Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

The Nokia N90, $900 Camera Phone Reviewed 212

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the does-it-ome-with-a-million-minutes dept.
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."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The Nokia N90, $900 Camera Phone Reviewed

Comments Filter:
  • by FidelCatsro (861135) * <fidelcatsro@gmail.TOKYOcom minus city> on Wednesday October 26, 2005 @09:03AM (#13879820) Journal
    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]
    • by pasokon (829164) on Wednesday October 26, 2005 @09:06AM (#13879841) Homepage
      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.
    • by yogix (865930) on Wednesday October 26, 2005 @09:25AM (#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
      • 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.

      • 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
        • You're both correct, in that we shouldn't have to worry about old technology like mikes and antennas, but the reality is that this is still a problem, especially for those of us in America living on the fringes of the digital divide where tech hasn't quite caught up to the rest of the connected world.

          I do agree with the original post -- primarily, the device is a phone and as such it must be able to do three things:
          1. get and keep a good signal
          2. capture my voice satisfactorily
          3. reproduce the remote caller's voice
    • 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.
    • 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?

    • A good site for honest phone reviews is Steven Punter's Southern Ontario Cell Phone Page [arcx.com]. No, he doesn't review this particular model, but he has interesting things to say about various popular North American phone models. Check it out....

      Eric
  • by novus ordo (843883) on Wednesday October 26, 2005 @09:03AM (#13879825) Journal
    "My god...$900"
  • oblig (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 26, 2005 @09:04AM (#13879829)
    Yeah, but can it make phone calls?
    • Re:oblig (Score:2, Insightful)

      by scovetta (632629)
      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 p
      • Re:oblig (Score:5, Funny)

        by DarkVader (121278) on Wednesday October 26, 2005 @10:25AM (#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.
      • by Tet (2721)
        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.

      • by RKBA (622932) *
        The closest I've found to what you describe is the PalmOne Treo 650 (See: http://snipurl.com/j3cu [snipurl.com] ). I pick it up on Friday so I haven't had a chance to use it personally yet, but it's supposed to have unlimited Internet access, email, etc.

    • Safety (Score:5, Funny)

      by HermanAB (661181) on Wednesday October 26, 2005 @10:09AM (#13880225)
      Talking on a phone is dangerous while driving, so Nokia decided to drop that feature...
  • It's Free (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I hear its going to be free with a 10 Year contract
    • You think you jest.. in the early 1990's if you bought an analog phone in the UK then Nokia Mobira actually would offer to sign you to a ten-year contract!
  • N91 (Score:5, Insightful)

    by pr0nbot (313417) on Wednesday October 26, 2005 @09:06AM (#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.
  • by generic-man (33649) * on Wednesday October 26, 2005 @09:12AM (#13879875) Homepage Journal

    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>
    • by killmenow (184444) on Wednesday October 26, 2005 @10:08AM (#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.
    • Internet access.
      To me getting the latest news and weather over my phone means more to me than games, movies, and a camera.
    • Nice post, but couldn't you just buy a cheap laptop with a wireless adaptor, a DVD reader, a webcam, and a headset for Skype to do all of the above? It would probably cost about the same and you'd still need the backpack, but at least you can do all of the above with one device instead of several. Sure, you'd have to stay in range of a Starbucks or McDonald's everywhere you went, but that's not too hard to do anymore...
    • I believe I speak for everyone in this forum when I say that no one ever speaks for everyone in this forum.
  • by Nichotin (794369) on Wednesday October 26, 2005 @09:12AM (#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.
    • 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! ;-)
    • 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
      • My quite old Nokia 8310 is smaller, and the Nokia 8210 I had five years ago is lighter - and you can get smaller yet these days, such as this [mobilegazette.com] little 44g thing.

        By the way, this site has a pretty nifty 'compare size' function (on top of the images:) http://www.esato.com/phones/index.php/phone=23,cp= 141 [esato.com]
        • Ahh now there's news I can use!

          Damn shame that VK2000 doesn't have bluetooth, otherwise I'd probably start shopping for one today...and unfortunately the 8310 is a little smaller but thicker, which isn't great for carrying it in your pocket. But I definitely appreciate somebody who appreciates the utility of a simple phone!
      • 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...

        Because the biggest components of a phone are the battery, keypad, and screen. Once you have those, adding

    • OK, I love the Ericsson phones. Great interface, great technology, versatile, it's all good. I've downloaded so many anime theme tunes from fan sites over GPRS to use as ringtones and alarm signals that it's just getting silly. Brilliant fun.

      But... the joystick.

      The goddamn Sony Ericsson joystick.

      Everyone I know with any variant on the general theme of Standard Ericsson Phone has run into the same problem. That joystick starts sticking something rotten, as dust and pocket fluff and other grode start to

  • I don't think so (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Jeff DeMaagd (2015) on Wednesday October 26, 2005 @09:13AM (#13879878) Homepage Journal
    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.
    • 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 reb
    • by Red Flayer (890720)
      " 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 th
    • 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

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

  • [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... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by squison (546401)
    ..free in 1-2 years with contract.
  • Japanese cell phones (Score:5, Informative)

    by Bueller_007 (535588) on Wednesday October 26, 2005 @09:28AM (#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.

    • 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? (Score:2, Informative)

        by Bueller_007 (535588)
        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

        • 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 n
    • 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 usa
      • by 246o1 (914193)
        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
      • 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 differ
        • FWIW, 3G is NOT a standard. 3G is a marketing and political term. It essentially boils down to "These standards support data rates approximately better than the worst DSL available." The following, totally incompatable, systems are considered "3G". UMTS. CDMA2000. FOMA. GSM with EDGE is also considered 3G by some groups, though it's borderline in practical terms.

          There are others, but these are the most popular.

          "3G" is little more than an attempt to extract more frequencies from governments by proposing

    • 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: w
  • am i the only one... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by utexaspunk (527541) on Wednesday October 26, 2005 @09:30AM (#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...
  • by salimfadhley (565599) <ip@@@stodge...org> on Wednesday October 26, 2005 @09:32AM (#13880017) Homepage Journal
    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. :-)
    • Close... but no cigar. You forgot to put a lens on that Nikon. Add in another hundred bucks or so for a cheap third party one - although that's still better than what the camera has I'm sure, it won't do the camera justice.

      Of course it won't all fit in your pocket unless you have some really baggy cargo pants. But the camera comes with a neck strap...

      • Actually, the $900 is just for the camera body [bhphotovideo.com]. $1200 with a lens [bhphotovideo.com], but in all fairness it's an excellent Nikkor. Personally, I'm going for the $1400 two-lens package [bhphotovideo.com], you can't beat the price for the glass you're getting.

        Canon might make an arguably better body in the Digital Rebel XT, but by all accounts the kit lens pales next to the Nikon. And yes, I am a Nikon fanboy, or at least I already have several F-mount lenses that more than justify buying a new Nikon body.
    • Of course you could do that. But you'll get one of these for free or very cheap with a contract in the UK. Would you get the free D70 with a contract? Absolutely not! It's not about the hadware *value* it's about the _cost_ to the consumer. I've always had top end phones, but I've never paid over £20 for one because I'm on contract.

      ~Pev
  • 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!
  • But if I'm going to pay $900 for a phone I vant to look mahvelous with it, dahling!
  • by canfirman (697952) <pdavi25@ya[ ].ca ['hoo' in gap]> on Wednesday October 26, 2005 @09:50AM (#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.

  • 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?

  • by lidocaineus (661282) on Wednesday October 26, 2005 @09:51AM (#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.
    • 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
      • 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

        • Do you even know what you're talking about? I hear what you're saying, but that's not what people are asking for. And I don't appreciate being called an idiot.

          Everybody KNOWS there are cheap phones that don't do much more than make phone calls. It would be nice if a manufacturer put some effort into developing a nice phone that focused on voice functionality. Small (think small pager or Zippo lighter), simple fast phone book (for example, Samsung phones have a nice phonebook, except it's really slow),
          • No offense, but go take a reading comprehension class. My OP was discussing how people complain about not getting what they want (a basic phone) when they can get it. Never have they mentioned aesthetic value (and in fact, many mention that they don't care how it looks as long as it does one thing). I never said there was anything WRONG with this. What *is* wrong are people who think that's the only right way to do things.

            You are the one who brought up aesthetics. If you can't seem to find a simple
            • Look I'm not going to get into a flamewar about it. What I'm saying is that so-called "stereotypical response" you're talking about is NOT asking for a phone that just makes phone calls and doesn't care about anything else like you say. I mean, a lot of people in general are dumb, but do you really believe that people can't find a phone that makes phone calls? Don't you think they are asking for something besides that? Either you're not hearing them (possible), or they're doing a bad job at getting thie
    • Ok. all i want is a phone that makes phone calls. and doesn't look and feel like it belongs in the 'barbie keeps in touch' playset.

      they make the "just phones" chincy so you won't like them and spend the extra dough on a 300 mhz datacenter photo phone.
  • by antifoidulus (807088) on Wednesday October 26, 2005 @09:51AM (#13880130) Homepage Journal
    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...
  • Prosumer options? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by necro81 (917438)
    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,
  • I want to research phones, but all I'm finding is obfuscation. Is there a dpreview for wireless phones out there?
  • Obviously (Score:3, Funny)

    by Comatose51 (687974) on Wednesday October 26, 2005 @09:56AM (#13880148) Homepage
    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!
  • I will not pay... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ari_j (90255) on Wednesday October 26, 2005 @09:57AM (#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.
  • You can get an official Darth Vader Supreme edition costume. http://tinyurl.com/cubsg [tinyurl.com]

  • I'm old fashioned (Score:2, Insightful)

    by faloi (738831)
    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.
  • Which is the best mobile phone review site, which covers not just the high end phones?
  • by squoozer (730327) on Wednesday October 26, 2005 @10:36AM (#13880400)

    With the success of the iPod which does basically nothing but play music how come no one has figured out that there could well be a market for a phone that does little more than make calls. While some may be interested in a phone with hundreds of extra features I would like a phone that basically just lets me make calls. Adding a camera to a mobile phone has, IMHO, got to be one of the worst combinations of technology since someone combined chocolate and fireguards.

  • $900 for a phone and it's not even quad-band.
  • The E-Series phones are being made to compete with the BlackBerry line. I currently own a Nokia 6820 which is the text messaging phone with a fold-out keyboard. I absolutely love it. It seems they have improved on this design with an enhanced screen and BlackBerry mail support.

    Check out the E-Series line: http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000193062973/ [engadget.com]

  • by yagu (721525) * <yayagu@@@gmail...com> on Wednesday October 26, 2005 @11:45AM (#13881158) Journal

    I'm seeing standard and predictable fare (not necessarily a bad thing) in posts for this article. There are basically two camps; those who just want a cell phone that sends and receives calls reliably (that's where I am); and those who love the extra features and want the coolest gadgetry they can blend with their cell phones.

    My thoughts:

    • reliable calls. Please fix cell phone technology before you add cameras and video to my phone! I've heard the argument it's the manufacturers of the phones doing this, not the providers. I don't care! Clearly the phone manufacturers and providers talk (unless, maybe they're using cell phones), and collaborate on what goes into new cell phone designs.

      There has been a recent emergency in my family and I was totally frustrated by the number of dropped calls, unintelligible conversations, etc. I endured with people on the other end using cell phones.

    • it isn't the cell phones that are the problem, it's the implementation of the networks. I don't care! If I'm buying cell phone service, I assume it's an end-to-end solution. If you want to know more about how cell phones work, look here [howstuffworks.com]. It's an interesting read, you'll learn a lot about how cell phone technology works, but you won't find out why or how they would fix quality problems with the technology.

    • combining is just a bad idea. I remember one time combo TV-VCRs on the market. I asked a friend why he'd bought it. He shrugged, said it just seemed cool, and more convenient. But what happens if the VCR breaks? (It did, btw). Same for combo-cell phones. More stuff in one device means more opportunity for some piece to break, leaving you with awkward devices that don't do everything you bought it for.

    • related to point previous, there's the compromise in quality of added functionality. If I'm dishing out $900 for a do-all gadget and it takes pictures, it'd better be at least 4Mpixel with a Leica lens and variable focus (I don't want infinite depth of field in all of my pictures).

    • for the total cost of this new gadget (I'm loathe to call it a phone) I could buy: a very good 4M pixel camera; an iPod; and a cell phone. I know people argue for the convenience of them all in one. I don't buy that. The all-in-one invariably compromises in form factor. It's not an ideal form factor for a phone, it's not an ideal form factor for a camera, and it's not for an mp3 player.

      Yeah, it's not as convenient to carry multiple gadgets around, but it's not nearly as inconvenient as people want to make it out to be to strengthen their all-in-one argument.

    • pay-for services. I didn't even know about this one until recently, but lots of these combo gadgets are designed to suck more money out of you. For example, the ads show people sharing pictures and videos with their camera phones, but it turns out that's not part of the basic service, you pay as you go to send pictures. What a ripoff (why isn't that just part of the service minutes?)!

    • I keep hearing the argument that we can just buy a phone if that's all we want. But, I'm not finding that to be true. I've been to kiosks where they don't offer any non-enhanced phones. They may be out there, but they're not easy to find -- and the sales force out there isn't inclined to be helpful around this, they're making their big bucks by selling the bling.

    Bottom line: (at least for me) I just want a phone that does a very good job of being a phone.

    • by Dionysus (12737)
      reliable calls.

      Seems to be a problem in the US. Can't say I had this problem in Europe, no matter the phone, network or location (I've been to places in Norway where I couldn't get reliable radio signal, but the phone still worked).

      I keep hearing the argument that we can just buy a phone if that's all we want. But, I'm not finding that to be true.

      Again, this is a problem in US. In Europe, since all providers use the same network, I can go to the store (not related to the network providers) and buy a cell
  • Every last bit of cameraphone functionality I'd ever want includes realtime slaving a nearby PC window to the camera, over Bluetooth (or WiFi, more likely). Mind control over the psychic friends network, too, but I can wait for that.
  • Slight mistake (Score:3, Interesting)

    by frank_adrian314159 (469671) on Wednesday October 26, 2005 @12:52PM (#13881956) Homepage
    ...you could ever want on a camera phone.

    Should be "...you never really wanted on a phone."

  • Here's the #1 feature I want in a phone (that I can't seem to find anywhere)

    I want it to be TOUGH. I want to be able to drop it in the bathroom, have it carom off the bathtub, and land in the toilet, and still be functional.

    Is there such a beast?

    DG

Almost anything derogatory you could say about today's software design would be accurate. -- K.E. Iverson

Working...