lot of components. So on paper the Droid looks pretty comparable to the N900. But in practice cramming so much in a super thin space resulted in cutting a lot of corners.

I do agree the stylus is a bit of an odd choice.

I've also read that the N900 was conceived more as a development device than a consumer device, but then Nokia made a different decision about what to do with it. So Perhaps Nokia wasn't making it's biggest effort to engineer for thinness.

Also I believe the case on the Droid is made of metal. Perhaps that allows the material to be a little thinner, at least accounting for 1mm?

Re: N900 Thickness
 

From what I have seen of the N900 mainboard, I think the thickness can be attributed to the stereo speakers and the camera module. Could be wrong.

Re: N900 Thickness
 

Speaking as somebody who actually has access to a device, removing the stylus would not have provided enough room for the BP-4L. :)

Re: N900 Thickness
 

If you're going to need/prefer a stylus 10% of the time, then you need to have a place to stick it. And it needs to be convenient to get to and to put away. That means the phone needs a space for it. It adds a little bulk but nearly no weight. A good design decision, IMHO.

Re: N900 Thickness
 

Have your ever seen a battery shaped like a stylus? Once you do, come back here and absolutely require Nokia to expand N900 battery capacity.

Re: N900 Thickness
 

As i understand, droid doesn't have too much internal storage. Memory chips aren't that big, but aren't size-less either

Re: N900 Thickness
 

more to love baby... :cool:

Re: N900 Thickness
 

well I guess it leaves us all wondering really... I love the N900 already and I'm sold on ( literally since I'm among 100's who've preorderd ) but I do see some things I like about the Droid and a few that leave me.. well a bit jealous as far as what was able to be pulled off with that device and not with the N900 like size and to give a more in depth explanation: screen size, keyboard, and battery... and if i could trade all three of those to get at leat one thing the droid has going for it would be that ole release date that is coming up and I'm sure will be sold... now thats hot! lol but i would mind the screen size or battery "as much" if we could some how mange to get a keyboard of that size on our device... I'm sure the one that is on it works well enough but those extra physical keys would be nice

Re: N900 Thickness
 

1mm for the stereo speakers
1mm for the kick stand
1mm for the camera cover
1mm for the better quality lens
1mm cause its not as long or wide
1mm for more keyboard travel
1mm for stylus (and yes I want one of those)
1mm for the fm transmitter and receiver
1mm for the integrated 32GB

oh and 2mm for the tv out :D

Mike C

Re: N900 Thickness
 

I would have definitely liked bp4l battery as well since I already have quite a few of them but oh well.

Re: N900 Thickness
 

What's the deal with a tinny Droid bundeled with a huge contract on one special carrier?
It could be as thin as a piece of paper... won't buy it because I felt for the iPhone and it's expensive contracts. So no good at all..

Re: N900 Thickness
 

-The kickstand is part of a separate part that buldges out around the camera, so it's not part of the 18mm thickness.
-Ditto for camera cover
-Ditto for at least some of the lens and camera module (and do we really know that the Nokia's module is bigger than the one in the Droid?).

-The N900 and Droid are the same width (59.8 mm vs 60 mm). Also, due to it's thinness, the Droid has considerably less volume than the N900 (about 95cc vs 113cc). The droid only gains an extra 4cc from it's additional length. In fact, it would have to be another 2cm longer to have the same volume as the N900, if it's width and depth did not change. So the Droid is really not somehow making up for in length what it's losing in thinness.

-Keyboard travel is probably right. It really sounds from reviews like Motorola skimped on the keyboard. Looks nice, is very crappy to actually use.

-The fm transmitter and receiver I think are part of the chip that also includes bluetooth and maybe some other things. Does it really add that much space in and of itself? I don't know.

-The T.V. out jack is the same as the headset jack and the Droid also has a 3.5mm jack, so is there really a difference there?

I'm not saying that the N900 isn't thicker, because Nokia has packed more into it than the Droid. But I'm not sure those reasons really add up. Also the N97-mini has almost all the same features as the N900, but is almost as thin as the Droid (14.2 vs 13.7mm). And the N97 has in fact, I think, all the same features as the N900 (except 8 vs. 32Gb memroy, but with a bigger battery) and is still 2mm thinner and has 20% less volume. Does the stylus and the extra memory really account for 20% of the N900's volume?

I don't know maybe Maemo is thicker.

But seriously, perhaps the N900 just isn't Nokia's best engineering effort. As I said above, I read somewhere (can't remember where) that it was really conceived orginally as more of a developers platform than a consumer device.

Re: N900 Thickness
 

I think he said it was 19.5mm at its thickest.

My sarcastic point is that its an apples to oranges comparison. If thickness is an issue you will get the droid. If you need decent photos and memory etc, you know what to do.


Mike C

Re: N900 Thickness
 

If you'll look at the droid's abomination called "keyboard" you'll understand everything. Nokia was smart enough to make keyboard comfortable instead of trading it for some marketing bs. Thanks for that.

Re: N900 Thickness
 

Wait your saying the n900 isn't the best Nokia could do even though it the best looking phone Nokia has produced in years which I might add the best keyboard they have produced in years (rivals the HTC pro2 apparently).

Re: N900 Thickness
 

It's 19.5mm on at the point where the postage stamp sized buldge for the camera is. Everywhere else it's 18mm. So basically it's 18mm.

I didn't really see the sarcasm in your post. It seemed like you were claiming basically the N900 is thicker because it packs more features in it. And I was trying to point out that it's not really obvious the thickness can be explained that way. I think the comparison to the N97 and N97-mini is especially telling. This is after all a thread about why the N900 is as thick as it is, not about why the N900 is better than the Droid or why you should get the N900 over the Droid or vice-versa.

Re: N900 Thickness
 

Oh one more thing
1mm for the infra red
1mm for the front facing camera

Mike C

Re: N900 Thickness
 

1mm for resistive touchscreen.. yeah!!

Re: N900 Thickness
 

Without the space for the stylus, they could have easily fitted a 'wider' battery.

Re: N900 Thickness
 

How easily? Any calculations or projects?

Re: N900 Thickness
 

My opinion on some of the points made here.

Battery:
Unless you have used the N900 extensively, complaining that they didn't use a better battery is silly.

Consider that by using the same battery as previous models it saves Nokia money not having to design and manufacture a new battery. Even better, once the battery dies it shouldn't be too hard finding an official replacement so no worries buying poor knock-offs or worse, not being able to find that specific model at all.

So its a win win situation, as long as the N900 has reasonable battery life (which by all reports, it does) then Nokia made a good choice. Stick to a tried and tested battery, avoid all the cost and risk of developing something new.

Keyboard:
It never fails to amaze me how people under value a good keyboard.

I would much rather have a thicker device with a keyboard with decent button travel than a thinner device where you get poor response. I had a lot of problems with my Xperia X1 keyboard because it didn't have enough travel on the buttons. The layout was excellent (although the size awkard due to the device being too narrow), like the Droid, but a good layout with poor response is useless. The Droid keyboard at least in the photos looks really cheap.

Speakers:
This one should be obvious, the bigger the device the better the sound quality can be. If you mount tiny speakers flush to the case you get tinny sound and minimal volume, but if you allow a little space you can drastically improve both loudness and bass response.

Again, the Xperia X1 was super quiet and tinny (I could never hear it ring in my pocket) because they favoured design over functionality. The slit for the audio was microscopic, if they had made it a little wider they could have had amazing sound. In fact everything about the X1 was style over functionality and the reason I sold it and switched to the N900 was because it seemed to fix these problems.

Thinner is better:
It really isn't. I do love my iPod Touch for being the ideal screen/device size vs pocket-ability but I find it far too thin to handle at times. Many times I have come close to dropping it because its so thin and light.

Multi-touch:
You ever tried doing multi-touch actions when you only have one hand free? Its a lot easier to do the clockwise/counter-clockwise motion the N900 uses than mutli-touch so once portrait mode works in the browser, it will kick the iPod/iPhones *** for one handed usage.

After using the iPod Touch extensively I find mostly I use it portrait. Wait, isn't that a negative for the N900? Perhaps for now, but I find also that I do not use multi-touch for the same reason so one of the biggest selling points of competing devices is null and void.

So overall, devices like the Droid do not seem so brilliant anymore, at least to me.

Re: N900 Thickness
 

Look at how Nokia released the n95 NAM model. Its essentially the same size as the original n95 but with BL-6F 1200 mAh which is slighly larger battery instead of the BL-5F 950 mAh.

If Nokia can squeeze the BP-4L into the E71 and n97 (which doesn't hold the stylus) then I'm sure the Nokia engineers could have achieved this.

Re: N900 Thickness
 

If you're one of those people that can't go along using only a virtual keyboard, then thickness shouldn't be a problem. I just can't see myself constantly typing on a touch screen keyboard, can't stand those things. I much prefer having a thicker phone but with a full QWERTY keyboard, and the N900's keyboard look quite nice.

Re: N900 Thickness
 

SIM card slot

Re: N900 Thickness
 

According to all the previews I've seen it's certainly a better one.

Judging by build quality, I'd disagree heavily with you. Thinks are really packed in internally and it's quite solid.

Re: N900 Thickness
 

I just remembered that i study electronics. And in class i learned that you can easily pack components together, but you may have the unpleasant surprise of having a huge heat build-up (no space in between = next to 0 ventilation), with results varying in fun-ness from a strange sensation in hands (warm plastic casing) to frying the device. So remember kids, tighter isn't always better! Leave some breathing space!

Re: N900 Thickness
 

Overclocking FTW! ;)

Re: N900 Thickness
 

Sorry, I had a N900 on pre-order since way back, but the thruth:

IT IS A BRICK !

and approx +50 grams to be perfect IMO

just my 2 cents

Re: N900 Thickness
 

Not really, as there was even a dedicated mention at the Maemo Summit not to keep the device running at 600 Mhz constantly or else it will smoke. That's not even overclocking!

Funny that the Open Pandora can be clocked up to 800+ Mhz :p, but of course i'd imagine it has more room to spare and has a better chipset.

Re: N900 Thickness
 

The OMAP3530s have only had the necessary silicon improvements to run at 720MHz very recently. The earlier overclocking tests were on silicon very similar to the OMAP3430. The Pandora and the N900 can both be overclocked fairly high, but don't expect the chip to last very long in that state. :)

Re: N900 Thickness
 

Then how do you explain that the N97 has all of the same internal hardware features, plus a more complex sliding mechanism and a larger battery, and is 2mm thinner and has 20% less volume? (And the N97-mini is even smaller still with almost all of the same features and is 4mm thinner.) Does the extra 24 Gb of memory, the infrared port, and the stylus, even with a smaller battery, really require 20% more volume?

I'm not saying the N900 isn't well engineered in terms of durability and usability. I'm just suggesting that Nokia may not have been making their biggest effort to make the N900 as small/thin as possible. Once again, as I said above, I read that the N900 was originally conceived more as a developer's platform than a consumer device, so why expend a lot of effort and cost on engineering the slickest/smallest physical design?

Re: N900 Thickness
 

I would assume that the Pandora has a more elaborate cooling system (heatsinks) due to its size in comparison to the N900. Better cooling system = higher clock speed maintained without burning up

Re: N900 Thickness
 

Is that a Metric Brick or Imperial Brick?

Mike C

Re: N900 Thickness
 

Hey chicks like the thick.