Active Topics
-
The N900 is now 15 years old! (8)
to Nokia N900 by whayong - 5 hrs, 54 mins ago -
Sailfish OS for the Motorola Moto G7 Power (XT1955-5) - (ocean) (4)
to SailfishOS by Maemish - 5 days, 2 hrs ago - more...
 |
|
2010-06-21
, 22:28
|
|
Posts: 4,672 |
Thanked: 5,455 times |
Joined on Jul 2008
@ Springfield, MA, USA
|
#22
|
Originally Posted by mastac
You've entirely missed all the details I've enumerated to you about wasted dimensions, screen size and power usage. Begone with ye!
if you want the n900 to be wifi only, take the sim card out
Originally Posted by ysss
While you're right that WiFi isn't as ubiquitous, it is becoming MORE ubiquitous and therefore far more of a utility to tablet owners than it had been previous to this year especially. You're finding it even on trains and busses in many cities. It helps that the trend has been to push more and more of these small devices (iPad, iPod Touch, tablets, etc.) because they help to build the momentum by which much cheaper and much more smaller devices, untethered to telco carriers, can be supported on the Internet.
Technically WiFi can never be as ubiquitous as GSM/CDMA due to many reasons (mainly stems from technical limitation). So there'll be quite a lot of areas where the device is not connected to the hive mind (mainly when you're moving about: cars, buses, metros, etc).
Considering how much apps and services that work so much better when you're connected, I'd much prefer if we address the concerns and shortcomings of the more ubiquitous connectivity option... (cost, privacy, connectivity option, etc)
While I'm sure you're referring to the likes of Pandora or Google Maps as the always-on services you enjoy while in transit, wireless connectivity from the TelCo's isn't perfect and a fully downloaded map with occasional updates would still serve one better than a live mapping direction service that can lose its connectivity at any moment. Wifi would still provide these updates (far faster and cheaper, too). Pandora, on the other hand, is an excellent argument if you don't have any music of your own or simply prefer it over FM or AM radio. (My 1974 Beetle only has AM radio, sorry).
Originally Posted by ysss
GSM (voice and data) is very easily susceptible to evesdropping and, worse, man-in-the-middle exploits. Practically, it's just as bad as open wifi except that people think they can trust it and there's been no noticeable attempt to plug up the exploits. So much for trusting clear legal entities on wireless. CDMA/EVDO still hasn't been hacked yet... So far, so good there... For now.
As far as security is concerned, isn't there more risk on public wifi where other users can scan, intercept, setup honeypots, etc?
At least the operators are clear legal entities that can be easily identified and acted upon if there are issues.
| The Following User Says Thank You to danramos For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2010-06-21
, 22:28
|
|
Posts: 4,672 |
Thanked: 5,455 times |
Joined on Jul 2008
@ Springfield, MA, USA
|
#23
|
Also, I find it amusing to have my name used as a camp (ie. "I'm in the Dan Ramos camp...". Thanks.
Last edited by danramos; 2010-06-21 at 22:38.
Thanks.
Last edited by danramos; 2010-06-21 at 22:38.
|
|
2010-06-21
, 22:51
|
|
Posts: 46 |
Thanked: 41 times |
Joined on Jun 2010
|
#24
|
I'm using my N900 most of the time as a wifi device. Most of the time, I am either at home or at the university and I have wifi in both locations.
However, I wouldn't buy a wifi-only n900. I have to carry a mobile phone with me anyway, and I'd rather not carry with me more than one device in my pockets.
The cost of adding 3g to the device is less than you think. It probably adds only few dollars to the manufacturing price of the device. Most of the price you pay covers R&D, marketing etc., and not manufacturing. You want a cheaper device? Do like I did and buy a refurbished unit for less than 350$.
I would consider a wifi-only device, OTOH, if it had a large screen (5''-7'') and higher resolution so I could use it as an eBook reader. Anything that goes into my pocket should be able to function as a mobile phone.
However, I wouldn't buy a wifi-only n900. I have to carry a mobile phone with me anyway, and I'd rather not carry with me more than one device in my pockets.
The cost of adding 3g to the device is less than you think. It probably adds only few dollars to the manufacturing price of the device. Most of the price you pay covers R&D, marketing etc., and not manufacturing. You want a cheaper device? Do like I did and buy a refurbished unit for less than 350$.
I would consider a wifi-only device, OTOH, if it had a large screen (5''-7'') and higher resolution so I could use it as an eBook reader. Anything that goes into my pocket should be able to function as a mobile phone.
|
|
2010-06-21
, 23:03
|
|
Posts: 4,672 |
Thanked: 5,455 times |
Joined on Jul 2008
@ Springfield, MA, USA
|
#25
|
Originally Posted by sela
You say probably, but in fact it costs very much more than a few dollars, and then there's the additional lost space, weight and screen real-estate we've lost. Also.. really, for a refurb, I'd still want to pay less than that if I never wanted a cell phone radio, given everything else I told you.
The cost of adding 3g to the device is less than you think. It probably adds only few dollars to the manufacturing price of the device. Most of the price you pay covers R&D, marketing etc., and not manufacturing. You want a cheaper device? Do like I did and buy a refurbished unit for less than 350$.
Originally Posted by sela
No, anything that goes into my pocket (because it has a large screen) should function as a computer. Anything small and light enough to sit comfortably in a belt-loop holster (because, it's JUST a cell phone radio) should function as my mobile phone.
I would consider a wifi-only device, OTOH, if it had a large screen (5''-7'') and higher resolution so I could use it as an eBook reader. Anything that goes into my pocket should be able to function as a mobile phone.
 |
|
2010-06-22
, 00:34
|
|
Posts: 794 |
Thanked: 784 times |
Joined on Sep 2007
@ /Canada/Ontario/GTA
|
#26
|
Originally Posted by flareup
Exactly what I was blogging about last week:
...
Nokia had the ball (they owned the pitch!) and threw it away....
http://mobiletablets.blogspot.com/20...in-tablet.html
I would get a wifi tablet in a heartbeat provided it was still pocketable and had a more modern UX.
 |
|
2010-06-22
, 01:06
|
|
Posts: 4,930 |
Thanked: 2,272 times |
Joined on Oct 2007
|
#27
|
Originally Posted by danramos
See, I don't think those are all strictly related to the phone thing, especially the screen size.
You say probably, but in fact it costs very much more than a few dollars, and then there's the additional lost space, weight and screen real-estate we've lost.
IMO, from looking at the devices that have made it to market and been successful, there's an unstable equilibrium in screen sizes about 6" -- anything smaller, people want it smaller so it fits in their pocket better. Anything larger, and they want it bigger so they can see things bigger. (This assumes the same pixel count -- more pixels is generally better, and may or may not overcome an "unfavorable" size difference.) While individual people may vary from that, that seems to be the trend for mass-market devices.
Since the internet tablets have always been on the smaller side of that curve, I think we'd have seen the switch to 3.5" screen anyway, even if it had remained an unphone.
As for additional space... What additional space?
N810: 72*128*14 = 129,024 mm^3
N900: 111*60*19.5 = 129,870 mm^3
Okay, 1% more space... And that's treating the N900 as a box of maximum thickness (when only the camera/kickstand protrudes that far), the same as the N810 (which is essentially flat) -- it's probably the same or less volume in reality.
In fairness, the smaller screen takes up less internal space, so the smaller-screen device having the same size does imply some bloat in the rest of it, but it's not huge, and there's other improvements as well (camera, IRTX, FMTX, FMRX, at least). IMO not enough difference to care about one way or the other -- cost is the only real factor I see.
Frankly, if the N900 came out during the first few months when I'd not yet tethered my N800, I'd probably have opted for a wifi-only N900 if it were even $100 less (which I'm sure it would have been). But having tethered and carried both a tablet (first the N800, then the N810) and a phone practically everywhere for well over 6 months, I'd have easily paid $200 extra for the "phone" version (no matter how much smaller the unphone version was), but at some point I'd have saved the cash and kept the separate phone. I still wish they did have both options (and, while I'm wishing, maybe an AT&T version, for the poor folks stuck in a contract, or in Canada), but having experienced (become addicted to?) always-on connectivity, it wouldn't have changed which one I got.
__________________
World's first inductively-charged N900!
World's first inductively-charged N900!
|
|
2010-06-22
, 07:24
|
|
Posts: 2,802 |
Thanked: 4,491 times |
Joined on Nov 2007
|
#28
|
Originally Posted by danramos
I'd be happy to have a cellular modem built into a non-phone device (you know, like what we were originally led to believe the N900 would be). If the radio is only powered up on demand when you need a cellular data connection (as opposed to it being always on just in case someone calls or sends an SMS) then power consumption isn't that big a problem.
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.
Space doesn't have to be a big deal either as this thread shows.
Long-time readers already know I'm biased toward WIFI-only with bluetooth/USB tethering to a cell-phone.
| The Following User Says Thank You to lma For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2010-06-22
, 08:34
|
|
Posts: 176 |
Thanked: 149 times |
Joined on Dec 2009
|
#29
|
You make a fair case for your needs. But I need the phone part too. I'm just guessing that you'll have to wait for Meego to get what you want. More devices = more form factors.
| The Following User Says Thank You to harp For This Useful Post: | ||
 |
|
2010-06-22
, 09:44
|
|
Posts: 186 |
Thanked: 192 times |
Joined on Jan 2010
@ Finland
|
#30
|
Originally Posted by Benson
To be honest, N810 also had a bigger battery (both in volume and capacity), bigger SD slot, and one more connector. Also, IIRC, the screen was inset a mm or two (making the edges of the screen difficult to finger tap / clean). There's also the technology advancement of few years in between the devices, typically integration levels keep increasing, and using up less space. That said, I don't think space is the major issue here.
N810: 72*128*14 = 129,024 mm^3
N900: 111*60*19.5 = 129,870 mm^3
Okay, 1% more space... And that's treating the N900 as a box of maximum thickness (when only the camera/kickstand protrudes that far), the same as the N810 (which is essentially flat) -- it's probably the same or less volume in reality.
One thing that actually can make a difference in device design though, is the size/shape requirements of the antenna module. This however, is common with any radio the device has (3G/WiFi/GPS).
Originally Posted by lma
Tethering would be fine for me, if someone came up with a solution that would "just work", and do so reliably. My experience so far is, there's always that little something that causes extra trouble or distraction.
Bluetooth tethering is fine too, just a bit of extra hassle (one more device to carry around and keep charged).
__________________
Trout have underwater weapons.
Trout have underwater weapons.
| The Following User Says Thank You to juise- For This Useful Post: | ||
 |
| Tags |
| camp ramos, no cellular, wifi cellular |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
| Thread Tools | |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 07:25.
Nokia had the ball (they owned the pitch!) and threw it away.
I've been using my 800 with a 'mifi' thing from 3 network in the uk, on a payg basis (they even do a bundle deal with ipod touch).
and my phone is a tiny nokia.
simples.