Nokia in S60 licencing shocker?

[Ben]

It seems that Nokia's S60 interpretation of the Symbian OS is doing the rounds...

http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2007/04/25/samsung_unveils_i400/
http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2007/04/25/lg_brings_google_phone_to_europe/

This is pretty exciting stuff IMHO. With Windows Mobile 6 only getting traction on the back of HTC, the pushing of S60 by Nokia onto other companies hardware could allow our favourite Smartphone OS to fight back. Also, other manufacturers might not be so scared to supply S60 with decent hardware - freeing it from the slow processors and tiny amounts of RAM that Nokia have been punishing us with until very recently (E65, N95).

[Schockwave]

This certainly is interesting, and as you say with other brands using the Nokia S60, this certainly should encourage other manufacturers to provide decent hardware to work with S60, as you say.:) ;)

[The Mullet of G]

I'm not sure that S60 needs to fight back its already crushing its competition by quite a margin. :D

In some ways its a good thing that the OS is branching out, but it remains to be seen if other manufacturers can offer anything of substance. Also compatibility with Nokia's existing S60 software is a must, as theres to many Symbian flavours floating about already which hinders software development. :)

[Hands0n]

I think that Apple's OS X represents possibly the strongest competitor for Symbian, even in its first outing in a mobile device. To see it in action is to behold what we all hoped Symbian would turn out to be. It is quick and very slick (forget the UI, just see it work).

But the danger to Nokia is very muted if Apple try and keep this all to themselves. Nokia did not get to pole position by accident. They have already turned their sights on to the UI developed by Apple and responded. But for sure, Symbian is hamstrung by very many of its own inefficiencies. It does need to get "slick and quick" and in that it has been lounging around for too long, almost complacently.

I'd like to see a right royal battle unfold - it will be good for all of us in the long run. :)

[The Mullet of G]

Indeed Apples OS X does indeed look pretty on a phone, but once you actually have to do anything on the phone the problems become obvious quite quickly, the hardware limitations further exacerbate this leading to what can only be a largely frustrating experience. I've seen a fair few head to head reviews of both iPhone and N95 and N95 has won hands down every time, the recent episode of The Gadget Show was a fair example, as once you get beyond the shiny Apple stuff it all starts to fall flat. :)

Nokia have announced that 2008 will see the arrival of S60 touch which going on the videos I've seen so far should add an element of slick to the S60 interface. See here for more info -->
http://www.allaboutsymbian.com/news/item/6089_S60_Touch_Interface_Launched.php :D

[Hands0n]

Hang on, hang on! OS X "fall flat"? I don't think so :eek:

One must be fair to Apple, this is their first outing in mobile phone and more importantly mobile OSX. The HCI (UI) aside, the underpinning OS is a superb bit of software engineering.

Do you have links to the articles you refer to (always pop them in please, makes it easier for us lazy gits to locate them). I would be interested to see these HtH comparisons.

I do think that, given that the mobile OS X has only had a few months out in the field that comparison with a very mature OS like Symbian is quite flattering to Apple. But one should not underestimate the capability of the OS, it has good pedigree.

[The Mullet of G]

Yup OS X falls flatter than a sheet of A4 :D

Shiny stuff is all well and good but only if its backed up with substance and decent hardware, the iPhone falls way short on both accounts, features wise its arrived at the party half a decade late, a 2MP camera with no zoom and no video just isn't acceptable for what is meant to be a multimedia device, lack of 3G is also a negative in that respect. It does have a proximity sensor though but then so did my Nokia 7650 back in 2002. :D

Unfortunately I'm also from the lazy side of the fence, but a quick search with google should yield the results you require. ;) In the meantime check out episode 1 of the new series of The Gadget show they have an N95 iPhone head to head, it highlights a lot of what is already being said elsewhere, in summary jubilant iPhone user quickly becomes guy sitting dejected in the corner ruing his iPhones lack of features and half decade old hardware, and finishes up with him punching the phone in rage as the short comings of the OS and hardware become all to much to bear. :)

[Hands0n]

Hang on just a cotton pickin minnit :D One should not compare the iPhone against the current breed of handset and bemoan the differences. The iPhone as we have seen it is a 1st Gen. device and is, yes, way behind the competition in the hardware stakes. That would be like comparing a Windows 3.11 i486/66 PC against one of todays high-end Core2Duo-based Vista Ultimate PCs. No comparison at all....

If one focusses on the OS, which as far as I have read, has not been done by any reviewer and you will see that OS X is head and shoulders ahead of Symbian. And it really should not be, Symbian has had the field to itself for ages if one discounts Windows Mobile. The pedegree of OS X is assured - and [again 1st Gen.] impementation in a mobile device is a good first go. Anyone recall the first iteration of Symbian? It was not at all good. Yet here is Apple's flagship OS squeezed into a handheld device functioning like any well-behaved OS should.

The trouble is, Apple have such a reputation that the reviewers of this new hardware and software (one must separate the two for review purposes) are being far too demanding. What other 1st Gen. product have they experience of that did better? They could not name one, I'd vouch. But here they all are slamming the iPhone and its OS X in one sentence as if it were a decades-old device, it isn't.

To be a reviewer one has to take a fair and dispassionate but utterly objective look at the device. My opinion of a number of reviews is that the reviewer often has an agenda of their own, if nothing else taboid sensationalism. Sure, it may well sell copy, but it is [to be entirely polite] disengenious of them. Those reviews that have been fair, impartial and wholly objective have been a much more interesting and factual read than the others.

I do not have an iPhone, nor do I want one - simply because it is on O2's network and objectively that network is of poor quality here where I live, work and play. Had it been Vodafone, T-Mobile or even 3 I would have given serious consideration.

I do, however, have an iPod Touch and the experience of the OS X on there is delightful. It is, as I said earlier, quick and slick. The HCI is also highly functional in this implementation of it. Whether I would like it in a mobile phone is another matter. I did not particularly enjoy the similar HCI of the Prada, so don't suppose that I would in any other brand of mobile phone. But, and this is the important bit for me, if the iPhone and iPod Touch paradigm is carried over into a full-blooded PDA then I'd be down the Apple store in a snap.

OS X in that small package is superb, the apps (Safari, Calendar and Contacts) in the iPod Touch are faithful renditions of those in the conventional OS X world. Even the YouTube and iTunes apps are excellent in use and function. There is little to find fault with.

No, I am not convinced that the nay-sayers have got it right, and cannot help but feel that they are out on their own religious crusade against. Put side by side, Symbian S60 and OS X are at the very least head and shoulders equal. But for my money, I think that OS X has the better longer-term prospects. Unless Nokia pull a rabbit out of the hat and repair all of Symbian's shortcomings - and the platforms that it runs on (we've been there in another thread MoG so I won't open it up here :) ).

If Apple with its OS X and Touchscreen technology has done nothing other than wake up the incumbents out of their complacency, then it can only be a good thing for all of us :D

[The Mullet of G]

It would indeed be like comparing 486 based PC with a modern high end PC, and that there is why you wouldn't get away with releasing a a 486 PC these days. ;)

The problem here is Symbian is a mobile based platform that is designed to run on mobile hardware, OS X is a desktop OS that has been shoe horned onto mobile hardware, on paper the desktop OS should win but in reality it doesn't, rather than offer the flexibility you'd expect from a desktop OS you instead get a walled OS much like Nokia's S40 but in some respects worse, where are the games and 3rd party software? Where is the ability to actually edit documents etc? Where is the support for non iTunes audio and video formats? For a phone thats based on touch it seems the iPhone is more look and don't touch when it comes to actually editing or expanding the phones capabilities, Apples tight grip is legendary and its strangling iPhone. I do recall the first iteration of Symbian and I disagree in its time it was streets ahead of pretty much anything else on a mobile, I also remember when Symbian was Epoc and it ran on Psions palm tops, equally it was quite handy in its day. :)


People tend to underestimate Symbian, its pace of evolution is driven by competition and market demand and so far its holding its own, the arrival of iPhone can only be a good thing as it drives Nokia to evolve S60 faster, don't expect Symbian to stand still and watch as iPhone trundles by, so far S60 has a huge catalogue of 3rd party software and games, a pretty impressive feature set and an absolutely massive amount of units in the market place, modern S60 devices like E Series and recent N Series handsets are true Smartphones with infinite software expandability, that not only let you view content but also edit and create, to that end the iPhone is still just a shiny toy. :)

Touch screens are all fine and well when they have limited functionality like controlling an mp3 player, but they aren't new technology and as such there is a reason they aren't the mainstream in mobile devices, once you get passed the cool it does stuff when I touch the screen phase, you realise that having a device that only accepts touch screen entry just isn't practical in the real world, it works well for some things but for basic phone tasks like single handed texting etc it just doesn't.

[Hands0n]

Right then :) *rolls up sleeves, cracks knuckles* :D Excellent discussion MoG, thanks for the points made. I'm with you some of the way :)

I still have to take issue that the reviewers have not taken into account that this is OS X's first outing on a mobile device (iPhone and iPod Touch). I'd challenge any other OS to have done so well on its first outing. Anyone remember Windows CE and later Windows Mobile? I do, and it was not good, still isn't in many ways. Nor, I contend, was Symbian.

In its days on the Psion Symbian resided on the best PDA around - made it what it was even. Nothing much came close. But that was then. Look around at the situation today and there are but three matured mobile platforms - Symbian, Windows Mobile and PalmOS, the later suffering quite badly as Palm loses its way under the stewardship of USR.

Where Symbian and Windows Mobile score against OS X right now is the ability for 3rd party developers to write apps for the platform. Apple have already announced that they are going to cater for the developer community during the early part of 2008. Remember, this is OS X's first outing on the mobile platforms and it is easy to criticise Apple for not doing so from the off, it had - like any company - commercial issues to address. Namely to get a working device out into the market. The bells and whistles can follow in the wake of the launch and availability phases. This is all perfectly normal stuff - and if memory serves me well the signed applications APIs for WM and Symbian also followed initial OS availability.

In that respect - one cannot describe OS X as a "walled OS" - it is not like that in the mainstream and it will not be like that in its mobile incarnation, although for now it certainly is. The intent to allow for signed app development has been made public, and Apple will have to come up with the goods. Apple knows that it needs the developer community - a strong supporting community ported from the incumbent OS X developers. And the strength of OS X will become apparent as the developers start to port to the mobile platform.

There has been some moaning about creating a signed apps paradigm - but this is the case with Windows and Symbian anyway.

Where are all of these 3rd party apps for OS X now? There are none, of course. As there weren't any for WM or Symbian at this same stage in their development and availability. In short, it is very early days - and that has not been acknowledged by the reviewers.

Turning to purpose-designed OS. Symbian, like Windows Mobile before and OS X now, was not purpose designed for phones. It started life doing mobile computing and was adapted to mobile phones - even as Linux is now being done. Why shouldn't large-scale OS such as Windows Mobile,OS X and Linux scale down to the mobile environment? Why not indeed. As mobile devices become ever more complex and capable one could argue why should Symbian be expected or able to scale up with the hardware? The argument is double-edged to be sure.

The truth is that either way, the OS should be able to scale to the hardware. But I tend to feel that the larger OS is a better candidate to scale down to mobile than the other way round. It is easier, I contend, to remove or limit features than have to develop them cold out of the ground. Windows Mobile, OS X and Linux fit the former profile, Symbian fits the latter - there is not a Symbian OS available for the desktop computer. Symbian does not scale in that direction, or it would have done by now.

The thing to understand with Symbian is that it does what it does - and to get it to do a lot more is going to require some open heart surgery to the OS. The whole reason that Windows and latterly OS X and Linux are of appeal to the mobile manufacturers is that they already know that these OS will scale down to ever more sophisticated mobile platforms. Otherwise the interest would be towards Symbian.

Nokia, arguable the largeset manufacturer of mobile phones (but not mobile devices) in the world is tied to Symbian - they own it - they have to make it work. That, however, does not mean that it is the right thing to be doing. We're back with the Finance Director again - they are not going to let Nokia go anywhere else real soon now. The developers will be told to make Symbian work, full stop. No ifs, buts or discussion. And so they will, as best they can. Of course this is repeated in the Apple camp - but not for the likes of HTC and other independents all of whom (pretty much) licence Windows Mobile. Now if Apple were smart they'd licence OS X mobile - but that has not generally been their policy in the past. But market forces may attract them otherwise.

Lets touch (sic) on touch screens to close this comment. These have been around for simply ages. Just up to now we have had to use a stylus to control them. What Apple have done is to eschew the stylus in favour of our built-in pointer, the finger. And it works very well indeed, much better than may be suggested otherwise. There are plenty of touchscreen phones and PDAs out in the field and one does not see dejected users sitting in corners. That these adapt the phone/text paradigm into the touch screen is true - and the users who will use these multifunction mobile devices will not be at all upset at the prospect of having to use two hands. They would with any PDA-style phone, and that is what the iPhone is, nothin more, nothing less. The iPhone, like any of the PDA-Phones, is most definitely not a regular-style phone and anyone buying one thinking otherwise is going to be sorely dissapointed.

So any objective like-for-like comparison of the iPhone has to be against the large army of same-format devices which it isn't in Symbian's case because there isn't one, yet.

That is why I say that there has to be separation of the OS from the Hardware. Right now we can compare OS between OS X and Symbian. We cannot, however, compare the PDA-phone paradigm with a Symbian-based device against the Apple iPhone.

Time for tea :D

[The Mullet of G]

I'm feeling lazy and Pro Evo 2008 is calling so I'll just pick some points in your post.

I still feel that you wrongly assume that Symbian is forever doomed to be exactly the same as it is now, while you readily point out that OS X will evolve on mobile platforms, you consider Symbian as being unable to evolve but the S60 touch stuff due next year doesn't support that view, sure it hasn't changed massively since the 7650 days but its been completely unopposed so it hasn't had to, now that theres something else on the market Nokia will be sure to take note and respond accordingly as they generally do.


As far as I know Nokia only own about 48% of Symbian the rest is owned by other handset manufacturers including Ericsson, Samsung and Panasonic. There is no need to make Symbian work it already works, millions of devices sold speak volumes here.


I wont budge on the touch screen only input issue, I haven't seen anything in the iPhone that warrants a change of heart here. I think you should probably watch that episode of the Gadget Show that I referred to as PDA's and stylus problems weren't why the guy was sitting dejected in the corner, it was the cameras poor quality and lack of video capture, he was however punching the iPhone largely thanks to touchscreen issues namely the onscreen keyboard covering text input areas etc.


While there is no doubt Apples iPhone looks nice and shiny I doubt Nokia will be overly concerned, taking into account since its launch Apple have shifted around 100 million iPods, Nokia shifted 111 million mobile devices in the 3rd quarter of this year alone, 16 million of which were Smartphones. http://www.allaboutsymbian.com/news/..._share_up_.php

2008 will be an interesting year for both Apple and Nokia, no doubt both will refine there respective OS's but I think come the end of the year Nokia will probably be smiling more as will its S60 users. :)

[miffed]

I go along with the theory that a fully nurtured and evolved iPhone will kick the backside of S60
I have owned EPOC devices , S60 , S80 and now s60v3 devices - along with PPC 2002-3 , WM5 & WM6 devices , and TBH I have never been able to understand where the idea that S60 is "better" than Windows mobile comes from - In terms of features / functionality / accessabiliy and even "polish" I still feel WM devices are just that little bit more useful
So why does Symbian appear more popular ? - for me , it is JUST THAT , it appears more popular because it is an illusion !

Symbian = the most popular smartphone OS

Yes , maybe there are more Symbian smartphones than their Window mobile counterparts - but IMO this is not down to functionality

Of all the people I know that own S60 smartphones outside of the forums , I don't think any of them specifically CHOSE to buy a smartphone - the simply wanted a phone - and (like sheep ) ,they bought Nokia's as they felt they were a safe bet - ask any of them what Symbian S60 is , or about the spec of their phone , and they'll say "I dunno - it's a phone innit ? "
Whereas your WM crowd are a little different - the people with these devices knew exactly what they were looking for and went and bought it - they'll refer to their device as a PDA - and they'll be able to tell you all about the specs.
OK , so you WILL get some that bought their Symbian devices in this manner too , like myself with my N80/N95/E61/E90 ... but I am pretty sure that the bulk of Symbians "numbers" advantage is down to people who don't even know they own a smartphone !

So where does Apple fit into all this ? ....Well .... They could possibly provide the PERFECT middle ground ! all the functionality and OS to attract the PDA people (those who WANT a smartphone) plus the polish and WOW factor to attract the normal customers that simply want a flash phone

here is a prediction for you (based on my opinions above )

S60 will fail miserably outside of Nokia devices - I honestly think that the majority of people buy s60 handsets, simply because that is the OS that Nokia's happen to run.

[Hands0n]

PDA's and stylus problems weren't why the guy was sitting dejected in the corner, it was the cameras poor quality and lack of video capture, he was however punching the iPhone largely thanks to touchscreen issues namely the onscreen keyboard covering text input areas etc.

But see, my point is that Camera quality and lack of video capture is nothing to do with the underlying OS X. Those are more to do with the hardware and lets be fair, early Nokia camera phones were abysmal. I can see that Apple in this respect went for something pretty basic as they are entering completely unknown territory. In fact, much of the criticism levelled at Apple for the iPhone could easily have been lifted from the early-days critique of the UK's 3 mobile network operator. Its almost word for word critique about not being up there with the incumbents.

If the iPhone is not a success then Apple will drop it within 18 months, it will simply disappear. If it is a success, albeit not comparable in numbers to Nokia (and why should it be, it is but one handset against an entire range of S60 devices) then Apple will develop the hell out of it.

As to the "chap in the corner" - the HCI (UI) will not be to everyone's taste. I often use touchscreen text entry in the Safari Browser for the likes of this forum and while the keyboard does take up screen realestate, as would any other touchscreen PDA, it does not do so such that using it is difficult or impractical. It is no different than Windows Mobile occupying the bottom 1/3rd of the screen with its touch keyboard.

Finally - let me pin my colours to the post - I do not think Symbian is doomed, merely that it has a ceiling that it seems to be rapidly approaching. The other OS's do not have that ceiling. Maybe, just maybe, Nokia and the Symbian consortium can raise the ceiling significantly. But if past experience is anything to go by, then I think that Symbian has shown itself to be lacking in the manner in which it has been implemented to date. All of that is entirely the fault of the manufacturers who have drip-fed minor point-releases of the OS and hardware, almost begrudgingly it seems at times.

Symbian has singly failed to "rock" me. I find it slow, restrictive, almost crippled in some respects. The notion of using it a a multi-tasking system fills me with dread. I feel very unsafe using it for anymore than a single app at a time. Memory management is poor and leaks occur requiring regular re-boots to resolve. All of this from a mature OS is very worrying indeed.

But I don't see Symbian going away any time soon - and it may be that it will be developed with more seriousness than to date. The risk for Nokia is that they have already established their place in the psyche of the "professional" buyer - to pick up on Miffed's thoughts. I do not believe that people generally use Symbian in the same professional manner that they use Windows Mobile - the OS of choice for such business use.

Now I am going to try and repair Parallels and XP after upgrading to Leopard on the Macbook Pro and install my copies of iWork08 and iLife08. No time for games young man :D

[The Mullet of G]

Lets face it regardless of what either of us say here Nokia will probably ship more than 400 million mobile devices next year, at least 50 or 60 million of those devices will be smartphones, it doesn't matter if people bought them thinking they were light sabers the bottom line is numbers. I don't doubt that Nokia have shifted a lot of smartphones to not so smart people who only use them for talk and text, but they have also shifted a serious amount of E Series handsets which I don't think were bought by people following the in crowd. There is definitely more Symbian smartphones than there Windows counterparts, Symbian holds a 73% share of the smartphone market, this is not because Windows Mobile is a great and stable OS. ;)

[The Mullet of G]

But see, my point is that Camera quality and lack of video capture is nothing to do with the underlying OS X. Those are more to do with the hardware and lets be fair, early Nokia camera phones were abysmal. I can see that Apple in this respect went for something pretty basic as they are entering completely unknown territory. In fact, much of the criticism levelled at Apple for the iPhone could easily have been lifted from the early-days critique of the UK's 3 mobile network operator. Its almost word for word critique about not being up there with the incumbents.

If the iPhone is not a success then Apple will drop it within 18 months, it will simply disappear. If it is a success, albeit not comparable in numbers to Nokia (and why should it be, it is but one handset against an entire range of S60 devices) then Apple will develop the hell out of it.

As to the "chap in the corner" - the HCI (UI) will not be to everyone's taste. I often use touchscreen text entry in the Safari Browser for the likes of this forum and while the keyboard does take up screen realestate, as would any other touchscreen PDA, it does not do so such that using it is difficult or impractical. It is no different than Windows Mobile occupying the bottom 1/3rd of the screen with its touch keyboard.

Finally - let me pin my colours to the post - I do not think Symbian is doomed, merely that it has a ceiling that it seems to be rapidly approaching. The other OS's do not have that ceiling. Maybe, just maybe, Nokia and the Symbian consortium can raise the ceiling significantly. But if past experience is anything to go by, then I think that Symbian has shown itself to be lacking in the manner in which it has been implemented to date. All of that is entirely the fault of the manufacturers who have drip-fed minor point-releases of the OS and hardware, almost begrudgingly it seems at times.

Symbian has singly failed to "rock" me. I find it slow, restrictive, almost crippled in some respects. The notion of using it a a multi-tasking system fills me with dread. I feel very unsafe using it for anymore than a single app at a time. Memory management is poor and leaks occur requiring regular re-boots to resolve. All of this from a mature OS is very worrying indeed.

But I don't see Symbian going away any time soon - and it may be that it will be developed with more seriousness than to date. The risk for Nokia is that they have already established their place in the psyche of the "professional" buyer - to pick up on Miffed's thoughts. I do not believe that people generally use Symbian in the same professional manner that they use Windows Mobile - the OS of choice for such business use.

Now I am going to try and repair Parallels and XP after upgrading to Leopard on the Macbook Pro and install my copies of iWork08 and iLife08. No time for games young man :D



Symbian is like any other OS or piece of software, it can be rewritten or updated in any way the programmers desire, I can see where your coming from with most of your post but Symbian having a ceiling is somewhat odd considering the nature of software, Symbian has a ceiling in much the same way Windows 95 did, if there comes a time when the OS just doesn't cut it then they will update it accordingly like Microsoft have done with Windows 98, XP and Vista, with Nokias considerable resources I don't think they'll have to much trouble keeping upto speed with there OS. :)



I frequently browse the web via Opera while listening to music via the inbuilt player, I've even been known to check texts at the same time without any problems. ;)

As a final note if you find Symbian so disappointing then why did you get an N95? And why would you have it as your avatar? I dislike Windows Mobile I think its hugely disappointing, and therein lies the reason I neither own one or have a picture of one as my avatar. ;)

[Hands0n]

As a final note if you find Symbian so disappointing then why did you get an N95? And why would you have it as your avatar? I dislike Windows Mobile I think its hugely disappointing, and therein lies the reason I neither own one or have a picture of one as my avatar. ;)

In each [tiny] iteration of Symbian we have been promised ever more. I was massively disappointed with the N80 - the hardware simply could not cope with the OS. We were then promised much better in the N95, and indeed it is better due to the faster processor. But hamstrung by the woefully inadequate system RAM (increased for obvious reasons on the N95 8GB).

The N95 itself does what it does adequately, and that is about the most positive spin that could be put on that statement. It does not do it a little well, well, or even exceedingly well. Just adequately, in that it will load and run any number of S60 apps. It will even manage a few concurrently. It has dire problems with its own browser, particularly as web pages become nested and soon runs into the memory limitation. Memory leaks occur often, and it [obviously] does not recover from them without having to be restarted.

In the N95 Symbian offers much potential - delivers some of it - but remains untrustworthy. Certainly I trust my iPAQ h4155 a hell of a lot more than I would trust my N95 for critical work. The N95 under Symbian tries to be a general purpose computer, even Nokia suggest that it could be. But truth be told, WM2003 and up is far more reliable and trustworthy.

So to answer your good closing question let me just say "Hope springs eternal..." :) I am a born optimist, an early adopter and an enthusiast [as are most of us on here] but I am also a fierce realist. Symbian still has some way to go, as does the hardware that Nokia deign to run it on.

Now if I were to be given the design spec for a Symbian handset - system RAM would be the last thing to worry about. Memory leaks would be punishable by the Dev/s having to spend a month floor sweeping. Processor selection would be ahead [not in the wake] of the OS itself. None of this need cost more to the end user - but it would orient a whole community of WM2xxx users towards the platform. And might just keep OS X and Linux upstarts at bay.

But Nokia don't think that way, they're a tad too complacent.

[The Mullet of G]

The N80 was a massive disappointment, the screen resolution amongst other things hindered its performance greatly.

Can you name a phone thats better than the N95 or its 8GB brother? We'll discount the iPhone as hardware wise it fails to pack a sufficient punch and lacks too many vital features. I've never understood why people use the built in browser its based on Safari and as such it sucks the big one, Opera is a far better option as it has been for some years now. My N95 is used heavily for playing games, videos, music, running apps, browsing the web and even the odd photo or video at gigs and I rarely see memory full issues, maybe you have some dodgy apps installed?

The iPAQ is a pocket PC, despite what Nokia says in its adverts the N95 is a phone with PDA like functionality, sure its quite advanced but its not a replacement for pocket pc's etc, in the same way its not trying to replace your digital camera or PC, it simply brings a range of products together in one package so that you don't always have to lug a ton of technology around with you. :)

Indeed if I were building a smartphone it would also boast ridiculous specs, but I think its safe to say our expectations of the ultimate smartphone are probably a bit on the overkill side of things, but from Nokias point of view they are shifting a ridiculous amount of smartphones, and as they say if it ain't broke don't fix it. Windows Mobile has a measly market share of just over 6% which is nigh on insignificant even Linux enjoys a share of more than 13% in the face of such woeful competition Nokia can afford to be complacent. :D

[Hands0n]

AS you rightly say, the N95 and its successor is something of a marvel of integration - a jack of all trades that does a lot of things, none of them exceedingly well but all the same an awful lot of them.

My comments relating to the inadequacies of the N95 relate to the standard out-of-the-box device. Even you have found its shortcomings and use Opera instead of the supplied browser, the latter of which is infamous for causing out of memory issues. These are not well recovered by the Symbian OS which then has to be re-started to avoid continued problems with other apps.

I think that there are any number of phones that are "better" than the N95. There are possibly few-to-none that are examples of higher integration though. But those two meanings are quite different. Better to me means more reliable, higher performing, slicker and quicker - I'll have to reserve judgement on the iPhone itself but if the iPod Touch is anything to go by then it might just fit the bill in that respect.

Re the iPAQ vs N95 - it is Nokia who are trying to kid themselves and everyone else that the N95 is a pocketable computer. They are setting the expectation, and falling short on it. iPAQ phones, on the other hand, can be high performing in the slick and quick department, making the N95 look quite feeble. Certainly there are no inherent memory issues with those PDA/Phones like exist in the N95 - and to a much lesser extent the N95 8GB.

I fully acknowledge the integration and convergence evident in the N95. It is a bold project let down by [really only] two shortfalls which I have already made much mention of. But to be sure - Nokia no longer have this field entirely to themselves. Marketshare is a funny thing - very fickle. Any Nokia's lead, whilst formidable, is not assured in the face of the competition.

I believe that 2008 may be a telling time for the high-end Nokia handsets. It is a lucrative part of the business that new entrants such as Apple will want to address first. Also one that the incumbents will want a larger slice of.

Me? I'm just pleased to have so many possible toys available for my playpen :D

[The Mullet of G]

I was using Opera way before the inbuilt browser was included on S60 handsets, when it did finally arrive I preferred Opera as it was a more mature browser so I stuck with it. I'm not really sure what your doing with your N95, but I seem to be able to multitask with mine and run it for weeks on end without any memory problems, while you can't even browse the web on yours without a restart, you Symbian rookies should stick to S40. :p

Can you give any examples of these phones that are better than N95? As just saying there are a number of them is a touch vague. Every ones definition of a better phone is different as we all require different things from that phone, personally for my needs I've yet to see anything that comes close to touching the N95 besides its 8GB variant.

Dude the whole "Its what computers have become" and the rest of it are just snappy advertising slogans, you have to learn to be realistic in your expectations. As to iPAQ phones I haven't had any dealings with them so took the time to read a few reviews and they weren't too favourable, I particularly liked this one "Packing Wi-Fi, satnav and a camera into a quad band, Windows Mobile 5.0 smart phone/PDA, this is the communications equivalent of a magician’s bottomless hat – but sadly, in use it’s more like enduring one of your uncle Roger’s tedious card tricks." :D here's the link to the page I got it from http://www.t3.co.uk/reviews/communication/other/hp_ipaq_hw6915_smart_phone
Read a few others but they said much the same things. Seems like all is not quite as rosy with iPAQ phones after all, not surprising though as CPU and RAM wise they are just a tad better than N95. :)

Market share is a funny thing, but looking forward to 2008 and I just can't see Nokia's market share taking any great hits, its all a bit like the whole Windows thing, every year we hear that Microsoft's days are numbered and this is going to be Linux's year but yet Windows is still here. :)

2008 will definitely be interesting in terms of what the handset manufacturers have to offer, as always I'm sure there will be plenty of stuff to debate, and hopefully we all end up with something we like, in the meantime sell your N95 and stop whining lol. :p

[Hands0n]

Okay - lets look at some "better" bits.

The Sony Ericsson W900i (quite a vintage now) is quicker and slicker than the N95, it does most of what the N95 will do - has a far superior camera and MP3 player (Cybershot and Walkman respectively). It has pretty much the same apps, and will run Opera Mini if one does'nt like the in-built browser. Point for point - the W900i stacks up against the N95 in almost every facet.

The funny thing about expectations is that it is incumbent upon the manufacturer to set these correctly. I don't find it at all acceptable to be told one thing and then be told to set my expectations to something completely different. I not only want it to do what it says on the tin, but to also do it effectively. To do otherwise is to walk down the road of "Unlimited Access" that is causing so much bitterness right now in the mobile data world where packages are anything but "Unlimitd" by any stretch of the English language. It is, I feel, important to get these things right. If you are going to sell it to me as a general purpose computer then it better had work like one :) If we all took that approach the Manufacturers and Marketers would not be quite as bold as they are these days.

It is, I find, ironic and amusing that the very reference you put for credible reviews (i.e. T3) is the same magazine/website that scores the Apple iPhone number one in their Top Ten :D :p :D Lets see what they said about it just for a laugh



The hotly-anticipated touchscreen is as wondrous as hoped,
You manipulate it with natural movements
....but software that’s like predictive text 2.0 means that accurate typing isn’t always required to get perfect spelling.
The quality of the 3.5-inch screen is terrific; you can easily enjoy a two-hour movie.
......and text detail is also some of the best we’ve seen on a phone.
The iPhone works seamlessly with Mac and Windows
It’s also compatible with Address Book, iCal, and Microsoft Entourage on the Mac, on Windows, it works with Microsoft Outlook.
The browser on the iPhone is excellent when connected via Wi-Fi, displaying web pages in their full glory, not WAP versions.
Supported email services include Yahoo!, Gmail, .Mac, and AOL. You can also enter settings for non-webmail services.
The iPhone is elegant and exciting and the first device in a long time that we’ve had a hard time putting down.



Errrr, what does one make of that then? They love the iPhone and hate the iPAQ - they also rave about the N95 and particularly love its built in apps and web browser so much that they mention it twice!



Once in a while, a real trophy gadget comes along.
....it’s also a widescreen media player, five-meg camera and superb web-browser.
Satellite acquisition is sound, and route calculation fast.
The only drawback is a lack of integration with the N95’s other features: you can’t navigate to an address from Contacts or add GPS data to photos.
The N95 is also home to a five-megapixel autofocus camera, although images aren’t as detailed as they might be, due to a degree of compression not normally seen outside of a car-crusher.
VGA videos are a super-sharp riot of colour, though.
The superb web browser, .....
......efficient messaging and office software found on previous N handsets are wisely left unchanged.
...... you have to have one.



Perhaps they have a lower set of expectations than someone who tends to expect a description to be met, such as me. Its not about being unrealistic, but very much more about keeping the Manufacturers, Dealers, Marketeers honest. Otherwise we'll be back to a Dickensian era where the Consumer has no protection whatsoever.

I actually have a pair of N95s on two differrent networks and they do what I need of them [generally] well enough. But while they do what it says on the tin, they do it only adequately. Give me your N95 for less than 5 minutes and I'll have it gasping for memory having used its browser. Used like that several times in one day and the memory leak that Symbian cannot contain will leave you with no alternative but to re-start the handset. That, in my book, is not the quality experience I expect of a £400+ handset. Nosireebob :)

To be sure, if the N95 is "...what computers have become" then it is time for me to give up and take up knitting. I have a very clear, honest, and utterly reasonable expectation of what a computer is. If you're selling me one then it had better meet that expectation or expect critique.

But to be crushingly fair to Nokia the N95 and its successor the N95 8GB are incredible handsets, for all of their flaws - of which there are several that we've discussed and perhaps some we haven't :)

[miffed]

I think the thing that struck me when I saw the original iPhone presentation (all that time ago! ) was "If Apple can do this , then what the hell have the rest of you been playing at for all this time ? " - The simple & Slick UI ,(forget functionality for a second ) beautifully presented - How come no one else has even tried to go there ?
The answer is simple - they didn't even think about it ! they didn't even CONTEMPLATE that anyone would want it ! and this is what sets Apple apart from the others IMO
Sure , your Nokia's and LG's of the world will follow almost instantaniously (and have you believe it was what they had planned all along ) But the innovation is the important factor here
Not simply the innovation of a slick touchscreen UI - I think it goes way deeper
Apple are no strangers to the PDA market - so why are they not presenting the iphone as a PDA ? after all it runs OS X ?
Why, it's almost as if Apple aren't interested in this sector of the market - it's as if they want to sell this OSX device to virtually everyone - even PLAYING DOWN the fact that hosts a full OS - and sell it to the most simply minded of potential customers
Just to uphold that point - here is an article by Jeremy Clarkson from yesterdays "The Sun"

THANK POD FOR A PHONE I CAN USE

I'm a sucker for a gadget. Time and time again I will come back from the shops with a brushed aluminium box all covered in buttons and flashing lights

'What does that do?" my wife always asks . And I always answer "I don't have a clue , but isn't it brilliant?"
Because of this ridiculous trait I am always buying new mobile phones and as a result I can let you into a little secret . NONE OF THEM WORK .

Some can't find a signal even if you're standing on top of a mast ,Some flatten their batteries before you've even had chance to dial half a number, and some have buttons so small you need fingers like cocktail sticks
And that's before you get to the sheer complexity of the damn things. No really. to send a text on my Motorola V8 you need a degree in quantum physics, a head torch , a magnifying glass,three hands and a fortnight
And the chances are the gibberish you write because your fingers aren't slim enough ends up being sent to the wrong person because you hit a four instead of a five
What I normally do is by a phone, lose my temper with it -and give it to my daughter ,Who , within minutes is using it to communicate with the space station
Now though , it's all over, I've got one of the new iPhones and it's staggeringly good , the biggest technological leap since Sky+

Like every other phone it'll do a million things ,it's a camera,an internet, a photo album,a weather forecaster and an alarm clock, but unlike any other phone ,it's also an iPod
Best of all though , its easier to understand than a hungry caterpillar storyand you can operate it even if you are more than 12 years old

I know this is Just Jeremy Clarkson :) - but I would guess he represent s quite a large group of people with his thoughts here -Look at what Apple have accomplished
They have put a Mobile phone , with a proper OS into the hands of someone who is sceptical of ANY mobile phone !!
This is taking what Symbian do - (i.e. sell smartphones to people under the guise of "Normal" phones ) and taken it one step further

[The Mullet of G]

Okay - lets look at some "better" bits.

The Sony Ericsson W900i (quite a vintage now) is quicker and slicker than the N95, it does most of what the N95 will do - has a far superior camera and MP3 player (Cybershot and Walkman respectively). It has pretty much the same apps, and will run Opera Mini if one does'nt like the in-built browser. Point for point - the W900i stacks up against the N95 in almost every facet.

The funny thing about expectations is that it is incumbent upon the manufacturer to set these correctly. I don't find it at all acceptable to be told one thing and then be told to set my expectations to something completely different. I not only want it to do what it says on the tin, but to also do it effectively. To do otherwise is to walk down the road of "Unlimited Access" that is causing so much bitterness right now in the mobile data world where packages are anything but "Unlimitd" by any stretch of the English language. It is, I feel, important to get these things right. If you are going to sell it to me as a general purpose computer then it better had work like one :) If we all took that approach the Manufacturers and Marketers would not be quite as bold as they are these days.

It is, I find, ironic and amusing that the very reference you put for credible reviews (i.e. T3) is the same magazine/website that scores the Apple iPhone number one in their Top Ten :D :p :D Lets see what they said about it just for a laugh


Errrr, what does one make of that then? They love the iPhone and hate the iPAQ - they also rave about the N95 and particularly love its built in apps and web browser so much that they mention it twice!


Perhaps they have a lower set of expectations than someone who tends to expect a description to be met, such as me. Its not about being unrealistic, but very much more about keeping the Manufacturers, Dealers, Marketeers honest. Otherwise we'll be back to a Dickensian era where the Consumer has no protection whatsoever.

I actually have a pair of N95s on two differrent networks and they do what I need of them [generally] well enough. But while they do what it says on the tin, they do it only adequately. Give me your N95 for less than 5 minutes and I'll have it gasping for memory having used its browser. Used like that several times in one day and the memory leak that Symbian cannot contain will leave you with no alternative but to re-start the handset. That, in my book, is not the quality experience I expect of a £400+ handset. Nosireebob :)

To be sure, if the N95 is "...what computers have become" then it is time for me to give up and take up knitting. I have a very clear, honest, and utterly reasonable expectation of what a computer is. If you're selling me one then it had better meet that expectation or expect critique.

But to be crushingly fair to Nokia the N95 and its successor the N95 8GB are incredible handsets, for all of their flaws - of which there are several that we've discussed and perhaps some we haven't :)


I was expecting you to at least name one credible handset but W900i is a bit wide of the mark, my mate has one and I wouldn't say the camera was better far from it, and also Walkman hasn't been worthy of note since the 80's, Sony dusted of a load of old badges and stuck them on a phone thats as big as a house, its bigger than an N95 and only does a fraction of the stuff, does it play .avi files? does it play mp4's at 640x480 via TV out? Does it have wifi or HSDPA? What about GPS? Hows the support for document formats like PDF or standard text files? Its worth noting that Opera Mini is a bit on the average side also. :)


The T3 review wasn't selected for credibility as they haven't had any for years, it was the first result google chucked out and I simply liked the opening paragraph. :)


Now that I've alerted you to the whole Opera being better thing you've no excuse for using the built in browser. Besides I reckon it'd probably take you about 5 minutes to even find the built in browser on my phone. :p

[Hands0n]

Pah! I've known of Opera in all of its incarnations since it was given birth. :)

Seriously, the camera on the W900i is worlds better :) than any Nokia I have come across to date. It might only be a 2Mpixel camera but the optics more than make up for it. I'd rate the W900i camera over and above the N95 for image quality and sharpness. The Megapixel count often gets lost in the Jpeg compression. The only true way to tell is if you can get the images stored in RAW format - which with these two handsets you cannot.

The audio (Walkman) sound on the W900i is not as compressed as it is on the N95, the difference is noticeable. On the N95 the music player is adequate.

Physically the W900i is narrower than the N95 but taller and a bit deeper. They weigh in roughtly the same. For sure the W900i is dated but point for point it scores against the N95 where it matters, quality (Camera and Music player). It may not have such a wide spread of capability as the N95 but it gives no ground to the N95 for what it does. It is, in short, the premier multifunction phone of its day.

That the N95 has a wider spread of apps and functionality is not in question :cool: - what is, though, is how well it does each of these things in comparison. I have never, ever, had a memory issue with the W900i, nor a browser crash or other happenings of the N95. It has been utterly reliable.

When one "upgrades" to a device like the N95 it is reasonable to expect it to work at least as well as, say, the W900i. In fact I have had a succession of handsets since the W900i - the S40-based 6280, S60-based N80 and N93 to name but a few (we'll not talk about the LG Prada here :D). Apart from the 6280 all of the S60 handsets have been unreliable in the manner we have discussed here over this past two days. They all suffer from the same flaws underpinned by Symbian S60 and petite RAM allowances.

The very notion that core functionality (i.e. Browser) has to be supplanted by something like Opera exposes fundamental flaws in the implementation. Flaws that have persisted through the history of the OS and [at least] the N-Series. And that is the crux of the matter.

Regardless of how long it took me to locate your built-in browser, my contention stands. And that is the entire point. :rolleyes:

These are unquestionably good and very interesting handsets. But they are fundamentally flawed and Nokia either will not or cannot do something about it. One has to wonder why that is. :eek:

[The Mullet of G]

If you've known about Opera all this time then why are you still whining about the built in browser? :)


I think we should just agree to disagree here as we've dragged this thread way off topic, and essentially we are still just debating the same old thing over and over, as much as I enjoy a good debate there does come a point when neither side is really going to budge, I think that point came and went after our first posts lol. :)

Back to the topic at hand, it will be interesting to see what other manufacturers can offer in the way of Symbian handsets, Symbian is pretty well used in Japan and only one of the 44 or so handsets available is made by Nokia, so we might see the fruits of that market appear on these shores at some point. :)

[Hands0n]

I Agree!
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..... to disagree :D :D :D

But only in a few places. :)