The Following User Says Thank You to cb474 For This Useful Post: | ||
|
2009-11-01
, 01:16
|
Posts: 521 |
Thanked: 296 times |
Joined on Sep 2009
|
#52
|
The extra thickness of the N900 is in the bottom part of the slide that has the keyboard in it. The top parts with the screens are the same thickness on the N97 and N900.
Is the higher performance processor so much bigger to account for a 20% volume difference from the N97? Even though the N97 has a larger battery and a more complex sliding mechanism? There are things that are bigger in the N97 too. To me it just doesn't add up to accounting for a 20% volume difference on the two devices.
It seems to me like people have just decided that the N900 could not possibly have been otherwise. Nokia in its divine and infallible wisdom made the only design they could have possibly made, with the given components, and all things are prefect, because it is the best of all possible worlds.
Don't get me wrong either. I like the N900. I don't care about the thickness as far as handling the device goes. It seems more like a concern for pocketability, since this is after supposed to be a phone after all. But I am curious why it's so thick, when other Nokia devices with extremely similar components and some larger components are considerably smaller and thinner.
|
2009-11-01
, 01:20
|
|
Posts: 5,478 |
Thanked: 5,222 times |
Joined on Jan 2006
@ St. Petersburg, FL
|
#53
|
The fanboy's don't even want to admit that the N900 could be considered 'thick' lol.
|
2009-11-01
, 01:26
|
|
Posts: 11,700 |
Thanked: 10,045 times |
Joined on Jun 2006
@ North Texas, USA
|
#54
|
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.
|
2009-11-01
, 01:33
|
Posts: 219 |
Thanked: 98 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
@ Amsterdam, The Netherlands
|
#55
|
If the stylus was the one thing that kept a bigger battery out of the N900, I'm betting it would have been sacrificed.
|
2009-11-01
, 01:50
|
Posts: 716 |
Thanked: 303 times |
Joined on Sep 2009
@ Sheffield, UK
|
#56
|
Unfortunately, this topic is not going to go anywhere on this forum. The fanboy's don't even want to admit that the N900 could be considered 'thick' lol.
yes. replaced by a toothpick. like a swiss army knife.
what is the physical keyboard wasnt mechanic but electronic. it couldve been thinner.
|
2009-11-01
, 02:57
|
Posts: 4,556 |
Thanked: 1,624 times |
Joined on Dec 2007
|
#57
|
|
2009-11-01
, 04:01
|
Posts: 49 |
Thanked: 8 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
|
#58
|
|
2009-11-01
, 05:39
|
Posts: 9 |
Thanked: 1 time |
Joined on Nov 2009
|
#59
|
Cant wait to get my hands on my N900. It has been a horrible experience with the Palm Pre as I came fro the iPhone before that. Not saying the iPhone is the best, but it kills the Pre in all areas. I have also been very depressed with Palms upgrades, build quality and support.
|
2009-11-01
, 06:31
|
Posts: 49 |
Thanked: 8 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
|
#60
|
Is the higher performance processor so much bigger to account for a 20% volume difference from the N97? Even though the N97 has a larger battery and a more complex sliding mechanism? There are things that are bigger in the N97 too. To me it just doesn't add up to accounting for a 20% volume difference on the two devices.
It seems to me like people have just decided that the N900 could not possibly have been otherwise. Nokia in its divine and infallible wisdom made the only design they could have possibly made, with the given components, and all things are prefect, because it is the best of all possible worlds.
Don't get me wrong either. I like the N900. I don't care about the thickness as far as handling the device goes. It seems more like a concern for pocketability, since this is after all supposed to be a phone. But I am curious why it's so thick, when other Nokia devices with extremely similar components and some larger components are considerably smaller and thinner. All of the reasons people have offered so far are pretty easy to discount.
Last edited by cb474; 2009-11-01 at 06:02.