Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Motorola Develops Bare-Bones Phone 293

tunabomber writes "Whenever a review of the latest cellphone/camera/MP3 player/GPS receiver/fish finder/tazer convergence gadget is posted on Slashdot, the first posters are usually quick to chime in by saying they just want something with decent battery life, reception, ergonomics, etc. Those posters' prayers may now be answered, because Motorola's new 'dumb' phone has been designed with these traits in mind. Notable features include an E Ink display and dual antennae to improve reception. The phone is slated to become available before the end of the year."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Motorola Develops Bare-Bones Phone

Comments Filter:
  • Finally... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by slusich ( 684826 ) * <> on Monday October 30, 2006 @01:57PM (#16644573)
    It's about time. It seems like every basic phone on the market right now is a cheap piece of junk with poor reception and no durability. It's good to see someone taking this niche of the market seriously. It looks like they've put some serious thought into this phone, making it not only useful but stylish.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      I Agree. I just want a simple phone with decent standby time and excellent reception. I don't need a camera or an MP3 player or a web browser. I just want a phone... seriously.
      • by pizza_milkshake ( 580452 ) on Monday October 30, 2006 @02:49PM (#16645647)
        Yes, but now how will I update my MySpace page with videos of me finding fish and stunning them while listening to my favorite trendy band?!
      • by Shakrai ( 717556 )

        I Agree. I just want a simple phone with decent standby time and excellent reception. I don't need a camera or an MP3 player or a web browser. I just want a phone... seriously.

        The camera is a PITA anyways. Do you know how many employers refuse to let you bring camera phones in? Most defense plants. Hell, I work for healthcare and our regulatory agency says we can't have them either (course everybody does anyway). They are supposed to be left in the employees car.

        Verizon has a few halfway decent flip

      • I Agree. I just want a simple phone with decent standby time and excellent reception. I don't need a camera or an MP3 player or a web browser. I just want a phone... seriously.

        I agree also, but look at the bottom paragraph:

        And will it appear in the United States? For that to happen, Reith says, Motorola will have to find a willing service provider or agree to sell its product alongside no-name brands at drugstores.


        Basically, this phone is being developed and marketed for "economically challenged" marke
    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by kfg ( 145172 )
      . . .making it . . . stylish.

      i.e., ugly in five years.

    • by Lumpy ( 12016 )
      that depends, I love my Razr AFTER I hacked it to increase the volume. The size and reliability is perfect in every way. only thing I wish it had was the better reception capabilities my Treo600 had, that thing would pull in a usable signal where others had only "no service".

      Personally I hope these are made as triband and GSM. as I will be getting one here for use in the states shortly after they release them there. (as my razr was designed not for USA use but works perfectly here)

      Stupid of Motorola to no
    • I think the minimum features would depend on the person using it. But in western countries (especially Europe) the issue isn't that the phone is available or not. Its more a matter of the way the subsidy system works here.

      For example, I would LOVE to have a simple SMALL phone, with good call, and reception capabilities, WITH Bluetooth as a minimum. Therefore when I am out and about, partying or whatever, I carry a simple phone that JUST WORKS. It will connect to my car Bluetooth Handsfree for safe driving.

    • by bigberk ( 547360 )
      I agree, it looks like an excellent product. Most people probably use very few of the fancy features on the modern expensive phones. Myself, I buy older handsets because I think it's ridiculous to spend hundreds on a cell phone. This is just a communication device after all, the priorities (as I see them, as an engineer) should be: reception quality, talk and standby time on battery, and durability.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by dgatwood ( 11270 )

        Actually, it looks awful, just like almost every other phone Motorola has ever designed. More info on the phone here []. Here's a preliminary list of flaws:

        • No cover for the keypad. The #1 complaint non-techies have about phones is accidentally dialing someone.
        • No mechanism for synchronizing contacts with your computer. This means that you have to manually key in your phone book using whatever kludge of an interface they provide.
        • Uses special technology to boost battery life but provides less talk time a
        • by bigberk ( 547360 )
          Good points, all of them. The accidental dialing is a problem for me too - cover would be nice.
        • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

          by bunions ( 970377 )
          > Style---no, it isn't important to most people.

          Yes, the market certainly bears out this assertion.

          On a more serious note, due to the degree of eye-rolling induced by reading the quoted comment, I have dislocated my retinas and will be unavailable to respond to further comments for some time.
    • Nokia makes (made?) the 6019i for the CDMA carriers, and it is a basic, plain-jane phone with excellent RF, battery life and durability.
    • by badfrog ( 45310 )
      I still miss my Nokia 6160, which I got after reading a Slashdot review [] way back in 1998. That thing was a workhorse, I had it for 5 years before foolishly upgrading on a whim. And it still wouldn't be huge by most of today's standards. Nice simple phone, great reception and battery life. At the time it was the most advanced one on the market, and I think the first one to include games (snake, anyone?).
    • I've been asking my brother-in-law at Motorola for this for ages. Thanks, Randy! :)
  • Why? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Nemetroid ( 883968 ) on Monday October 30, 2006 @01:57PM (#16644577)
    Why so little features? I'd want something more advanced.
    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      If you work in any kind of job where security is taken seriously (government contractors, aerospace industry, etc.) they don't permit anyone in with cellphones equipped with cameras, usb, audo recording, etc. Not at the regular employee level at least. This is to combat corporate espionage and other information leaks.

      This is not exactly a "niche" market.
    • Why so little features? I'd want something more advanced.

      I worked at EInk around the same time this phone was being developed. The main reason why I was told it has so little features was that it's being marketed as a substitue for land lines in certain parts of the world. I actually got to see the phone a while back and it's pretty impressive at how small and cheap this type of technology has become.
  • by omeomi ( 675045 ) on Monday October 30, 2006 @01:57PM (#16644583) Homepage
    ...wish it had a camera ;-)
  • /jumps around //always celebrates in text ///has nothing else to say
  • But I want a phone that has 8000 features including getting my ESPN newsclips in 5 second video segments, playing badly made games, and having a look like it was designed by 12 year old boys with crayons! And so help me god if the battery lasts 8 hours or I ever get more than 2 bars worth of signal!
    • by raduf ( 307723 )

      I DO want mp3's in my phone. I have a Sony-Ericsson now, after the slow and paintful death of my old very simple very dear Siemens A35. The only thing I really like in my new phone is that after I stop the alarm in the morning I press one more button and it plays music, so I won't go back to sleep again. And sometimes I let it playing all through the morning ritual and on the way to the car.

      Other than that... I don't use the camera, I don't browse the net on the thing (brr) and
  • Alternatively... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by jolyonr ( 560227 ) on Monday October 30, 2006 @02:00PM (#16644639) Homepage
    How about I just stick with my old Nokia 6310i

    It's a neat idea to have a feature-free phone. But seriously, there are millions of those going on ebay cheap because silly people are upgrading to a phone that does polyphonic catatonic ringtones, online horoscopes, and realtime 3d su-doku. That's got to be cheaper than buying any new Motorola phone.

    • by lixee ( 863589 )
      It's a mere 9mms in thickness. That's three times smaller than your Nokia. Sign me up for one!
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by nine-times ( 778537 )

      People aren't always upgrading their phones for the reasons you mentioned. I have a Razr. Do I use the camera? Nope. Play the games or check my e-mail? Uhn-uh. So why did I get a Razr? It's thin. At the time I got it, it was the thinnest thing available, and I carry around a bunch of equipment, so I'd like each thing to be thin and light.

      There are advances in technology besides squeezing more crap into phones. They can get smaller, thinner, lighter, with better sound and reception. The power consu

      • Liked how thin the Razr was? Well, seems this thing's EVEN THINNER.

        I'm quite tempted, actually. If nothing else then by the battery life. I like my fancy 2-megapixel-camera, bluetooth, mp3-ringtone, video-messaging, Captain-Kirk-eat-your-heart-out ultraphone, but the battery doesn't last at all. If these are seriously inexpensive, it might be worth my buying one just in order to have something that I can take to a festival and not have to worry about the charge on.

        • I want one too, can take it on holiday without worrying too much about loosing it. Light weight as well so its good for backpacking expeditions. A longer standby life would be even better but for all the compromises its a brilliant second phone.

          It would suit my parents too if the interface is simple. They dont want any more deeply nested menues full of crap they never use, they just want a phone. Its brilliant and the next design will be even better if this one sells the way I think it will. Pushed a little
  • by tsa ( 15680 )
    Pity there's nothing in the article about what this thing will cost eventually.
    • Just a crystal ball gaze from me but here I go:

      It will be a little cheaper than a phone with the yesteryears (i.e. "standard") amount of bells and whistles if you buy it outright since what they save on assembling a simple phone is only a part of their total cost. If you get a subsidized phone with a, say, 12 month plan from a provider the price differential might just be gone. It's better for the provider to sell someone a basic plan + glitzy phone with add-ons that will entice the users to buing fringe
    • There's nothing in there about price, but plenty about their target region: India (and by extension, you can imagine China, SE Asia, and parts of Africa in there too). So you can get two things out of it:

      A) It will be cheap.
      B) It will not be sold to us rich Westerners.

      Of course, it is just what many folks are looking for.
    • [] has a (IMHO) better article.

      Looks like under $50, and while you may not be able to buy it directly in the US, I've got to think they'll be available on ebay fairly soon. If it's a tri-band GSM, you will likely just be able to slap your SIM card in and go.

      Personally, I can't wait to get one (and one for my dad)!
  • Thorstein Veblen followers may agree that this phone is merely an entry point.

    It's not desirable on it's own outside of a few /.'ers like me.
  • by Buran ( 150348 ) on Monday October 30, 2006 @02:05PM (#16644769)
    If you read the very last paragraph in the article, it states that the phone isn't going to be available in the US unless someone will carry it (and it doesn't have a way for Verizon et al to nickel and dime you to death with photos, ringtones etc, so good luck getting them to do it) or it's sold in drugstores alongside no-name brands, and I wouldn't be surprised if Motorola makes up some BS excuse about how it's beneath Moto to sell that way.

    So for now, those who want just a simple phone (like my mom) are out of luck. Even text messaging and other bells and whistles go unused on her phone.

    On the upside, she got the phone for free with her plan and just doesn't use the features she doesn't want, but she's continually asking me if she gets charged for text messages (not unless it's someone other than T-Mobile who sends them and nobody sends her anything, so I don't see why she worries).
    • Motorola should offer this phone to Cingular/Verizon/Sprint/T-Mobile as part of a reduced-cost "pay as you go" service. The reason is simple: people don't really need most of the fancy features to start with. They need a phone that is reliable, offers good reception quality, and the ability to support wired headsets or Bluetooth wireless headsets.
    • by Lumpy ( 12016 ) on Monday October 30, 2006 @02:22PM (#16645087) Homepage
      Let me let you in on a secret.

      if it's GSM and triband then you will be able to easily buy one via a secret website...

      dont tell anyone, it's a really obscure place that very few know of.

      I have purchased many cellphones that are not available here from ebay. MY daughter has sported a cellphone that is uber-trendy that oohs and aaahs from classmates on a regular basis from that secret website.

      IF it is available over there, you bet it will be available UNLOCKED on ebay minutes after.
      • by Buran ( 150348 )
        Not everyone wants to do that. A lot of people want to just be able to walk into a store and buy a phone that has a warranty and official support. Not everyone is comfortable with buying off ebay in general also. People who are on Slashdot aren't typical of the general population. Don't put yourself in the place of a Slashdot reader. Put yourself in the place of the vast majority of the cellphone-using morons who blab on the phone while driving and almost get me killed because they don't bother to pay atten
    • by Bastian ( 66383 )
      As long as there's a GSM version that speaks a language I understand (even just barely), I'd gladly order one of these babies from overseas. This is everything I've been dreaming of in a phone.
      • by Buran ( 150348 )
        I hope that you'll be able to get it. A lot of countries have large English-speaking populations so you will likely be in luck although not certainly. Still, though, as I replied in another reply to my comment, it really needs to be sold through official channels for a lot of people to be willing to buy one.

        I would think about buying Mom one if it does become possible, though, because she doesn't want a lot of features, either, and does not have a triband phone but does go to Greece sometimes to visit famil
    • >it states that the phone isn't going to be available in the US unless someone will carry it

      Since TFA states that the phone is primarily designed for the non-US market, I assume it will be a GSM phone. Since your Mom has T-Mobile, which is a GSM network, she can just buy one and put a T-Mobile chip in it. Granted, it probably wouldn't be quite that easy if she doesn't already have a T-Mobile GSM phone, but I'm willing to bet it'll be doable. People already are using Europe-only phones in the US.

      • by Buran ( 150348 )
        Yeah, if a geek is available to set it up (me) it can be made to work for her. She would not go onto eBay herself to buy it, though, and the general public won't do that even if they know that it can be done in the first place. That would be the barrier to widespread use of the phone here.

        Unless, of course, Motorola DOES come up with a way to officially distribute it here.
    • I hate that term. They might as well say "the poor, unwashed, unfashionable welfare slag" model. Certainly deliberate marketing ploy... however, despite being labeled an "Entry-Level Phone" I just got a Moto L2. No camera, no PDA, just a goddamned phone with some decent messaging features--but it's a Quad-Band GSM "World Phone," unlike damn-near every other f'ing phone sold in the U.S. So, while all my other friends with their $500 ham-sandwich sized Media/PDA phones crippled to [C|T]DMA are left silent whi
    • If you read the very last paragraph in the article, it states that the phone isn't going to be available in the US unless someone will carry it (and it doesn't have a way for Verizon et al to nickel and dime you to death with photos, ringtones etc, so good luck getting them to do it)...

      Not only that, but it's not expensive enough for Verizon. Some people don't realize, but US cellphone carriers *like* the idea that, if you want to buy a phone without locking yourself into a 5 year contract, it'll cost you

  • Features? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Gothmolly ( 148874 ) on Monday October 30, 2006 @02:06PM (#16644775)
    No wireless. No USB. Less space than a Nomad. Lame.
  • which continues to offer new, inexpensive phones. And will it appear in the United States? For that to happen, Reith says, Motorola will have to find a willing service provider or agree to sell its product alongside no-name brands at drugstores.

    Looks like you'll be haviong to go to eBay or GSM Importers for these phones.

  • by krell ( 896769 ) on Monday October 30, 2006 @02:08PM (#16644819) Journal
    The number rows (1,2,3) should be in perfect line-up rows on any phone so you don't have to look to hit the numbers. They are mostly lined up here, but there's no reason they could not have gone the rest of the way.
  • Bluetooth (Score:4, Funny)

    by AVryhof ( 142320 ) <amos AT vryhofresearch DOT com> on Monday October 30, 2006 @02:09PM (#16644835) Homepage
    Now it just needs bluetooth so I can add one of These []
  • Fashion has always been a cyclical market.  Trends become fads only to have reactionary movements back to basics.  It's about time for 'popular style' of phones to become phones again.

    We'll never see this product in the states because the article said that they are marketing rechargers powered by bicycling.  What American still does physical activity like that?
  • That has essentially the same feature set as the Motorola Sprint phone I have now, but it's less bulky.

  • by RingDev ( 879105 ) on Monday October 30, 2006 @02:14PM (#16644933) Homepage Journal
    FTFA: It is well suited in several ways to a phone designed for poor countries, says Motorola's chief technology officer, Padmasree Warrior.

    Padmasree Warrior. Sounds like their board meetings take place in a steel cage with investors chanting "Two man enter! One man leave!"

  • eink in the dark? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by amigabill ( 146897 )
    The display is very easy to see even in full sunlight but uses much less energy than an LCD, Wilcox says.

    What if it's dark out? Is there a backlight for use at night, or is it just not seeable then?

    How durable is eink? Article says no glass or plastic cover is needed, will this thing resist wear and tear that might try and ruin it?
  • This looks wonderful! I am definitely part of that niche that wants simplicity in a phone.

    However, I'm still not a cell phone customer, because the service is still too expensive. I could afford it, but paying $500-$800 a year for phone service just isn't appealing to me. Unfortunately, there's not much motivation for cell companies to work on pushing down prices when such a great portion of the population seems perfectly willing to stay at $40+ per month price point. So until it gets cheaper, I'll be stick
    • Cingular decided to raise rates on my phone by $5/month because it was a TDMA phone. I decided to look at my options.

      Most months I talk on my cell phone for about 12 minutes.

      For less than $100 I could get a phone for a prepaid plan. If I only buy the minimum number of minutes to keep my phone number, Cingular and T-Mobile both charge $100/year. For this, on Cingular you get about 400 minutes/year; on T-Mobile you get at least 1000 minutes per year.

      I tried both, and settled on Cingular - as I get better r
  • by Xthlc ( 20317 ) on Monday October 30, 2006 @02:16PM (#16644981)
    I've owned two gadget-laden phones in my life, and I'm still pining for my original StarTac. I never use any of the fancy features on my colorful phones, aside from (every once in a blue moon) text messaging. That, plus the size, plus the E-ink display, plus the green implications of being able to charge my phone during my bicycle commute to work, makes me eager to see this on the market. Although I'll probably have to order it from overseas. :(
  • ... But I'm worried! Motorola has a really bad track record for reliability on their cell phones, especially the lower models.

    Will this be a premium phone with high cost, but no features? I'd be willing to pay for it if it's solid.

    Currently through my friends I know of 6 v180's that have died within a couple months, a hand ful of the v2xx series, and several razr's that just stop working in one way or another. All with under a year of usage.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    The pictures of this phone actually do it justice - it looks amazing in proportion to the hand. See for yourself []. As someone who wants my phone to "just be a phone," I'll be buying one, without a doubt.
    • Text input looks far, far worse than the stunningly obsolete, first-generation-GSM Nokia I found in a cupboard once.

      (Of the 'this SMS thing looks fun, but will anyone ever use it?' age...)
  • by Jethro ( 14165 )
    Yeah, but it's not a FLIP PHONE! I will NEVER buy a non-flip-phone!!!

  • Utterly confusing, since when did a cell company actually make a practical device rather than nickel and diming the customer to death. It has been my experience in the past that Cell companies intentionally over complicate things in order to make the customer pay more money.

    Example, getting pictures off a picture phone without paying for them. Any digital camera can do this just fine. The Razor even comes with a 5 pin USB connector. However no driver support available unless you pay for a "Mobile con

  • This is more or less everything I want in a new phone. Just the phone! No frills, utilitarian and good battery life.
  • What develop? They had this tech since the days of the first cell phones. They are just bringing it back to the market (and not in the developed world). What's next, "developing rotary dial phones?
  • How about... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by kerb ( 43511 )
    Custom built phone? Why not? Computer sellers allows custom built PCs specified by users and this is being done for desktops, servers and laptops. Why not phone as well?
  • Flashlight! (Score:4, Insightful)

    by businessnerd ( 1009815 ) on Monday October 30, 2006 @02:44PM (#16645565)
    The article mentioned a future feature of having an LED flashlight. Now there is a feature I would actually want. Ingenious! How many times have we all tried to use the phones backlit display as a flashlight, why not go all the way and it's so damn simple to implement. Whenever you need a flahslight, you never seem to have one. Cell phone companies (I'm looking at you Motorola, LG, Nokia, etc.) please put this in your phones, be they relatively featureless or featurful. The utility of this far exceeds an mp3 player or video player.
    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Ullteppe ( 953103 )
      There's a high-intensity white LED on my Sony Ericsson K700i. It's intended to be lighting for the built-in camera, but is much more useful as a flashlight (actually, the LED is more useful than the camera). Shame there's no dedicated button, it takes two button presses to turn it on.
    • As mentioned previously, my stunningly cheap-and-cheerful Nokia 1100 has one.

      I discovered it by accident, too... ;-)
    • Re:Flashlight! (Score:4, Informative)

      by Davey McDave ( 926282 ) < minus bsd> on Monday October 30, 2006 @03:23PM (#16646335) Homepage
      A lot of phones already have these.

      A good example being my phone:,,46548,00.html []

      Decent battery, really easy UI (Nokias are a lot easier to use), flashlight, alarm, texts, big fat buttons you can actually press comfortably. Cheap as all hell too. Looks better in black. Maybe it just hasn't been released in the US yet? A lot of people have this phone in the UK..

      And yes, the flashlight is AMAZINGLY useful, just like the tiny screwdriver I have on my keyring. Not only is it good for screwing things, just as a sharp thin tool.
  • Fun Fact! (Score:2, Insightful)

    by mybadluck22 ( 750599 )
    Antennae is only appropriate when applied to zoology. The correct term for the plural of radio antenna is "antennas." Source: New Oxford American Dictionary
  • It's an absurdly thin (9mm) phone, not a bare bones phone. The lack of features has a lot more to do with it's exotic display that with the demand for a simple device.

    I'm not one of the anti-gadget brigade myself, but if I was I'd definitely swap the thinness for more battery life, a bigger keypad, a backlight and the feeling that it won't snap in half at any moment.
  • I work for a Big Honkin' Aerospace Company and have had problems for the past few years with upgrading cell phone. In addition to not having any cells in classified areas (no big deal - we have "leave your phone here' boxes outside every lab) we also aren't allowed to have a camera inside company buildings (due to trade secret issues). That extends to camera phones and PDAs. As a result, you're stuck picking the one token phone at the dealer that is cameraless.

    I'm glad somebody's getting on board with th
  • Insects have "antennae", phones have "antennas".
  • Texting is very important, in particular to low-end phone users and "emerging markets", because it's inexpensive and simple, and because it's increasingly being used for business functions. On the other hand, if money is tight, I think durability and use of standard technologies matter more than being ultra-thin and shiny.

    This phone looks like an overpriced gimmick to me.
  • Buy a pay per use phone. They cost 30-60 dollars at places like walmart, checks cashed places, and dollar stores. And they come with some free time on them. Many of them you can replace the uid card with a different one (one supplied by your provider. There small and have no features.

    But most likely for many who want a basic phone it will be too basic for them.
  • But... (Score:2, Funny)

    by Pi_r_ed ( 1003627 )
    But can it run linux?
  • There has always been basic phones out there. From Nokia alone: 1100, 1110i, 1101, 1112, 2100, 2310. I have always found the "but I just want to make phone-calls!"-argument to be pretty lame, since the market is full of phones that offer just the basics. Hell, three of those phones I listed have a B&W-screens.

    I bought my neo-luddite mother Nokia 1100. Very basic phone that "just works". And she has no problems using it. And it has very long standby (100-400 hours) and talk-times (2.5 - 4.5 hours). It's
  • Some of my clients have tight security regulations. I recently was sent for an extended engagement at a lab where I wasn't allowed to bring anything with a camera on site. I went out to the verizon store and bought a Motorola V65S for only $20. It does almost nothing.

  • We convinced my father-in-law to carry a cell phone about a year ago. He bristled at the idea of ever using any functions other than placing and receiving calls. Voice mail? Forget it. If the person is not sitting at the phone at the time John calls, he doesn't want to leave any message for them anyway. An address book? No way. He's proud of the fact that he has memorized the phone numbers of several dozens of friends, and snorts at the idea of using a machine to list phone numbers alphabetized by names. He
  • Since I can get a flip phone with internet and maybe even a camera for free or near free. Unless there's an actual plausible advantage that getting fewer features than those can get for almost nothing already then there's not benefit.

    Read the article closely. Half of it is some boring marketspeak about the display. The other half is the business case for why the display makes sense - In INDIA WHERE YOU CAN'T READILY RECHARGE THE PHONE AND WHERE PEOPLE WHO CAN'T READ STILL NEED A MOBILE PHONE.

    Of course it's
  • ARPU (Score:3, Informative)

    by aberson ( 461047 ) on Monday October 30, 2006 @05:02PM (#16648235) Homepage
    You know that $100 phone you bought when you sign up for a new contract? It's really a $300 phone... I don't have a source, but I recall reading somewhere that it takes over a year for the cell company to recoup the cost of the loss-leader phone they gave you.

    "Average Revenue Per User" is the cellular industry term that is key here. The wireless industry does everything it can to eek out every single bit of revenue from each user. Text messages, pictures, ringtones, etc. So, I don't think you'll ever see this phone in the states... there is not even a CHANCE of increasing revenue.

    MAYBE you could see this phone in the pre-paid market, which typically has simpler phones anyway (and higher airtime revenue).

  • by Rich Klein ( 699591 ) on Monday October 30, 2006 @06:28PM (#16649833) Homepage Journal
    I didn't see any mention of whether or not it has a GPS receiver. Any cell phone sold in the US is required to have a GPS receiver built in so they can track you, right? That could be one reason why this phone won't be sold in the US.

    It looks pretty cool to me, in any case.
  • by KZigurs ( 638781 ) on Monday October 30, 2006 @11:16PM (#16652743)
    Niiice idea, niiiice... The only problem I see is that little tiny bit that this is done by motorola. So far the only mobile phones company that has consistently failed to deliver at least ONE GOOD HANDSET. Slow menus, bugs and crashes, idiotic features and unusable functionality. Strangely most popular in the good ol' USA.

    Guys, please be so kind, go and get a GOOD phone. Samsung? Sony Ericsson? Nokia? Just whatever. Kill Motorola, please.
  • by walterbyrd ( 182728 ) on Monday October 30, 2006 @11:29PM (#16652851)
    Some schools are banning cell-phones for students, because of text-message cheating, and the like. But phones like this should not be a problem.
  • FINALLY! (Score:3, Funny)

    by sydbarrett74 ( 74307 ) <> on Tuesday October 31, 2006 @02:59AM (#16654221)
    Wow, a phone that is simply a *phone* and not an MP3 player/PDA/dildo/surrogate lover/toothbrush/kitchen sink/Swiss army knife. Whoda thunk it?

"This is lemma 1.1. We start a new chapter so the numbers all go back to one." -- Prof. Seager, C&O 351