Thread: The case for a wifi-only device
View Single Post
wmarone is offline wmarone
2010-06-21 , 20:53
Posts: 1,746 | Thanked: 2,100 times | Joined on Sep 2009
#7
Originally Posted by mastac View Post
if you want the n900 to be wifi only, take the sim card out
Which misses the point of not including the cellular base band completely (cheaper device, decreased power usage, etc.) I suspect that either the iPad mode of selection will become common, or someone will get the bright idea to make it an end-user installable option (and provide for audio suport and not -just- data.)

Originally Posted by danramos View Post
With free WIFI becoming so ubiquitous (McDonald's chains, Starbucks chains, free WIFI at hotels, public WIFI's, at home, etc.)
Because it's not ubiquitous. Each time you want access you have to stop at one of those places. I quite like being able to browse while walking around and not lose my connection (or worse yet, find myself somewhere that wants $10 for 24 hours of connectivity, of which I'll use 2.)

I'm just not seeing the case for embedding so many devices with power-sucking, surreptitiously running and space-hogging cellular radios in devices that were never intended to be cell phones.
Power management is king. Done properly 3/3.5G shouldn't consume more than WiFi, and done wrong WiFi can eat a battery lightning quick (which is the problem I have with my router at home, since it hates the power-save routines the N900 uses.)

The Nokia 770, N800, N810 and (arguably) the N810WE were all GREAT with just WIFI for connectivity.
Arguably, for -some- people. I explicitly ignored most PDAs and didn't really pay all that much mind to the N8x0 series due to being wifi only. Had there been a cellular module or something I'd probably have upgraded years ago instead of using the same phone for 5 years

Considering how well that's worked out, and the move of Apple to provide non-cellular versions of devices (iPhone->iPod Touch, iPad G3->iPad Wifi). Google has changed the specs for Android so that it would run and make sense on non-cellular devices, recognizing that people might prefer a good embedded OS on a non-cellular device. Even Barnes and Nobles has decided to release a wifi-only version of their Nook eBook reader, very recently.
It would always run on non-cellular devices, though I don't think Google has pursued that actively. And tossing out options for people to choose what they want never hurts, it's all about use cases.

With the sneaky use of the N900's phone-home registration as an example
Totally the fault of Nokia being irresponsible, there's nothing preventing such surreptitious transmission of data via wifi (especially since we can't install a functional, community-vetted version!)

the unnecessarily short battery life
Price to be paid for 100% connectivity. IMO, a device without access is useless. The trick is making sure that when access is desired it is made available, not constantly active and burning battery.

added heft and smaller screen
Bigger screen = added heft and reduced battery life (or you go the Apple route and jam huge batteries in the case...) A cellular base band doesn't add that much.
Last edited by wmarone; 2010-06-21 at 21:10.
 

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to wmarone For This Useful Post: