Beta
×

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!

Nokia's 808 PureView Officially the End of the Symbian Line

timothy posted about 2 years ago | from the please-turn-out-the-lights dept.

Cellphones 102

Snirt writes "Symbian is now officially dead, Nokia confirmed today. In the company's earnings announcement that came out a little while ago, Nokia confirmed that the 808 PureView, released last year, was the very last device that the company would make on the Symbian platform: 'During our transition to Windows Phone through 2012, we continued to ship devices based on Symbian,' the company wrote. 'The Nokia 808 PureView, a device which showcases our imaging capabilities and which came to market in mid-2012, was the last Symbian device from Nokia.'"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

I didn't like it (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42683545)

I didn't like it when the Symbians kidnapped Patty Hearst, but their phones were OK for a while.

Re:I didn't like it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42683743)

They should declare Windows Phone dead instead, fire that Microsoft agnet, and continue with Symbian.

Re:I didn't like it (4, Insightful)

cshark (673578) | about 2 years ago | (#42683795)

Both systems are expensive, clunky, profit losing failures. I wish Nokia would go with Android. Their hardware isn't bad.

Re:I didn't like it (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42683905)

Android loses money for everyone except Samsung. Anyway you go, Nokia was fucked.

Anyway, these threads are always funny with the clueless Symbian fanboys and the usual M$ hater-extremes circle-jerking each other.

Re:I didn't like it (2)

1s44c (552956) | about 2 years ago | (#42684837)

Android loses money for everyone except Samsung. Anyway you go, Nokia was fucked.

Anyway, these threads are always funny with the clueless Symbian fanboys and the usual M$ hater-extremes circle-jerking each other.

How about Nokia stop trying to implode and build a better phone instead? Take the n900, make it thiner and lighter, with longer battery life, a faster processor, and a better screen. Upgrade the camera too but keep the nice keyboard. How about they offer that phone with a choice of Windows or Maemo?

I'd stay clear of Windows phones personally but it should be possible to build hardware that all OS's can run on, unless the terms of the MS suicide pill forbid using anything else that is.

Re:I didn't like it (3, Insightful)

mister2au (1707664) | about 2 years ago | (#42685747)

Take the n900, make it thiner and lighter, with longer battery life, a faster processor, and a better screen.

Gee ... is that all ... faster and better screen but also better battery life ... and the battery can't be bigger because it has to be thinner and lighter ???

Upgrade the camera too but keep the nice keyboard.

While still making it thinner and lighter?

How about they offer that phone with a choice of Windows or Maemo?

Ok now I think the whole post was just sarcasm ???

You are suggesting a struggling company piles on the R&D to get a more feature packed phone with better battery life while staying smaller and supporting 2 different operating systems ... Sounds reasonable

Re:I didn't like it (1)

davester666 (731373) | about 2 years ago | (#42688463)

He forgot to mention it should also be cheaper, maybe $50 or $100 unsubsidized.

Re:I didn't like it (1)

1s44c (552956) | about 2 years ago | (#42688883)

He forgot to mention it should also be cheaper, maybe $50 or $100 unsubsidized.

Is that sarcasm? Do you seriously believe that company that is up against it should just give up and die? Because I don't. It doesn't look good for Nokia but they are not dead yet. As unlikely as it is they could still come up with something cool that would dig them out of the hole they are in.

Apple came up with the iphone without any prior phone knowledge. Nokia has lots and could still do good things if only it started moving in the right direction.

Re:I didn't like it (2)

1s44c (552956) | about 2 years ago | (#42688861)

I'm suggesting they try to make something that people will like. The R&D budget is the last thing they should cut when they need a cool new product to sell.

If they try they may fail. If they don't try they will fail. You appear to be suggesting that they should just curl up in a corner and die quietly.

Not even remotely true (1)

tuppe666 (904118) | about 2 years ago | (#42685057)

Android loses money for everyone except Samsung.

The Irony of your post is ignoring the fact that its not even remotely true, [Google for instance do awful well from Android.] is that Samsung make Windows Phones...you don't hear much about them, for good reason.

Re:Not even remotely true (1)

BasilBrush (643681) | about 2 years ago | (#42686607)

[Google for instance do awful well from Android.]

Citation please.

Have you been sleeping (1)

tuppe666 (904118) | about 2 years ago | (#42686709)

Re:Have you been sleeping (0)

BasilBrush (643681) | about 2 years ago | (#42686753)

Thanks for demonstrating my point. On your link to the results PR, Android doesn't even mention a mention, and Motorola made a loss.

Sorry fanboy. Android does not make a profit for Google.

Did you notice the line going up. (2)

tuppe666 (904118) | about 2 years ago | (#42686947)

Android doesn't even mention a mention

Ignoring your insults...do you really not know why Google do Android. Google‘s original base intention with Android was just to make sure that Google wasn’t shut out of the mobile market. It is expected to make $4Billion from mobile advertising in the US alone this year.

Still don't believe me CEO Larry Page last conference call for *last quarter* [Now selling 1.5Billion device daily] "This time last year, I announced that our run rate from mobile advertising hit $2.5 billion . . . But now, we’ve built up additional mobile revenue from users paying for content and apps in Google Play . . . I can announce our new run rate for mobile is now over $8 billion. That’s quite a business."

Calling someone a fanboy, just because your too lazy to Google is a disgrace.

Re:Did you notice the line going up. (0)

BasilBrush (643681) | about 2 years ago | (#42687089)

Yes, I noticed the line going up had nothing to do with Android.

"Android doesn't even [get] a mention"
Ignoring your insults...

That's no insult. You claimed Google does very well out of Android. I asked for a citation, and you posted a link to a page that doesn't even mention Android.

Still don't believe me CEO Larry Page last conference call for *last quarter* [Now selling 1.5Billion device daily] "This time last year, I announced that our run rate from mobile advertising hit $2.5 billion . . . But now, weâ(TM)ve built up additional mobile revenue from users paying for content and apps in Google Play . . . I can announce our new run rate for mobile is now over $8 billion. Thatâ(TM)s quite a business."

Note that "run rate" is another way of saying revenue, not profit. Notice also the lack of the word "Android" in there. Most of it is advertising from mobile platforms other than Android. Notably iOS.

Google wasted $billions buying Android, further developing Android, and then buying Motorola in an effort to shore up it's mistakes.

Calling someone a fanboy, just because your too lazy to Google is a disgrace.

I didn't need Google because I'd already read about Google losing money on Android. And I called you a fanboy because I know your usual MO. And there's no change here.

Your not serious (1)

tuppe666 (904118) | about 2 years ago | (#42687527)

Its a shame you are not serious. Eric Schmidt announced Android covered its costs with android revenue in Newsweek October 2010, when it only activated 200,000 Android devices. It now activates 1.5Million users daily and has a revenue of Over $8Billion a year with a growth 320% year on year.

Re:Your not serious (1)

BasilBrush (643681) | about a year ago | (#42691237)

I've already pointed out that $8 billion is their declared MOBILE ad revenue, not Android. Again, most of that is iOS ads, because that's where most mobile web-browsing is done. And revenue ain't profit.

Furthermore, they'd still have that ad revenue had they not wasted that money on Android.

And 2010 was before Google had to purchase Motorola to get some mobile patents. They spend $15 billion on that. The opportunity cost on $15 billion is pretty big.

I'm just as serious as all the people that have crunched the numbers and pointed out Google don't make a profit on Google.

Re:Have you been sleeping (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42686971)

So you're saying the play store makes no profit? Sure they don't make a lot from Android but they aren't making a loss. That's like saying Apple makes a loss on iOS because all they sell is the hardware, not the operating system.

Android was never meant to make them money anyway, it was more about making sure they stayed relevant. Imagen if they were at the mercy of Apple for their apps or being the default search engine, how relevant do you think they would they be today? They would certainly have a lot less users, that's for sure. If you take that into account then Android makes Google a lot of money.

Re:Have you been sleeping (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42688437)

It's a pointless argument. Regardless of what Google makes, Nokia wasn't going to support their revenue through the "Play Store" or or online advertisements. They would have been equally fucked had they gone with Android.

Re:I didn't like it (2)

Taco Cowboy (5327) | about 2 years ago | (#42685677)

Android loses money for everyone except Samsung.

[citation needed]

While there _are_ vendors who have failed on their Android offerings, many others are making decent profits from it.

While many of those second tier brands aren't well known to the West, they are being widely used in many third world countries in Africa, South America, as well as Asia.
 

Re:I didn't like it (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42684131)

Nokia going w Android is a brilliant move. Maybe we can get back to the indestructible mobile device of yesteryear.

I was a solid and loyal Nokia fan for 10+ years until Symbian forced me to rethink.

I remember cycling to work, dropping my nokia into the street. Came apart, battery on the road. No problem worked fiine. Cracked screen or whatnot, worked fine. Those things would not die!

tl;dr Nokia phones were famous for rock solid, abuse-proof hardware. Hope they attach this to a proper OS and live again.

Re:I didn't like it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42684341)

Before they switched to Windows Phone, they sold a lot of Symbian _smartphones_ (more than iPhones or Androids), had *increasing* sales, and were *profitable*. No, Symbian was not failing.

Re:I didn't like it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42684565)

People like you don't seem to get it. Symbian HAS failed. If it hadn't it would be here today.

The simple thing that it's not means it failed, get it? History will remember it as a failure in front of the "real" smartphone.

Even if nokia was wrong in deciding this it still means it failed, on a higher level. It couldn't inspire nokia to stick to it, it just wasn't meant to be.

You surely don't mean it won, right?

The rest is details.

Re:I didn't like it (4, Insightful)

Kjella (173770) | about 2 years ago | (#42684867)

People like you don't seem to get it. Symbian HAS failed. If it hadn't it would be here today.

That's like saying a man's heart failed - because it had a knife stabbed through it. It's dead but not by natural causes and the CEO holding the knife is Elop.

Re:I didn't like it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42685119)

I love this conspiracy theory where crappy Symbian "smart" phones would have continued to sell like hotcakes despite obviously superior Android and Apple devices.

Re:I didn't like it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42685581)

Maybe not forever. But it is simply a lie that Symbian was failing.
Sales by platform just before Symbian was killed [asymco.com] .

Re:I didn't like it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42688475)

The graph is a lie. Nokia was counting them as "smartphones" but the purchasers considered them just another dumbphone. Nobody was buying them to surf the web with a data plan.

I know this because I had one. Compared to a modern smartphone, it was a fuckin joke and a half.

Re:I didn't like it (2)

terryo (689471) | about 2 years ago | (#42685741)

For the last 5 years or so, you really had to work to buy a Nokia phone in the US. I have an N79, E72, N8 and an N900. I could sell them for close to what I paid for them even today. Well, except for the E72, which AT&T had, so there are a lot of them. I didn't mind Symbian too much but the lack of memory in the phone was short-sighted. OTOH, the battery life, the camera quality - they were ahead of their time for so long they took it for granted. Can't do that anymore in any industry.

However, the customer service was uniformly awful. Waiting for months or years as Nokia rolled out firmware updates? No thanks. That's why I look at the XDA-Dev forums for a supported phone when I need to buy a new one. (Last one was a Sony Xperia, now using a Samsung Captivate Glide, one of the few keyboards left.)

Re:I didn't like it (0)

bemymonkey (1244086) | about 2 years ago | (#42687995)

People like you don't seem to get it. Symbian HAS failed. If it hadn't it would be here today.

That's like saying a man's heart failed - because it had a knife stabbed through it. It's dead but not by natural causes and the CEO holding the knife is Elop.

Replace "man" with "100-year-old-zombie" and you're on the right track...

Re:I didn't like it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42686521)

If it hadn't been killed it would still be here. Actually, until last quarter it was still selling better than Windows Phone. Getting killed by a clueless CEO is not the same thing as failing.

Re:I didn't like it (1)

gmuslera (3436) | about 2 years ago | (#42684657)

They had Meego, free and that could teach a few user interface lessons to ios, android or w8. They prefered to take the windows anchor and sink to the bottom with it. With a bit of luck, android, sailfish, ubuntu mobile, firefox os or even bb10 could eventually be installed in their hardware in a future.

Re:I didn't like it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42685519)

Both systems are expensive, clunky, profit losing failures. I wish Nokia would go with Android. Their hardware isn't bad.

you are clearly not interested in photography

Re:I didn't like it (2)

oztiks (921504) | about 2 years ago | (#42687147)

Hardly, though I like Android as my personal favourite. I keep breaking Android phones and have given up on them. The iPhone 3X was a sturdy phone (iPhone 4+ are as cruddy as any Android device IMHO, drop test my ass!) and lasted a few extra months of wear and tear but the Nokia is built the last, you could throw them at someone and kill'em they are so tough. Your "isn't that bad" should be "best damn quality hardware in the market" regardless of spec.

In any case WP8 is not clunky and it's just fine for what it does; which is make phone class; snap a few shots with a better camera than any other competitor's device; boast a proper GPS solution called "Nokia Drive" and was a feature "pre mainstream android versions" and works just as well (not like the Apple disaster); it doesn't suck battery; and it loads websites just fine. I'm really sick of hearing the "obligatory" it's shit because it's Microsoft. Please point out its failings? I've used it now for several months now and found absolutely nothing wrong with it.

Oh yes, the Appstore is smaller and boasts far less Fart Apps than its competitors and yes I am aware of this so make sure you strike that one off your list before responding.

Re:I didn't like it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42684199)

They need a Symbian Liberation Army.

Re:I didn't like it (0)

TheCarp (96830) | about 2 years ago | (#42684125)

wow, I never would have guessed something that big was a phone, every video I have ever seen that featured them showed some woman straddling it and enjoying its strong vibrate function.... not sure how you talk on it though, must be a bluetooth headset.

Re:I didn't like it (1)

BasilBrush (643681) | about 2 years ago | (#42686563)

Possibly the best news about the end of Symbian, is the end of people thinking they've just thought up that joke.

Re:I didn't like it (1)

1s44c (552956) | about 2 years ago | (#42684683)

I didn't like it when the Symbians kidnapped Patty Hearst, but their phones were OK for a while.

Maybe the Symbionese Liberation Army will reform at this news and go on a round of kidnapping Nokia execs.

Sorry to see Symbian go (5, Insightful)

johanw (1001493) | about 2 years ago | (#42683689)

Symbian phones were very feature complete (much more so than Android and iOS, my E72 has functionality that even now isn't standard on those) and I don't like to see it go. I still use a Nokia E72 as my primary phone and plan to do so for some more years, I even bought a spare used E72 in case something happens to it. Now that rooting Symbian is easy I even get functionality that was Android specific for some time, like adblocking with a hostsfile. And of course a week of battary use, get that from any current device.

Re:Sorry to see Symbian go (2)

amiga3D (567632) | about 2 years ago | (#42683745)

I'm wondering since Symbian is open source now if someone else will make any Symbian phones.

Re:Sorry to see Symbian go (4, Insightful)

gstoddart (321705) | about 2 years ago | (#42683857)

I'm betting you'd only get the core OS, but most of the stuff related to actual telephony would be patented/proprietary.

I'd be surprised if you could fully operate your phone with the open source bits -- but admittedly, that's mostly just a guess.

Re:Sorry to see Symbian go (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42684221)

So basically the same as any other open source phone OS. Were you under the impression the android hardware drivers were open source?

Re:Sorry to see Symbian go (3, Interesting)

gl4ss (559668) | about 2 years ago | (#42684811)

well, of symbian^4 (or 4 or wtf it was supposed to be, who the fuck knows since apparently whenever they reorganized the new guy at the top thought that instead of fixing things it was just important to rename things) you would've gotten the ui(and well, not that much else relevant for making a phone..).

it was axed though(the four), but they did do one public commit of the tree at least which included homescreen. around the axing they decided to go all qml.
so you'd get some ui pieces for a dead tree.

and earlier symbian source.. well, if you want to go insane, take a look. there's really nothing that much worthwhile saving there without properiaty phone stack to go along with it.. so you could run the whole phone on a single arm chip or execute in place from rom. symbian did some neat tricks like that, but with current chip pricing they don't matter that much.

the reason why the story isn't pretty is that always they just went adding api's instead of fixing them. as if stacking an extra api on top of a broken one would fix the broken api underneath! how the fuck that's supposed to work? I'll suddenly get videoframes from the original api underneath by adding an extra layer on top of it? it wasn't most of the time that big of a problem that the api was totally obscure to use but that it was just plain unimplemented to do half the things it should have done now that was a real problem! but due to the totally broken chain of authority nobody could be arsed to do the work to actually tell people to do the fucking fixes. this plays a major role in why the whole symbian got axed and dumped, the organization was deemed to be bloated beyond repairable, employing 10x the people needed and that just impaired the development - every reorg they did just made things worse and at the height of the organizations size they were still relying on contractors for writing critical pieces of code all the way from kernel to ui. another reason of course is that elop is one lazy fat bastard and this was a very easy way out of the mess for him - just take n9's shell, license sw from MS and call it a day - or rather call it two years of work in a day, but hey at least he didn't have to deal with aholes who had entrenched themselves as guardians of buggy code.

and they should just have gone android. or rather they should have done the open source aspect of symbian properly back in the day and should have made symbian into what became android. you don't execute a successful open source strategy by at the same time releasing source while you lock the platform from unauthorized code!

anyone doing a new phone os now from existing base is just going to go android now, jolla excluded and even them I think would have done better to go with android and extend it.. instead of what they're doing now. easy to find drivers/socs, plenty of sw.. complete open source package to roll the os with and less chance of just going clinically insane.

Re:Sorry to see Symbian go (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42686237)

Shift happens. (To other people.)

Re:Sorry to see Symbian go (1)

CockMonster (886033) | about 2 years ago | (#42687055)

Symbian weren't allowed break APIs. With C++ it's actually quite easy to do, so newer APIs were added. series60, which has nothing to do with SymbianOS, may be another matter. Phone manufacturers were also free to choose which functionality they supported.

Re:Sorry to see Symbian go (2)

gl4ss (559668) | about 2 years ago | (#42684599)

symbian open source was always back-and-forth lipservice and confusion. they never did it properly and always restarted and backpedaled, reorganized and reshuffled, put repos up and down...

the state was such that there's this legend that you could get it to boot on a beagle.

frankly if someone would pick it up and try to turn it into a working product from that they would be in a legal minefield AND IN AN INSANE ASYLUM AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!fewr junk fewer junk

Re:Sorry to see Symbian go (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42683751)

Symbian phones were very feature complete

That statement is not supported by marketing statistics like "consumer buying opportunity".

Sorry, but Nokia does not deliver what the consumer wants!

Re:Sorry to see Symbian go (1)

LucidBeast (601749) | about 2 years ago | (#42684755)

I use my Symbian Nokia 701 daily as a phone and my iPhone nightly for surfing the net. Both are pretty good devices. iPhone UI is pretty feature poor.

Re:Sorry to see Symbian go (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42689097)

Well yeah, it's obvious people don't just want more features/functionality (see: iPhone, especially early iPhone, which was missing a ton of functionality compared to Symbian phones).
But the iPhone was different at the time, something new. So it sold well. And in the mean time it gained some more functionality to stay relevant against Android.

But all things being equal, features do matter. The lack of features is one of the main reasons WP can't compete with Android and iOS.

Re:Sorry to see Symbian go (1)

kwark (512736) | about 2 years ago | (#42683917)

"Symbian phones were very feature complete (much more so than Android and iOS, my E72 has functionality that even now isn't standard on those) and I don't like to see it go."

So what are the others missing? Please tell us so we can still get a decent Symbian phone before they are gone.

Re:Sorry to see Symbian go (2)

johanw (1001493) | about 2 years ago | (#42684147)

Well, things some service providers didn't like like sending files over Bluetooth n(of infrared for the models that had that). My E72 has out of the box functionality to choose which phone calls can be directly diverted to /dev/null or voicemail. It comes with a dictionary and office reading software, and, most importantly, with offline navigation. It uses a decent profile system so when I'm at work I can set it to vibrate only with just changing profiles. Added software can even do that automatically on a timed basis so I can program in office hours, or even detect which cell towers it connects to there and let it dwitch when it connects to those towers. And, of cource, a lot of models have a decent keyboard. Only disadvantage I know is that the non-toch models won't run Angry Birds.

Re:Sorry to see Symbian go (1)

aztracker1 (702135) | about 2 years ago | (#42684307)

I'm pretty sure I've tethered my Android phones in bluetooth before.. though not a phone initiated file send... Google voice lets me group senders and have different groups respond differently, I know there are add-ons to do so on the device. Profiles would be nice, I mean more than airplane or silent. I've been a bit of an android fan for a while though, since the G1... though my Nexus 4 is the first phone I actually liked all around (three nits with it though)... Hopefully they'll advance more. I'm hoping that with LG rumored to have stopped production of the N4, that Google will work on their Motorola Mobility division and get production in line themselves.

Re:Sorry to see Symbian go (1)

kwark (512736) | about 2 years ago | (#42684611)

Well, I only used a more or less stock Android till 1.6. Cyanogen after that but:
"sending files over Bluetooth n(of infrared for the models that had that)"
used this once to send something to a stock Milestone years ago. It worked (OBEX). Wasn't available in 1.x.

"out of the box functionality to choose which phone calls can be directly diverted to /dev/null or voicemail."
sending to voicemail is standard since 2.x. Ignore with an free app.

"It uses a decent profile system so when I'm at work I can set it to vibrate only with just changing profiles."
I guess they are there since 2.x. But I used free apps for that long before.

"importantly, with offline navigation"
While Nokia maps are great, there is an app (free) for that.

"Added software"
This is where the new smartphones have the real advantage. I'm switching profiles with Tasker based on time, place (either cell towers (uses no extra energie), gsm positioning, wifi accesspoints or gps), calendar item and running apps. Not only ring profiles but whether to activate wifi, gps, screen orientation/timeouts/brightness and what not.

"And, of cource, a lot of models have a decent keyboard"
So did all my android phones, it is a shame new phones are lacking them. But current high resolution screens might leave enough screen estate with a compact on screen keyboard.

So conclusion is that while the Symbian had some extra functionality out of the box, there are no features you mention that can't be added by using 3rd party apps. Except for battery life, this is where the old phones win.

Re:Sorry to see Symbian go (1)

johanw (1001493) | about 2 years ago | (#42685163)

A free app for offline navigation? Where? Google maps doesn't count, that's not really offline, you can only load a few maps before a trip, not whole countries. And it doesn't warn for speedtraps.

Re:Sorry to see Symbian go (1)

bemymonkey (1244086) | about 2 years ago | (#42688031)

Re:Sorry to see Symbian go (1)

V for Vendetta (1204898) | about a year ago | (#42692281)

Nokia's maps [nokia.com]

Re:Sorry to see Symbian go (1)

jrumney (197329) | about 2 years ago | (#42686717)

"out of the box functionality to choose which phone calls can be directly diverted to /dev/null or voicemail."
sending to voicemail is standard since 2.x. Ignore with an free app.

I set persistant marketers ringtone to silent (using out of the box functionality in Android), which is effectively the same as ignore.

"It uses a decent profile system so when I'm at work I can set it to vibrate only with just changing profiles."
I guess they are there since 2.x. But I used free apps for that long before.

I think profiles have only been available out of the box since 4.0, or even 4.1. But they are easily added through free apps. I use Llama, even in 4.2, as it has the automated switching based on more than just time (I think 4.2 has time based profile switching out of the box). I use it to

  • Switch to silent, start "Night Clock" and leave the screen on when the phone is plugged into a charger at night.
  • Kill Night Clock and set the screen timeout to 30s when I unplug the charger.
  • Switch my Alarm tone to silent when a holiday is marked in my calendar (if I need to set an alarm for a holiday, I can use a different Alarm tone).
  • Turn off WiFi when my car's Bluetooth connects (I think this is unneccesary now, but in 2.3 having WiFi on used to cause Bluetooth audio to skip every few seconds when it searched for access points).
  • Switch to vibrate when I have a meeting scheduled.
  • Switch to Loud when I leave my house or workplace, and back to Normal when I return.

Re:Sorry to see Symbian go (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42684825)

Sorry.... but you have missed the smartphone idea and classification.

1) The phone is bare bones
2) User adds applications to add features for device what user needs and wants.

Example:

Android phones can send files over bluetooth out of the box.
Android phones can reject calls from specific numbers, based to white or black listing or direct them to voicemail.
Android phones can come with dictionary and office reading software.
Android phones does offer offline navigation.
Android phones does support profiles (by different way, like time, location, device sensors, notification type example caller or email, based user actions etc)
And there are Android phones with a physical QWERTY keyboard or even with physical keyboard like E72 uses.

Your Nokia E72 is nothing compared to Android phones, than having just a better battery lifetime because E72 isn't even a smartphone in todays classification (and features Symbian+S60 to be such are very slim).

Of course if you go and you place yourself to corner only to have carriers offering you a very limited device features (like if carrier disables bluetooth, wifi hotspot etc) then you just live in wrong country to get a typical Android smartphone.

At least on my Android smartphone has 30 day standby time, 29 hour talk time and ~10 hours videos at 50% screen brightness (what is bright) and I charge it every third day, when active usage times are around 15-20 hours total.

Re:Sorry to see Symbian go (1)

GNious (953874) | about 2 years ago | (#42684693)

My old Nokia Symbian had DLNA/UPnP and VoIP/SIP support out of the box.
My brand-new Samsung Android has neither, but requires me to download 3rd party apps for this.

Re:Sorry to see Symbian go (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42685131)

I have no need for DLNA so I wouldn't want it on my phone taking the precious bytes from storage. But if I'd need a SIP client, I could install it on a Samsung phone (if I had one of those). Guess what is more convenient for a wide array of users with all kind of different requirements? Welcome to the smart smartphone era.

Re:Sorry to see Symbian go (2)

jrumney (197329) | about 2 years ago | (#42686777)

VoIP/SIP support is there in Android, it's just fairly well hidden (not in the main Settings menu, but in the Phone application's Settings menu, labelled as "Accounts", not to be confused with another menu labelled "Accounts" that controls the contact syncing with various providers). DLNA is an add on - most Samsung phones have it out of the box (branded as AllShare), I'm not sure why yours doesn't.

Re:Sorry to see Symbian go (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42684869)

I got an N85 in 2008 (still using it) and it had tons of stuff that other phones at the time did not. A 5 MP camera, the ability to install apps from any source (including game emulators), ability to watch flash videos, FM radio (including an FM transmitter), an actual filesystem that you could access, offline turn by turn navigation, the ability to connect to an Microsoft Exchange server to name a few. I also had an N770 which had the full power of a Linux system. Meego was suppose to combine the two, but Nokia went with Microsoft killing the perfect phone.

Re:Sorry to see Symbian go (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42688419)

Voice dialling without requiring an internet connection.

Re:Sorry to see Symbian go (1)

peppepz (1311345) | about 2 years ago | (#42689757)

Battery life.

Re:Sorry to see Symbian go (2)

ras (84108) | about 2 years ago | (#42685299)

It's sad, but my retired Symbian E70 remains to this day a better phone than any modern smart phone. It is smaller, faster to make a phone call, the battery lasted a week, the loud speaker was louder, the microphone is it was so good we ended using in preference to dedicated devices for recording messages, the native SIP stack in it (and we are talking 5 years go now) was better and more reliable than in Android 4.2.1 today, it could be doing several things and still play music and podcasts without a single glitch, and it was dropped numerous times without a case and still works to this day. Some of those things, like the battery life and real time performance (eg the SIP stack) were due to Symbian. That it was a absolute bitch to program on is also due to Symbian.

I retired the E70 when I could no longer buy batteries for it. I didn't like the smartphone that replaced it at first because it sucks at every thing the E70 was good at, but gradually I discovered the function I used least in the smartphone was the phone. Much as I liked it, it is Symbian's time to go. It belongs to a bygone era when RAM was expensive, CPU's were gutless and and mobile phones were used primarily as phones.

Re:Sorry to see Symbian go (1)

mirix (1649853) | about 2 years ago | (#42687581)

I see your E72 as a primary phone, and raise you my E71. Getting a bit long in the tooth at this point, though...

To me, hardware keyboard, world class reception, and a battery that lasts a week is more important than most other stuff.

I've been considering getting an android for random computing on, though. (But I'd keep the nokia for calls and text).

Re:Sorry to see Symbian go (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42687811)

Actually, you can get a week of battery use from the Motorola Razr HD, especially if you use it the same way you would an E72 (light browsing, 3G data, no gaming). The E72 has an unfortunate memory limitation. Try browsing the web with anything other than Opera Mini and you will see what I mean as it decides to close the browser to save memory.

That's too bad, RIP Symbian... (4, Interesting)

VP (32928) | about 2 years ago | (#42683725)

What is worse is that it is hard to find any existing Symbian devices...

For all the drawbacks of Symbian, the combination of a camera that put to shame any other cellphones, and the built-in capabilities of the phone (e.g. a complete SIP stack, integrated with the regular phone functionality) is still unmatched. Even Nokia themselves cannot replicate the hardware capabilities of the 808 in a Windows phone, because the OS can't handle them...

Re:That's too bad, RIP Symbian... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42683811)

and the built-in capabilities of the phone (e.g. a complete SIP stack, integrated with the regular phone functionality) is still unmatched

What about the many SIP-clients available on the AppStore?

I use XS4ALL SIP-client every day, and it reroutes my VOIP too!

The world is bigger without Nokia!

Re:That's too bad, RIP Symbian... (1)

VP (32928) | about 2 years ago | (#42684429)

What about the many SIP-clients available on the AppStore?

I use XS4ALL SIP-client every day, and it reroutes my VOIP too!

The world is bigger without Nokia!

What about them? They require a separate app, Symbian had it built in, and the "Internet calling" capability was integrated directly with the contacts, you could choose to call using cell phone or SIP from the same dialer (including using 3G data, not only WiFi). It is just one example of things that have been standard on Symbian years before other platforms had them. Another example, the panorama picture feature on iPhone 5 - that was available years earlier on Symbian. As I said, it is not one single thing, it is the combination of OS features and hardware capabilities that was superior.

Re:That's too bad, RIP Symbian... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42684631)

Oh, come on!
What the hell is wrong with apps?
I had an E63 and I hated it. Of course, you'd call it mid-to-low end, but how much did a high end nokia cost in 2003? A lot, same as a high end android. And you had bluetooth, basic office functionality and battery life and that's about it.

My E63 was horrible, everything was an app, from the contacts screen to the SMS feature, everything. It's either that or the OS was pure crap or it was put on top of crappy hardware, because it was slow as hell. So don't complains about android having EVERYTHING in the market just because it's an app, boo-hoo!

Re:That's too bad, RIP Symbian... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42684663)

You're comparing the iPhone 5's camera with a nokia from the 2000's jsut because it had something that could do panoramas???
There are front cameras on phones today that were better than the cameras on nokias. Yes, I know that were first or 2nd gen phone cameras, but YOU started it!

Re:That's too bad, RIP Symbian... (1)

VP (32928) | about 2 years ago | (#42685471)

No I am comparing the iPhone 5 camera (released 2012) to the Nokia N8 camera (released 2010)

Re:That's too bad, RIP Symbian... (1)

1s44c (552956) | about 2 years ago | (#42684909)

The n900 running maemo has SIP built in, no extra client needed. Skype too. You can pick a phone number and be given a choice of using the mobile network, skype out, or SIP.

Plus skype video calls work without any extra software.

I have never got SIP to work over 3G data though. I assumed the phone networks blocked this to protect their profits.

Re:That's too bad, RIP Symbian... (1)

johanw (1001493) | about 2 years ago | (#42685211)

They tried to block Skype and Whatsapp here in The Netherlands too, requiring you to buy an extra option on your contract. This resulted in a new law on net neutrality forbidding such practices. The carriers shot themselves in the foot nicely with this action.

Re:That's too bad, RIP Symbian... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42688697)

Instead of extra plans, they just raised the costs (per MB) for all internet related plans by raising prices and cutting the MBs and maybe making you pay for going over your quota.

Re:That's too bad, RIP Symbian... (1)

ameen.ross (2498000) | about 2 years ago | (#42688841)

Which doesn't cost nearly as much as sending an SMS because IM is blocked.

Re:That's too bad, RIP Symbian... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42691059)

Android has sip capabilies baked in the way you describe it.

Re:That's too bad, RIP Symbian... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42690695)

Ahem Android has a complete sip stack also

oh no!!! (3, Funny)

sunking2 (521698) | about 2 years ago | (#42683789)

Women love them so much though!!!

Re:oh no!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42683955)

Comment of the year... xD

Re:oh no!!! (1)

Irate Engineer (2814313) | about 2 years ago | (#42685675)

At least we won't confuse them in technical engineer conversations anymore.

Re:oh no!!! (1)

rjejr (921275) | about 2 years ago | (#42686207)

I didn't know there was any other kind of Symbian, the headline had me worried there for a moment.

What is this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42683843)

Posting a companies suicide note is not cool man! Companies are people after all.

Get your gruesome details here: (4, Informative)

whoever57 (658626) | about 2 years ago | (#42683991)

Symbian++ (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42684117)

I personally love Symbian phones. I love the well designed user interface and the general reliability. I recently looked at Android, iPhones, and decided to get the Nokia 701 Symbian smart phone. To me, a phone is a means to an end, not the end itself. Which is probably why I didn't get an iPhone. The 701 is a thing of beauty, really well designed and loaded with great features. It's like an iPhone but designed in Symbian, and doesn't have that many apps. Still, it's pretty slick.

I'm not quite ready to say good by to Symbian. It's a great platform, just no developers or future...

Re:Symbian++ (1)

LucidBeast (601749) | about 2 years ago | (#42684789)

Nokia 701 is a great phone now that they've updated the software. Developing stuff for Symbian was difficult, because Nokia didn't invest into the tools. I think that is actually the whole reason for the downfall.

Symbian dead? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42684321)

Can Netcraft confirm this??

Replacement Needed (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42684405)

None of the current smartphone operating systems seem to fill the feature phone nitch. Apps for Android generally expect a strong processor, accelerometer, gps, and camera. While these features are useful, not everyone needs them, while things like email are necessary.

What is needed is an operating system that will receive updates for feature phones. A lot of Android devices are left with Android 2.1-3 because they cannot support the new features of modern versions. There needs to be a mobile OS that will remain up to date but not include many of the bells and whistles, similar to the mindset of low requirement desktop environments like LXDE.

Re:Replacement Needed (1)

bemymonkey (1244086) | about 2 years ago | (#42688065)

What would a feature phone need updates for? It's not like they'd run any sort of arbitrary code, so security updates would be relatively unnecessary. And in case of a real update-emergency, you can always just flash the firmware via cable.

MS kills the best camera/phone (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42685561)

41 Mega Pixels that generated the same quality regardless of the zoom factor... sad to see it go.

Bullshit (1)

21mhz (443080) | about 2 years ago | (#42688843)

Who says the hardware won't ever be used in another device?

Re:Bullshit (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42692747)

Who says the hardware won't ever be used in another device?

yes who said can't be used check out full story at http://mtlpriceinindia.blogspot.in/2013/01/nokia-808-pureview-lowest-price-in.html

Two words (1)

lennier1 (264730) | about 2 years ago | (#42687137)

Good riddance!

Most have not seen Symbian Bello FB2 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42688481)

The sad reality is that 99% of people that know symbian have not seen the new Belle FB2 released in 2012. It is excellent, it works well it is stable, the QT based apps rock. Due to Elop saying it is dead, most people have not even bothered to look at these phones. I love my 2.5 days of battery on my N8. Then the hardware, well what other phones have as much stuff as an N8, I won't bother you with the list but even the iPhone 5 is not quite there yet...

I wish there was a dual core or quad core CPU, and they used LiFePO4 batteries.

Goodbye Nokia (1)

V!NCENT (1105021) | about 2 years ago | (#42688867)

I hope people will switch to 4G as soon as possible, so that 3G will be freed up for me, so I can enjoy my E7-00 untill it dies.

If Nokia doesn't have the best HTMLv5 experience and Whatsapp (or whatever will be required by then), awesome battery life, offline maps, full qwerty keyboard, kickass camera and all the other superb features of my current phone (that excludes the camera), I will not buy a Nokia device, ever again, unless Nokia ships a full featured Linux phone.

I hope the Nokia board realizes that they do not have a single unique selling point anymore. I also hope that if they make a comeback with a good phone, their entire marketing department gets fired and replaced with competent staff that CAN ACTUALY INFORM THE PUBLIC AND DUMBASS REVIEWER ABOUT THE PRODUCT, so it won't fail like Symbian has failed to sell enough.

iPhones suck at basic functionality. Android is a horrible piece of shit, and I say that as I Linux fanboy. BlackBerry doesn't even begin to cover what I actualy use a phone for, on the go. Everybody just likes to rave about how much of a computer the non-Symbian smartphones are, while they are FAR from being an actual computer.

So please Nokia, stop the madness. Ditch Windows Phone when you've created a MOBILE COMPUTER 'phone', that actually runs a fullblown Linux install and NEVER EVER listen to these review 'experts' EVER AGAIN. Instead you might want to listen to your CUSTOMER FEEDBACK?

Good-fscking-bye...

That's it, then... (1)

Retron (577778) | about 2 years ago | (#42689589)

The last vestiges of Psion's flagship OS have now died. It's a real pity that they let their slimline, yet feature-complete EPOC 5 be taken over in effect by Nokia. Nokia inherited an OS with cut-n-paste, OLE-style object embedding, fully-draggable windows long before those things appeared elsewhere - and it could do all that (and surf the Web too) on a 36MHz ARM processor. They proceeded to gut the OS over the course of a decade and then ham-fistedly shovel layer upon layer of bloat onto it, effectively eliminating all the hard work that had been put into it in the first place.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?