Nokia's Present & Future

The feature phone market is going away . Last trip to a verizon store here and there are bout 6 feature phones left in the store and they are planing on reducing that to 3 next quarter. The same could be said at sprint stores.
 
Considering tablets are basically just large smartphones running the same OS and similar apps customized for more screen space, smartphones are hardly crippled devices.

The core idea behind iOS devices is to create a responsive and powerful user experience, so backing that up with high performance processing does matter a lot to the average consumer even if they don't know the specifics.
 
Am I misinterpreting things if by quoted section you mean to say that wanting decent battery life (i.e. charge once a week) is an irrelevant usage profile?

Battery life is clearly very important (it's very high on everyone's list), but I think finding charging once every 1-2 weeks a hassle is such a minority view point, and to combine it with a usage pattern that rarely takes the phone out of the house, results in a user profile that is atypical in the extreme, and thus irrevelant to the industry.

And when we have 1 week ,will a month become the next "decent battery life". it's all about progress of course, but also about what is doable now and in the short term.
 
Am I misinterpreting things if by quoted section you mean to say that wanting decent battery life (i.e. charge once a week) is an irrelevant usage profile?

You're assuming decent battery life = charging once a week.
I don't really understand how someone in a first/second world country in the modern world doesn't come close to a wall socket in 4 days, and cannot have a solar charger or a backup battery charger.

I know for a fact that if I was a smartphone manufacturer, my target would be to provide the best possible utilization for a period of 72 hours.
That leaves plenty of room for forgetting to charge the phone overnight, unless you think it's perfectly natural that forgetting to charge it 3 nights in a row is something that phone manufacturers should take into account (note: they won't)...


C'mon.
Bulk is always a negative in a device meant to be carried all the time. As is having to remember to recharge it, wait for it to do so, and still remember that it's not in your pocket when you go out the door.

It's one thing to say bulk isn't important or battery life isn't important, and a completely different thing to state objective demands that don't reflect the actual needs of the general public (or any number-relevant public at all, to be honest).


As a comparison, anyone can say:
- It's good to have a fast car that can do large roadtrips with a single deposit

That's acceptable, but if I say I want a car that is:
- Small
- Does 0-100Km in 10 seconds
- Hits 180Km/h
- Carries 2 people
- Can do 5000Km on a single deposit

This is doable, it's basically a small light commercial van with a medium-end engine that takes fuel in the place where the luggage is.
But no car manufacturer is going to do this, no one actually needs to do 5000Km on a single deposit, in a car that will be used in cities with tens of fuel stations in a radius of 50Km. And if someone, somehow needs that, they can always carry extra fuel tanks in the luggage.

And saying it's not important to make a car that does 5000Km with a single deposit is not the same as saying autonomy isn't important. If that was true, I bet we'd all be using electric motor cars by now.


smartphone-marketshare-may-2011-o.png
I don't know where this is coming from and what it relates to, but I do know for sure it's not representative of the worldwide market (hint: topic title).
 
Considering tablets are basically just large smartphones running the same OS and similar apps customized for more screen space, smartphones are hardly crippled devices.
Unless you say that screenspace (for both viewing and input) and performance doesnt matter, Id say Smartphoners are crippled. Why else are people buying new ones every 2-3 years, current phones arent "enough" not to be outdated soon too.
I couldnt imagine typing a big word document on a smartphone, tablet would be alot better but you cant beat a full keyboard. Unless your program just doesnt run on Android, which is another crippling aspect compared to laptops and the reason why I dint bought one.
Smartphones just arent better "phones", that got perfected already 10 years ago, and for anything else they are worse than tablets or just plain inadequate.

I don't know where this is coming from and what it relates to, but I do know for sure it's not representative of the worldwide market (hint: topic title).
source. if you got better numbers, feel free to post them.
 
I don't know where this is coming from and what it relates to, but I do know for sure it's not representative of the worldwide market (hint: topic title).

source. if you got better numbers, feel free to post them.

The first sentence in your own link:


Symbian had something like 43% of smartphone share worldwide throughout most of 2010, hence my conclusion.

That said, it's kind of erroneous to show the stats of a single country and assume it'll be representative of worldwide usage, specially if we're talking about a country that derives the most from worldwide usage.
That's mostly because the people in the US don't really have much of a freedom of choice, since the carriers practically dictate what cellphones their clients can use (see eastmen's post).
If you only want to discuss the US, be my guest. Just make sure to state what you're actually talking about.
 
I was talking about total phone market (not Symbians share in Smartphones), and I dont find any worldwide stats, read my post in context.
If you got better data, post it. But I`d surprised if Smartphones would be account for 55% or more, prolly alot less.
 
Yeah, I'm not quite sure how they got 31 percent in the press release intro. It doesn't gel with their own numbers. Maybe they meant to write that it was 31 percent in Q4 2011.
 
You're assuming decent battery life = charging once a week.
I don't really understand how someone in a first/second world country in the modern world doesn't come close to a wall socket in 4 days, and cannot have a solar charger or a backup battery charger.

I know for a fact that if I was a smartphone manufacturer, my target would be to provide the best possible utilization for a period of 72 hours.
That leaves plenty of room for forgetting to charge the phone overnight, unless you think it's perfectly natural that forgetting to charge it 3 nights in a row is something that phone manufacturers should take into account (note: they won't)...

You are equating being close to a wall at least once every 3 days as an argument against not wanting longer battery life. I find having to charge my phone a rather annoying inconvenience, not a technical impossibility.

I prefer do it as little as possible.
 
Considering how much use many people get out of their phones, plugging it in once every couple of days has been a reasonable expectation. People who drive a lot expect to fuel up their cars relatively often, too.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I can see your point, IF the phone would last a lot longer if you don't use it (i.e. in 'standby' mode).

Unfortunately, the length of time the battery lasts in standby mode is abysmal on nearly all smartphones nowadays. And it's very hard to compare the real battery standby time, as manufacturers advertise numbers than often are multiples above what you really get (they enter some special super-low-level standby mode where the cellphone tower has to be 1 meter from the phone or something).
 
True. If you're keeping a phone as a utility/emergency device and using it only when necessary for the most part, the shortness of current device standby times would make them very impractical.
 
You are equating being close to a wall at least once every 3 days as an argument against not wanting longer battery life.

I just made a rather long post explaining why that's pretty much what I don't mean, but whatever.

Summing up in two points:
- Wanting a long battery life: ok.
- Having a "needs to last more than 72/96 hours or I won't buy it" rule: irrelevant for the world we live in, and no manufacturer will make a fully-featured smartphone based on that.

After this, if you (or any other) still simply think I'm trying to say battery life isn't important.. well, I don't know how to explain this any further, so be welcome to keep that thought.


BTW, I get 4-5 straight days of standby on my Motorola Defy, on a single charge. I'm using it as a secondary phone so I don't use it that often (maybe a 5min call a day).
 
Nokia 808 with a 1/1.2" sensor capable of 38MPixel photos.

fMfY6.jpg


It also records audio in Dolby Digital 5.1 using the reverse of Dolby Headphone codec through a dual microphone setup.


CPU-wise, all we know is that it's using a 1.3GHz single-core CPU.
Can this be using a BCM2763?
The ISP in that external GPU is rated at 20MPixels, and the smartphone is getting nearly 40MPixels. Even Tegra 3's ISP only goes up to 32MPixels.
 
Geez. Latest full-frame DSLR's have actually lowered their sensor resolution to get better image quality with less noise. That one has roughly 28x smaller area and around 2.5x higher pixel count making it's pixel-size to be around 70x smaller than those DSLR's meaning they will need that much more photons to get similar noise levels.
 
Geez. Latest full-frame DSLR's have actually lowered their sensor resolution to get better image quality with less noise. That one has roughly 28x smaller area and around 2.5x higher pixel count making it's pixel-size to be around 70x smaller than those DSLR's meaning they will need that much more photons to get similar noise levels.


Both implementations are clearly different in the way they're trying to achieve better output.
The 808 can take 38Mpixel photos, but its main purpose is to use pixel oversample to take very good 5 and 8Mpixel photos.
Also, they can resort to pretty decent "zoomed" pictures and videos without having to cram an optical zoom (unlike DSLRs, that's a luxury that smartphines can't afford in their current form factors).
 
Geez. Latest full-frame DSLR's have actually lowered their sensor resolution to get better image quality with less noise. That one has roughly 28x smaller area and around 2.5x higher pixel count making it's pixel-size to be around 70x smaller than those DSLR's meaning they will need that much more photons to get similar noise levels.

Yeah, the 41MP is marketing B.S., but.... You're comparing a camera in a cell phone to $3000 cameras :?:

The sensor in the 808 is 86 mm^2 that is comparable to the sensors found in Nikon's 1 series, which are excellent for the price.

For comparison this new sensor is four times the area of the sensors in N95 or N8, and those were brilliant.

Cheers
 
Back
Top