Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

The Nokia N90, $900 Camera Phone Reviewed

CmdrTaco posted more than 8 years ago | from the does-it-ome-with-a-million-minutes dept.

212

Lord_of_Tech writes "CoolTechZone.com has reviewed Nokia's N90 cell phones that comes with 2 megapixel camera and a host of other features, and it costs a solid $900 per unit. "The minute you set your eyes on the N90, the first thing that springs to your mind is 'it looks a lot slimmer in photos...' but as you take it out of the packaging, you realize the heaviness of it. To be very clear at the outset though, this is not Nokia's attempt to produce as sleek a phone as the Motorola Razr. What it is designed to be is a feature packed phone that doesn't mind compromising on the ergonomics to pack in every last bit of functionality you could ever want on a camera phone."

cancel ×

212 comments

Tiny quibble with the review (4, Informative)

FidelCatsro (861135) | more than 8 years ago | (#13879820)

One small , perhaps insignificant problem with the review.
It goes in-depth with all the features of the phone rather well, it does however miss one thing.

How good is it as an actual phone?
What does it sound like when making a call?
Is the antenna any use?
How is the microphone?

This is something rather important to me when buying a phone.. being that it is the primary purpose of the thing.

Good review of all the features though, I won't touch this phone with a barge-pole if the review is correct (and the price tag so inordinate ).

PS: I took the liberty of coral caching the site , it was taking a while to load pages when I was reading the review http://www.cooltechzone.com.nyud.net:8090/index.ph p?option=content&task=view&id=1915 [nyud.net]

Re:Tiny quibble with the review (4, Informative)

pasokon (829164) | more than 8 years ago | (#13879841)

The review really doesn't tell you anything... try this http://www.mobileburn.com/review.jsp?Id=1689 [mobileburn.com] for a decent review, with real pics of the phone and interface, as well as sample shots from the camera.

Re:Tiny quibble with the review (4, Informative)

yogix (865930) | more than 8 years ago | (#13879979)

"Hey - the 90s called. They want your concerns back..."

I have been using Nokias (and other mobile phones) for over 10 years here in India. While some of the earlier models did have issues in these areas, in my experience, NONE of the current models do...

The problems that they do suffer from are mainly usability issues such as sluggishness of software, bad layout of keys and so on.

So although every time a cam-phone is mentioned on Slashdot someone brings up the 'mic and antenna' issue and how a 'phone should be just a phone', I really don't think these newer phones have a problem in that area any more.

[DISCLAIMER: This is of course based on my own experiences with several cam / non-cam phones I have used. Your mileage may vary...]

-YoGiX

Re:Tiny quibble with the review (2, Insightful)

IANAAC (692242) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880018)

So although every time a cam-phone is mentioned on Slashdot someone brings up the 'mic and antenna' issue and how a 'phone should be just a phone', I really don't think these newer phones have a problem in that area any more.

I think the poster's point was that it was a camera/vidcam review, not a phone review. He's right. The review is all about the camera functions and not much else.

Re:Tiny quibble with the review (1)

FidelCatsro (861135) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880093)

I have had numerous problems with Microphones and speakers when using phones over the years .
It is very noticeable the difference in quality between some of them , especially with those that tend to drop parts of the conversation .
Perhaps I am just a little sensitive in regards to sound quality ,but it is very important to me .

I also live in a village , the reception here is not great . I need a good antenna to compensate for that . If you are in a city or town , chances are you will never notice something like this though.

Re:Tiny quibble with the review (0)

bluelip (123578) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880013)

Your comments remind of the joke about a watch that does everything, but tell time.

Re:Tiny quibble with the review (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13880313)

Wow that joke sounds hilarious. Let's hear it, idoit.

Re:Tiny quibble with the review (2, Informative)

fjm03 (548420) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880109)

Good point since the handset, as configured, isn't practical on the Cingular network which increasingly relies on the 850 Mhz channel for coverage in many markets.

Re:Tiny quibble with the review (1)

Sathallrin (874274) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880186)

$900 is just way too much for a phone. Especially with only a 2 megapixel camera. You can get a much better digital for much cheaper. Plus probably a much better phone to go along with it. The article doesn't say much about the quality of the actual phone.

Re:Tiny quibble with the review (1)

10Ghz (453478) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880211)

How good is it as an actual phone?
What does it sound like when making a call?
Is the antenna any use?
How is the microphone?


After using several Nokia phones (1611, 5110, 7110, 6110, 6210, 6310i, 6220, 6260, 6680 and 9300) over the course of the years, I can say that there are no problems in each of the areas you listed. Those are really non-issues that are not really worth reporting on, really.

The N90 is a good phone. It has a good antenna and microphone, and it's easy to use. There, happy?

The first thing that springs to my mind.... (3, Insightful)

novus ordo (843883) | more than 8 years ago | (#13879825)

"My god...$900"

oblig (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13879829)

Yeah, but can it make phone calls?

No seriously... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13879899)

Can it make phone calls? Can the call be completed without being dropped? For $900 I might expect that level of reliability.

Re:oblig (1, Insightful)

scovetta (632629) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880096)

Who cares? It'll take 2 megapixel PICTURES that you can e-mail to yourself. For an extra $199, you can do text messaging to other Nokia N90 customers.

Seriously folks, when was the last time you heard yourself say, "It's a good thing I had that camera in my phone, or I would have missed that!".

I'd expect some *useful* features in a $900 phone (universal remote control, PDA-like features, wi-fi, laser pointer, [a phone that you can make calls on]!!, maybe something cool like goggles or a tv-out that you can pipe internet access through your phone to a screen that you can actually see something on. Why not treat the phone as a thin client and have your "computer" be your phone.

Sorry, my phone just finished making me french toast, I've got to run.

Re:oblig (4, Funny)

DarkVader (121278) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880340)

Well, I was never one of the people who really wanted a camera in my phone. I did want bluetooth, so I could use it as a modem with my iBook.

So, I got a motorola v551 - which happened to have a camera. I didn't object to a camera enough to bother finding a phone without one.

And then, I was at my girlfriend's business one night - and an eagle decided to eat a pigeon in the doorway.

Without a camera phone, I'd have missed getting pictures of that. So, I guess I'm glad my phone had one.

Re:oblig (1)

Tet (2721) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880343)

Seriously folks, when was the last time you heard yourself say, "It's a good thing I had that camera in my phone, or I would have missed that!".

Actually, quite often. It's handy to know that wherever you are, you have a camera with you. OK, so it's not great quality, but it's good enough for a lot of uses.

Safety (5, Funny)

HermanAB (661181) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880225)

Talking on a phone is dangerous while driving, so Nokia decided to drop that feature...

Re:Safety (3, Funny)

BushCheney08 (917605) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880296)

But it's always a good idea to get photos of that guy yapping on the phone just before he crashes into you...

It's Free (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13879838)

I hear its going to be free with a 10 Year contract

N91 (4, Insightful)

pr0nbot (313417) | more than 8 years ago | (#13879844)

Not sure why this was posted to slashdot... it's just another phone.

The one you want is the N91, which has 802.11g wi-fi.

Re:N91 (0, Flamebait)

viktor (11866) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880112)

Not sure why this was posted to slashdot... it's just another phone.

I agree, but then again every beta of every minor revision of the Linux kernel seems to get posted to slashdot, so why not a post for every phone model? :-)

Yeah, that could be considered flaimbait. Please don't bite it.

As a Nokia Insider (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13879848)

Nokia's double standards are completely disgusting -- so much so, that if there are any children or sensitive people reading this letter, I suggest that they stop now and not read what I am about to describe. It is requisite, even in this summary sketch, to go back a few years to see how there is something grievously wrong with those self-centered prophets of Stalinism who replace the search for truth with a situationist relativism based on grumpy metagrobolism. Shame on the lot of them! Sure, Nokia talks the talk, but does it walk the walk? As you no doubt realize, that's a particulary timely question. In fact, just half an hour ago, I heard someone express the opinion that Nokia's arguments would be a lot more effective if they were at least accurate or intelligent, not just a load of bull for the sake of being controversial. Nokia seizes every opportunity to pervert human instincts by suppressing natural, feral constraints and encouraging abnormal patterns of behavior. I cannot believe this colossal clownishness. Any sane person knows that we wouldn't currently have a problem with emotionalism if it weren't for Nokia. Although it created the problem, aggravated the problem, and escalated the problem, Nokia insists that it can solve the problem if we just grant it more power. How naïve does it think we are? Truly, everyone ought to read my award-winning essay, "The Naked Aggression of Nokia". In it, I chronicle all of Nokia's convictions, from the besotted to the deplorable, and conclude that Nokia says that censorship could benefit us. That is the most despicable lie I have ever heard in my entire life. Allow me to explain. I know more about solecism than most people. You might even say that I'm an expert on the subject. I can therefore state with confidence that Nokia just keeps on saying, "We don't give a [expletive deleted] about you. We just want to anesthetize the human spirit." I may be opening a Pandora's box by writing this, but Nokia's grand plan is to portray what I call malicious, unrealistic scroungers as drug addicts. I'm sure Mao Tse Tung would approve. In any case, we should not concern ourselves with Nokia's putative virtue or vice. Rather, we should concern ourselves with our own welfare and with the fact that the acid test for Nokia's "kinder, gentler" new hijinks should be, "Do they still cure the evil of discrimination with more discrimination?" If the answer is yes, then we can conclude that Nokia wants us to think of it as a do-gooder. Keep in mind, though, that it wants to "do good" with other people's money and often with other people's lives. If Nokia really wanted to be a do-gooder, it could start by admitting that whenever it announces that it is the one who will lead us to our great shining future, its forces applaud on cue and the accolades are long and ostentatious. What's funny is that they don't provide similar feedback whenever I tell them that for the nonce, Nokia is content to violate strongly held principles regarding deferral of current satisfaction for long-term gains. But faster than you can say "hematospectrophotometer", it will prepare the ground for an ever-more vicious and brutal campaign of terror.

Nokia should work with us, not step in at the eleventh hour and hog all the glory. In this land which has befriended savage yobbos, Nokia has conspired, plotted, undermined, prostituted, and corrupted, and -- hiding to this hour behind the braver screen of despicable backbiters -- dares to contrive and scheme the death of every principle that has protected it. Leaving aside the behavior of other unambitious, grungy individuals, Nokia's mind has limited horizons. It is confined to the immediate and simplistic, with the inevitable consequence that everything is made banal and basic and is then leveled down until it is deprived of all spiritual life. Although I agree with those who contend that Nokia's representatives irrationalize thinking on every issue for dubious reasons or for no reason at all, nevertheless, I cannot agree with the subject matter and attitude that is woven into every one of Nokia's pesky quips.

Nokia's surrogates are the biggest pompous know-nothings who have ever dirtied the face of the earth, as if it made any difference. Better, far better, that Man were without the gift of speech than that he use it as Nokia does. Better that Man could neither read nor write than have his head and heart perverted by the flagitious and lackluster tommyrot that oozes from Nokia's pen. And better that the cut of Man's coat and the number of his buttons were fixed by statute and enforced by penalties than that Nokia should create an ideological climate that will enable it to threaten the common good. As a parenthetical note, I can't follow Nokia's pretzel logic. I do, however, know that its superficial, rude politics leave the current power structure untouched while simultaneously killing countless children through starvation and disease. Are these children Nokia's enemies? This is an important question because to Nokia's mind, no one is smart enough to see through its transparent lies. So that means that the Eleventh Commandment is, "Thou shalt silence critical debate and squelch creative brainstorming", right? No, not right. The truth is that when a mistake is made, the smart thing to do is to admit it and reverse course. That takes real courage. The way that Nokia stubbornly refuses to own up to its mistakes serves only to convince me that its claim that the Earth is flat is factually unsupported and politically motivated. Think about how easy it's become for passive-aggressive liars and cheats to cultivate an unhealthy sense of victimhood.

When I first heard about Nokia's rejoinders, I didn't know whether to laugh, because Nokia's tracts are so insipid, or cry, because Nokia's epigrams do not hold under close moral scrutiny. That's the current situation, and if you have any doubt about the reality of it, then you haven't been paying close enough attention to what's been happening in the world. Nokia's older projects were incomprehensible enough. Its latest ones are obviously beyond the pale.

If one could get a Ph.D. in Expansionism, Nokia would be the first in line to have one. Nokia has two imperatives. The first is to poke and pry into every facet of our lives. The second imperative is to create a climate of intimidation. Heathenism doesn't work. So why does Nokia cling to it? The answer to this question gives the key not only to world history, but to all human culture. To end this letter, I would like to make a bet with Nokia. I will gladly give Nokia a day's salary if it can prove that anyone who resists it deserves to be crushed, as it insists. If Nokia is unable to prove that, then its end of the bargain is to step aside while I raise ultra-spiteful deviants (especially the contumelious type) out of their cultural misery and lead them to the national community as a valuable, united factor and encourage others to do the same. So, do we have a bet, Nokia?

Re:As a Nokia Insider (0, Offtopic)

xtracto (837672) | more than 8 years ago | (#13879873)

Wow, an Anonymous Coward Nokia Insider Troll.

I didnt read all the comment, I already know it:

I dont know why does this Nokia zealots talk about Nokia phones being easy to use, they say "Making calls in a Nokia telephone is easy" sure, it is easy to...

Neat uh?

Hilarious pompous diatribe! (1)

Dystopian Rebel (714995) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880295)

Replace "Nokia" with your favourite bête-noire and mail it to all your friends!

From the Whoops department... (1, Funny)

xtracto (837672) | more than 8 years ago | (#13879852)

"does-it-ome-with-a-million-minutes "

OME as in Otitis Media with Effusion? [drgreene.com]

I thing you could get it after a million minutes of continuous speaking :)

low space (0)

u2pa (871932) | more than 8 years ago | (#13879864)

only 25mb space on it... no thanks

Re:low space (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13879894)

Despite appearance to the contrary, it's a phone not a computer.

This phone is a travesty. (5, Funny)

generic-man (33649) | more than 8 years ago | (#13879875)

I will absolutely not buy this so-called "phone." For $900 I can get:

  1. A Nintendo DS on which to play games
  2. A small 4-megapixel camera with which to take photos
  3. An Archos PXF-78-MNpL-1 Personal Media Player Jukebox that will extract the photos, sew them into a DivX movie, synchronize with all seven of my Linux boxen, and perform many other tasks that an iPod cannot do
  4. A free cellular phone from any carrier I wish
  5. A portable DVD player on which I will watch movies
  6. A large backpack to haul this around

As is common in these discussions, I believe I speak for everyone in this forum when I state that because I do not want this product, none of you should ever even consider purchasing it.

</coffee>

Re:This phone is a travesty. (0, Offtopic)

kevin_conaway (585204) | more than 8 years ago | (#13879944)

Zing! Take that, Slashdot culture.

Well said. Even funnier that it got modded interesting

Of course you would! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13879952)

And that is why you are a Slashdot geek and not a Sharper Image gadgeteer.

Re:This phone is a travesty. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13880044)

For god's sake, it's BOXES not BOXEN. Everyone who says BOXEN should be shot.

Re:This phone is a travesty. (3, Informative)

FidelCatsro (861135) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880120)

Well that stems from UNIX Boxen which in turn stems from VAXen.
http://foldoc.doc.ic.ac.uk/foldoc/foldoc.cgi?boxen [ic.ac.uk]
boxen
 
/bok'sn/ (By analogy with VAXen) A fanciful plural of box often encountered in the phrase "Unix boxen", used to describe commodity Unix hardware. The connotation is that any two Unix boxen are interchangeable.
In German Boxen is Boxing as in pugilism

Re:This phone is a travesty. (0, Offtopic)

jtroutman (121577) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880196)

and here I just thought it was simple pluralization (is that even a word?)... if the plural of ox is oxen then the plural of box must be boxen.

Re:This phone is a travesty. (0, Offtopic)

Kombat (93720) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880200)

No, the parent is right. "Boxen" is trendy and stupid. It comes from
pluralizing "ox" (the livestock), but neglects to consider the convention of other words. For example, the plural of "fox" is "foxes," not "foxen." The plural of "pox" is "poxes." Actually, even the word "box" itself is supposed to be pluralized as "boxes." Have you ever heard anyone outside of the geek-clique say, "Hey Jim, hand me those boxen over there, would you?"

It's a trendy way for geeks with self-esteem issues to be trendy in a cult-humour sort of way, and feel like they belong in some sort of elite club that misuses words. Merriam-Webster, Oxford, and every other dictionary I checked all pluralize "box" as "boxes," and not a single one of them included any reference to an alternate pluralization ending in 'n'.

Re:This phone is a travesty. (1)

FidelCatsro (861135) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880320)

It is annoying i agree , but every sub set of culture has its trendy words .
If cowabunga and kook can make it into the dictionary , I don't see why Boxen can't .
Well not as a plural for box , but as a term for commodity hardware . I personally use "Machines " or computers , but each to their own .

Re:This phone is a travesty. (4, Funny)

killmenow (184444) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880214)

I will absolutely not buy this so-called "phone." For $900 I can get:
  1. Hookers
  2. Blow
I already have a digital camera and a cellphone and if my digital camera's batteries die after I photograph myself with the hooker, I can still use my phone to call my dealer for blow.

You list is missing one thing (1)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880238)

Internet access.
To me getting the latest news and weather over my phone means more to me than games, movies, and a camera.

Re:This phone is a travesty. (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13880281)

You also get: 5 different chargers, USB or connector cables. Do you have room on your desk for all that shit? Not to mention the great convenience of having to carry a freaking backback around to do all these things with.

Re:This phone is a travesty. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13880334)

Bravo. Also, I'd like to point that another DISadvantage to the all-in-one phone approach is that with the $900 phone, absolutely NONE of those spiffy features are available to you on an airplane because TSA and FAA regulations still require all communication devices to be turned off while in flight. It doesn't matter if the communication components can be disabled, they want all communication devices turned entirely off.

P.S. Maybe the cell-phone-in-flight regulations will change, maybe it won't. There are pros and cons either way.

Let the complaining begin (3, Insightful)

Nichotin (794369) | more than 8 years ago | (#13879876)

As usual, there will be a lot of posts about "I just want the damn thing to be able to do calls, nothing more". Aside from killing the market (if every vendor had done so), I just think you haven't really considered the possibilities. I travel one hour per day, and since my SE K750i is so powerful, I watch re-encoded episodes of American Dad and Family Guy to kill some time. The quality is acceptable. I basically see the phone as a cool gadget to kill some time while travelling or attending a very boring class.

Re:Let the complaining begin (2, Interesting)

Ford Prefect (8777) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880089)

I travel one hour per day, and since my SE K750i is so powerful, I watch re-encoded episodes of American Dad and Family Guy to kill some time. The quality is acceptable. I basically see the phone as a cool gadget to kill some time while travelling or attending a very boring class.

Whatever happened to reading a book?

I'm starting to feel like some weird throwback to some bygone age with my newspapers and paperback books - and I'm only 26! ;-)

Re:Let the complaining begin (1)

teeker (623861) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880179)

Aside from killing the market (if every vendor had done so), I just think you haven't really considered the possibilities.

No, I HAVE considered the possibilites. That sounds great for you but not everybody wants or needs to watch TV on their phone. Some of us really honestly truly would place a higher value on the simple ability to place calls and be as unobtrusive as possible the rest of the time. I am waiting for something smaller than the RAZR...I don't need a PDA, I don't need an mp3 player, I don't need a camera or widescreen video, I just need a bluetooth connection for a headset, backlit mono screen, a decent (simple) phonebook, and something that I can carry comfortably in my pocket. I'm not sure why something that simple these days couldn't be made about the size of a Zippo lighter... Couple that with data services so my laptop could connect to the internet via bluetooth to the phone, and it'd be absolutely perfect for me (and I suspect others).

If everybody was bitching about it, then you'd think somebody would make one, but apparently not.

I don't think so (3, Interesting)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 8 years ago | (#13879878)

For one, compromising ergonomics for everyone for features that only a subset of owners might use isn't a good idea.

And another, a phone that costs as much as a mid-range laptop (laptops start at $500 now) but smaller and easier to steal or lose doesn't seem to be a good idea. Even with a hefty service plan subsidy, it's not going to be as cheap as a low end laptop.

Which isn't to say there isn't a market for these but a $900 phone looks like a niche item to me.

I certainly won't be buying this, I thought the RAZR was too expensive.

Re:I don't think so (1)

generic-man (33649) | more than 8 years ago | (#13879992)

Compared with my $20,000 platinum Vertu Communications Instrument [vertu.com] (Flash), a $900 phone would be quite cheap. I would buy this "Nokia N90" if only it had a concierge button and some jewel-encrusted highlights.

The RAZR was "too expensive" for a few months; now you can find it for free* with a service contract.

* $1,200 minus $500 activation rebate minus $400 service activation credit minus $150 rebate which must be filed no sooner than 90 days and no later than 120 days from time of activation minus $150 rebate which must be filed no sooner than 180 days and no later than 210 days from time of activation equals FREE!

Re:I don't think so (2, Insightful)

Red Flayer (890720) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880117)

" For one, compromising ergonomics for everyone for features that only a subset of owners might use isn't a good idea."

Compromising a couple characteristics in order to create the perception of increased functionality works well. SUVs come to mind.

The mobile phone market is becoming like the automobile market is.

Sensible people will buy sensible phones. Other people will buy the 'SUV' of phones, not because it is better, but because they can brag to their buddies/coworkers/business contacts that they have the newest greatest most expensive phone.

I see it every day at my office, when the ad sales reps bitch and moan that the company won't pay for their new Dongle. And when, three months later, they've replaced that Dongle with a newer, more prestigious one. iPods, cell phones, PDAs, etc.

Re:I don't think so (1)

grimJester (890090) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880219)

And another, a phone that costs as much as a mid-range laptop (laptops start at $500 now) but smaller and easier to steal or lose doesn't seem to be a good idea.

Oh come on! A phone is bad because it's "easier to steal or lose" than a laptop?

Re:I don't think so (1)

se7en11 (833841) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880230)

FYI: TigerDirect.com [tigerdirect.com] is offer the RAZR phones for free with a 2 year contract.

Re:I don't think so (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13880349)

yah, but it is tiger direct. Why you anyone in their right minds get anything via them, free or not.

Re:I don't think so (1)

10Ghz (453478) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880280)

For one, compromising ergonomics for everyone for features that only a subset of owners might use isn't a good idea.


I have used camera-phones, and I really haven't seen any evidence of this "compromising of ergonomics". All the camera-phones were just as good as normal phones, as phones without camera were. Besides, this phone is designed for the camera in mind. Don't want a phone with prominent camera-features? There are plenty of those available. And if you want a phone to "just to make phone-calls", may I recommend the Nokia 1101?

And another, a phone that costs as much as a mid-range laptop (laptops start at $500 now) but smaller and easier to steal or lose doesn't seem to be a good idea.


You apparently haven't heard of this. [vertu.com] Prices range (IIRC) from $1.500 to something like $5.000. And besides, there are lots and lots of tiny things that are VERY expensive. Jewelry can cost a lot more. Watches can be really expensive.

Name Change (0)

lbmouse (473316) | more than 8 years ago | (#13879887)

HotSmokingServerZone.com

Low light flash, image stabilization technology?! (2, Interesting)

Dekortage (697532) | more than 8 years ago | (#13879889)

Bah! I want low signal boosting and Verizon service stabilization technology!!!

Rubic's Phone? (2, Funny)

Maavin (598439) | more than 8 years ago | (#13879901)

How long does it take to fold the thing correctly?

Is there an algorithm out, yet?

" The Nokia N90, $900 Camera Phone " (!!!) (1)

Bananatree3 (872975) | more than 8 years ago | (#13879902)

[Grandpa voice]These people will never, never learn. Back in my day, a telephone was a commodity. Now, these young whipper-snappers are trying to coherse their parents into bancrupcy to pay for these new fangled gold bricks. My, when will you ever learn, young grasshoppers?[/Grandpa voice]

$900 now... (2, Insightful)

squison (546401) | more than 8 years ago | (#13879914)

..free in 1-2 years with contract.

Re:$900 now... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13880140)

Well, you can get today (since a few months, in fact) a SonyEricsson K750i for much less than that. Less than $100 with a contract. It also has a 2 megapixel camera with a rather good autofocus lens (not a dumb fixed focus lense). And it is also packed with features despite its small form factor. It's not a smart phone, though (no touchscreen).

And if you are looking for a smart phone with a bigger display, more features and more applications, then you can wait for the SonyEricsson P990, which will combine the 2 megapixel camera with all the nice features of the P900/P910.

(no, I'm not working for SonyEricsson - just happy with their nice phones)

No thanks. (1, Insightful)

rindeee (530084) | more than 8 years ago | (#13879926)

I believe one could get a very nice phone and a separate 4-5MP camera with a large memory card and still have some spending money left. Yeah, I get that this is an "all-in-one" device, but they've made the classic mistake that has torpedoed so many others in the past. They compromised on the camera (it's only 2MP and has very little storage capacity) and on the phone (it's big/bulky) in order to combine them. Even with the end product, $900 just seems a stupidly high price to charge.

hmm my short review (1)

sam_paris (919837) | more than 8 years ago | (#13879957)

no headphone socket, no vibrate, less disk space than my sony ericcson, lame

The one feature mobile phone never have (1)

Serilkath_Montreal (922707) | more than 8 years ago | (#13879971)

Making their owner not being a big jerk.

A $900 phone????? (0, Flamebait)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 8 years ago | (#13879989)

And why would I buy this? I can buy a digital camera with higher resolution than this and a new phone for less money than this.

Who buys a $900 phone??? Bah, I'm getting old I guess.

Steff from User Friendly (1)

Silver Sloth (770927) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880061)

Marketing types always have to have the lates gadget, however costly.

Re:Steff from User Friendly (1)

cakesy (886563) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880110)

Maybe the only ones who really buy it first are the other phone companies - so they see what they need to do to improve their own models. This would make sense, and a reasonable reason for having a high starting price.

Japanese cell phones (5, Informative)

Bueller_007 (535588) | more than 8 years ago | (#13879993)

The "West" is so far behind in mobile phone technology. For only $200, I can get this phone in Japan:
http://www.vodafone.jp/english/products/model_3G/v 903t/index.html [vodafone.jp]

It's completely bilingual (although I don't think it has predictive text in English mode), has a 2 MB camera, global roaming (and global GPS navigation (although only five or six countries are available at the moment)), can take video calls, communicate via Bluetooth or IR, read QR codes (very convenient in Japan). The Nokia N90 can't even vibrate when it's in silent mode. WTF? That's pretty much par for the course over here. And the Nokia is $700 more? If you can switch this phone to work on a Verizon account back home, it's almost worthwhile to buy a ticket to Japan, buy the phone and then fly back.

Even the free phones you get with a new account over here have AT LEAST a 1 MB camera. Some have 2. Some of the newer Sharp phones even have built-in optical zoom.

Vodafone is generally looked down upon by the Japanese people. NTT Docomo probably have even better phones available.

Global Roaming? (1)

Frankie70 (803801) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880055)


It's completely bilingual (although I don't think it has predictive text in English mode), has a 2 MB camera, global roaming


I have not heard of a phone which comes with roaming, global or otherwise.
It's the service provider who provides roaming on the phone.

Or is there something I am missing?

Re:Global Roaming? (2, Informative)

Bueller_007 (535588) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880122)

Yes, you are missing something. Japan uses a different cellular phone standard than the rest of the world. Most Japanese phones use PDC, a 2G protocol developed and used ONLY in Japan. PDC has its advantages, but pretty much the rest of the world uses GSM. That means that the average phone that you purchase over here is incapable of global roaming, regardless of your provider. PDC/GSM and 3G phones (capable of global roaming) are becoming more popular over here, but they usually cost significantly more.
Thus, I made a point of mentioning that it is capable of global roaming.

Re:Global Roaming? (1)

Frankie70 (803801) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880306)


Most Japanese phones use PDC, a 2G protocol developed and used ONLY in Japan. PDC has its advantages, but pretty much the rest of the world uses GSM.


Vodafone is Japan's GSM provider, so I am sure a regular GSM phone you buy anywhere should be able to
provide roaming in Japan also, if your provide has a tie up to Vodafone Japan.
Again, it's the provider who provides roaming not the phone.

A PDC/GSM phone will not provide roaming on a CDMA network, just like a regular GSM phone will not provide
roaming on a PDC network, right?

Not again, "they are so far ahead in technology" (3, Informative)

Iloinen Lohikrme (880747) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880133)

In Japan, they use different technology solutions, not more advanced technology in mobile phones.

The situation in Japan differs much from situation in other parts of the world, namely population density in Japan is much higher and there aren't many areas in Japan where there isn't high population density. What this means is that you have to build your whole mobile phone network differently, you have to have lot's of base station and they have to operate in much smaller area, thus leading to lower power usage in both base stations and in mobile phones. Because power requirements are lower, Japanese mobile phones have been a lot smaller for decades. They don't have any magical technology that the rest of the world hasn't, they just a different situation with different needs.

It should also be noted that the markets have proved that Japanese don't have more advanced technology, if they would have, they would have stormed the markets allready.

High Population Density (2, Informative)

246o1 (914193) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880206)

Actually, while most of the Japanese population lives in the major metropolitan areas (about 25% alone in Tokyo metro), most people here live in rural areas, as I do. Despite this, everyone here has cell phones (DoCoMo, probably having the best phones, also being the most popular). By everyone, I mean EVERYONE. Most schoolchildren start carrying cell phones when they go to school alone in grade school, and even the very old have them. Likewise, the above statement about cheaper phones with better offers is completely true. Whenever I notice the difference between the phones, I am amazed. That 2 megapixels would be something apparently extraordinary enough to draw such attention on /. surprises me, as I have even seen 3 megapixel phones advertised recently. Sure, technology here might not be miles ahead of America, but the truth behind the stereotype is that the availability of certain technologies is miles ahead here, regardless of the reasons.

Re:Not again, "they are so far ahead in technology (2, Informative)

Bueller_007 (535588) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880271)

The phone that I was referring to was a 3G phone. 3G is the new GLOBAL STANDARD. This phone DOES NOT use PDC (the Japanese-only mobile phone network to which you are referring). PDC phones have a weaker signal strength, so they are smaller, lighter and use less power. They have little, if nothing in common with the newer, (much) larger 3G phones. Did I even mention the size of the phone in my post? No. The phone is pretty big. Surprisingly big when compared to the old 2G Japanese phones. The difference is that it has almost the same features as the Nokia, and it is CHEAP. About 1/4 of the price. Plus, it has global GPS, something that is actually useful to have in a cell phone if you're going to carry it around with you to other countries.

By the way, have you ever been to Japan? There are PLENTY of places with low population density. For example, the whole coast of the Sea of Japan... Tohoku... Hokkaido... Kyushu... Shikoku. Basically, EVERYWHERE except Kanto, Kansai and Nagoya. The population density of Japan is LOWER than that of Belgium and the Netherlands, both of which, I believe use the GSM standard for cell phones.

If you've ever gone to a Japanese electronics shop, you'd know that we are FAR behind them when it comes to phones.

Re:Japanese cell phones (2, Informative)

antifoidulus (807088) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880242)

Every time I hear one of these "In Japan, great cell phones!" posts I always chuckle at an accessory in common use in Japan is a plastic case that contains 4 AA(maybe AAA I forget) batteries that plugs into the power port. Why use such an ugly abomination? Because the battery life on those phones with a zillion features sucks. My 40 euro little dinky motorola phone can last me from Monday till Friday on one charge; that never happened when I lived in Japan. Also, about the whole predictive text input: when I was living in the US, my 4+ year old crappy phone had predictive text input in English, not all that advanced of a feature.....

am i the only one... (3, Interesting)

utexaspunk (527541) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880003)

...who is disappointed that the screen doesn't flip all the way around so that the phone could close with the main display exposed? it could have been a cool little phone/PDA convertible. ...alas...

An alternative for under $900 (3, Insightful)

salimfadhley (565599) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880017)

1 x Nikon D70s - Ths award winning machine does nothing other than take photographs very well. Dispite not having the highest megapixel count, this SLR comes with great optics and a sensor that delivers vivid colour and gret low-light sensitivity.

1 x Nokia Series-6 phone; This award winning range of Symbian phones comes with SDKs in Python, Java and C++; Possibly the most extendable range of phones ever built. You can still buy phones without cameras in them, but snap them up while you get a chance.

Result: A smaller, more OSS friendly phone, A bigger but much better camera... one that's likely to teach you a few things about photography. :-)

Re:An alternative for under $900 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13880171)

1 x Nokia Series-6 phone; This award winning range of Symbian phones comes with SDKs in Python, Java and C++;

But you need like 5 files for even a simple HelloWorld program...

Not for US market? (1)

fjm03 (548420) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880029)

It's a 900/1800 Mhz handset, not 850/1800 Mhz.

Definition of heavy (1)

ChrisF79 (829953) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880050)

Clearly, this phone is heavy compared to other phones currently on the market. That part I'm not arguing at all. I just think it is funny to see how the definition of heavy has changed so much. It wasn't too long ago that someone that wanted a cell phone would often purchase the ones in the vinyl bags (that looked like something from the Vietnam war). If you would have handed someone this N90 back then, they would have raved at how light it is!

That's Fine... (1)

Greyfox (87712) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880072)

But if I'm going to pay $900 for a phone I vant to look mahvelous with it, dahling!

Uses Realplayer (1)

the_Bionic_lemming (446569) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880080)

Since the phone uses realplayer - it's effectively a stinking piece of crap not subject to further scrutiny.

Avoid this phone at all costs, or immedietly turn over your geek liscence to be downgraded to a loser liscence.

You have been warned!

sound quibbles (1)

necro81 (917438) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880092)

The biggest problem we've had with this phone is that as much as it touts itself as a multimedia phone, it doesn't have the regular 2.5/3.5 headphone jack input, which means that you are left with the bundled headphone package. Although it's decent, it's not suitable for even the sensible aficionados let alone the audiophiles. The least you would expect after spending so much on a phone is a decent pair of earphones, but apparently our thinking is too wishful. There are no equalizer settings...

I admit that not having the standard headphone jack is just plain stupid design (unless Nokia plans on introducing a high end headset sometime, $$$ Profit), but really: since when has any audiophile given any cellphone the time of day. And why would they want to? Since when is pristine audio playback quality a selling point? The lack of equalizer settings is, I guess, a moot point, if the playback quality makes it unlikely you'd hear much difference. Once again; since when has having an equalizer been a selling point in a cellphone? My own cellphone is a midrange model (Motorola V220), but are these two items something that's standard with high-end cellphones? Why not just buy an iPod or other dedicated MP3 player, whose playback quality can be assured?

Nokia is trying to help the slashdot geeks! (1)

ShadowsHawk (916454) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880100)

Come on guys, you're missing the point! The whole point of the heavy phone is to help you buff up while answering calls.

Weight Issue (4, Funny)

canfirman (697952) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880119)

CoolTechZone.com has reviewed Nokia's N90 cell phones that comes with 2 megapixel camera and a host of other features, and it costs a solid $900 per unit. "The minute you set your eyes on the N90, the first thing that springs to your mind is 'it looks a lot slimmer in photos...' but as you take it out of the packaging, you realize the heaviness of it..."

However, at $900, the weight issue can be easily compensated by the lightness you now feel in your wallet.

Except... (1)

metamatic (202216) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880121)

What it is designed to be is a feature packed phone that doesn't mind compromising on the ergonomics to pack in every last bit of functionality you could ever want on a camera phone.

The functionality I want is for it to be a quad-band phone, so I can use it everywhere. This phone isn't, so it won't work in some places.

Why do they keep packing in the extra features when they haven't got the basic phone functionality sorted out yet?

Everyone haul out the slashdot kneejerk reaction! (2, Insightful)

lidocaineus (661282) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880123)

Where are the hordes of people that are going to proclaim, "All I want is a phone that makes phone calls!!! No one else can possibly want more than I want!"

Of course almost all phone companies provide barebones phones (usually free with a service contract. And of course, this IS a frankenmonster of a phone and even gadget hounds would have a hard time justifying this one for the price. But don't let that stop any of you luddites out there from making it clear, once again, why YOU are right and everyone else is not entitled to have a slightly different view.

Re:Everyone haul out the slashdot kneejerk reactio (1)

teeker (623861) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880248)

Feel defensive much? I am one of those people who want a small, simple phone, but it doesn't mean I believe phones like this shouldn't exist. The gripe that you're (apparently) mistaking for some kind of personal attack is that there are multitudes of camera phones, lots of mp3-player phones, big built in screens, PDAs, etc out there to choose from, while the people who would just really like to have basic phone call functionality in a smaller, lighter package have nothing to choose from. It's not that I don't want you to have your media center/PDA/camcorder/PC/widescreen TV/kitchen sink phone, it's just that it would be nice if somebody would also make a phone for us.

So if you can't understand that, then by all means, keep whining about everybody who wants to take your technology away.

Re:Everyone haul out the slashdot kneejerk reactio (1)

lidocaineus (661282) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880319)

Did you even READ what I wrote? The whole lunacy of the typical slashdot post about cell phones is that people complain about feature creep, yet phone companies DO make phones that cater to your needs. Let me quote from my original post:

...almost all phone companies provide barebones phones (usually free with a service contract).
I'm not being defensive, as if I want everyone to have a technical garbage phone. I'm trying to point out the idiocy of complaining for a phone that fits your needs when clearly THERE ARE PLENTY OF THEM AVAILABLE.

Nokia N70... (1)

GreekPimpSlap (925925) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880128)

you will pretty much be better off waiting for the nokia N70 which will pretty much be the same phone but with a cheaper price. supposedly it will also have the 2-way PTT (like nextel) but with video also so you can actually see who you are talking to. here is a good review of it: http://www.infosyncworld.com/reviews/n/6234.html [infosyncworld.com]

What exactly is the point of a 2mp cameraphone? (3, Insightful)

antifoidulus (807088) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880130)

With the lens it comes with, your pictures are still probably going to look like crap, no matter how many pixels you use. A better lens however would make the phone bulkier and more expensive....Camera phones are great for those "slice of life" moments(example, here in Germany I saw a grifter with a live alpaca, but alas I had no camera to share the moment with everyone!) when you don't have a camera, but even then, do you really need 2 megapixels? Esp. for something you are probably just going to throw up on the web...

Re:What exactly is the point of a 2mp cameraphone? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13880199)

It has a Zeiss Lens . . .

Prosumer options? (2, Insightful)

necro81 (917438) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880131)

The settings you have on the N90 are nothing less than what you will find on most prosumer digital cameras today. You can adjust the white-balance, contrast, color saturation, color effects and what have you. In our tests, we found that for the White Balance mode, the automatic worked best and we recommend that you don't play around much with this setting, as we feel the sensor adjusts a lot better if you simply set it to auto.

All those kinds of camera settings are things that professional (or at least, experienced amateurs) use to adjust the photo quality when they are taking stills, in a studio, and have the time to actually adjust the settings and do some experimenting. When using a cellphone camera, how much time are you going to spend tinkering with these various settings before taking a candid shot in a dark nightclub of you and some hot chick that you'll never have a chance of seeing again? And would she stick around long enough for you to do so?

My point here is that the presence of these features, while quite a feat considering the size of the phone compared to a pro camera, is just plain superfluous, because no one who uses this phone's camera is going to spend the time messing around with them on the fly.

Good review site? (1)

dubbayu_d_40 (622643) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880146)

I want to research phones, but all I'm finding is obfuscation. Is there a dpreview for wireless phones out there?

Obviously (2, Funny)

Comatose51 (687974) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880148)

Obviously this is more than just a camera phone. It's a camera, phone, plus a transformer that transforms into a hole in your wallet!

Yes, but can it... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13880154)

play The Crazy Frog??!

/ba-ding-ding

I will not pay... (2, Insightful)

ari_j (90255) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880162)

I will not now nor ever in the future pay 8 times the going price for sacrifices. If I am paying 8 times what I normally would for something, it's because there are absolutely no sacrifices whatsoever. No sacrificed battery life, no sacrificed ergonomics, no sacrificed ease of use, no sacrificed antenna reception, no sacrificed looks. No sacrifices whatsoever.

But for the bargain price of _$800_ (1)

Matey-O (518004) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880163)

You can get an official Darth Vader Supreme edition costume. http://tinyurl.com/cubsg [tinyurl.com]

I'm old fashioned (2, Insightful)

faloi (738831) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880166)

What it is designed to be is a feature packed phone that doesn't mind compromising on the ergonomics to pack in every last bit of functionality you could ever want on a camera phone."

The only functionality I want in my cell phone is that it make and receive calls fairly reliably. I don't want a camera, PDA, games, personal theme music...none of that. I'd rather have individual devices that do all these things well, rather than one device that doesn't really do justice to any of the features.

Re:I'm old fashioned (1)

velocipenguin (416139) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880268)

I agree wholeheartedly. Cell phones seem to include far too many features at the expense of usability, size, and reliability.

Re:I'm old fashioned (1)

thaig (415462) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880339)

Perhaps you haven't given it a try?

The convenience of not having to carry all those separate bits of equipment is considerable.

If you ever have opportunities to take a photo of something that you didn't expect to see, you might be glad that although you don't have a camera, you do always have your phone with you. This has happened to me on numerous occasions and even though my
camera-phone is not nearly as good as the N90's, it has still been useful.

I have used an N90 (I develop mobile phone software) and although the crispness of the screen is it's most "standout" feature, I think that the biggest technology jump is really the video recorder which, unlike older phones, seems to be able to record for as long as there is space left. The quality is good by video standards and the compression is mpeg4 so the files are small. I used to think that videos clips were a gimmick until I took a few - I think that a short video clip is a lot more evocative than a photo, especially if it is of people.

This phone is a bit too clunky for me but I think it is a good preview of the features that are to come in smaller packages in future. They are all desirable once the cost comes down and you have a chance to try them.

Regards,

Tim

Really is not a review... (1)

hkultala (69204) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880170)

... but a presentation article about the phone's features.

lacks criticism etc.

the "reviewer" does not really understand what should be expected and just hypes the features the phone has got but does not comment about missing features other devices have..

"The settings you have on the N90 are nothing less than what you will find on most prosumer digital cameras today. You can adjust the white-balance, contrast, color saturation, color effects and what have you. In our tests, we found that for the White Balance mode, the automatic worked best and we recommend that you don't play around much with this setting, as we feel the sensor adjusts a lot better if you simply set it to auto." .. and no talk about aperture size, shutter speed..
tre "reviewer" does not seem to have any experience on "real photography".. prosumer cameras hae quite a lot of more adjustments, and I find the N90 camera adjustment feature list quite lacking, though I only have experience from a very small automatic pocket camera.

The best Mobile phone review site ? (1)

mallumax (712655) | more than 8 years ago | (#13880216)

Which is the best mobile phone review site, which covers not just the high end phones?

2 megapixel? That's all? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13880264)

For $900, it better be a hell of a lot more than that.

Motorola Razr looks cool but sucks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13880315)

The motorola razr is a georgius looking phone, the black one looks incredibly cool. My gf got that one, so i had a look at it. And it sucks so much. Here in Spain they delivered it with a software version which doesnt take videos! I had to flash the dam thing to get video camera.
The screen is relatively big and bright, they keyboard looks like from the future, and it soo slim. But the camera sucks, low memory, slow menus... it doesnt honor its look at all.

-Steels
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...