As I sit at my desk looking at around a dozen smartphones of all shapes and sizes (hey, I'm a journalist, and privileged that way), running four different mobile OS platforms, I find my decision on which to use as my main phone based on a number of hardware factors (screen size, form factor, camera) that you'll probably empathise with, plus one that you might not expect. At the top of my list of characteristics for a perfect smartphone is a loud, high quality loudspeaker. Yes, really.
There's a very famous adage that addresses the question posed in the title ("Why not a standalone camera?") very adeptly and quickly: "Because it's the only camera that's with you". However, true though this is, the question and answer have provoked Tim Salmon and I to indulge in some friendly Christmas debate - comments welcome if you come down on one side of the argument or the other!
Despite the torrent of device releases across the world this year, I was struck by a comment on one of my Phones Shows, pointing out that in some ways smartphone hardware has gone backwards in the last few years. This is something of an exageration, but I got the point. Moreover, I thought it well worth documenting the different aspects of yesterday's (and today's) smartphone technology - are there indeed tricks from the past that 2012 designs can learn from?
More of an observation than a rant (though see below), but the rise and rise of the REAL camera phone puts quite a bit of pressure on us geeks, whatever mobile OS we currently favour. You see, the theory is that "the best camera is the one you have with you" but in practice all smartphones aren't created equal in the camera department and that has unforeseen social repercussions....
The last nine years has seen an increase, not only in the physical size of smartphone screens, but even more dramatically, in their resolution. We've gone from the original S60 smartphones (e.g. the 7650 and 6630) right up to the monster 'superphones' of 2011, with the highest resolution model offering a staggering twenty-five times as many pixels, all to (arguably) do a job that's not dissimilar. Which begs the question of how the various resolutions compare, of how many pixels you actually need, and whether Symbian as we currently know it is up to the job for competing in screen resolution with the smartphone class of 2012? Here are my (illustrated) thoughts.
There's one Nokia product decision that has really, really puzzled me in the last few years - and that's the retirement of the SU-8W after only a couple of years on sale. First made in 2005, I reviewed it here and, amazingly, it still works perfectly - six years later, as demonstrated below with my N8. What is the SU-8W, why did Nokia stop making it and where can you still get it, all questions I try to answer below. And - I know Nokia reads All About Symbian - isn't it about time to kick off another production run? Pretty please?
I've traced the N8's heritage in terms of camera-toting smartphone design before. What I wanted to look at here was the improvement in sensors through the main three models, the N82, N86 and N8. Allowing for raw resolution improvements, how much better (over the N82) are the N86's - and then the N8's - images - can the evolution be easily illustrated? Putting each to a number of tests, I conclude that the N8's sensor and electronics are indeed of higher quality, even after discounting the resolution improvements. Who knew?(!)
By popular request, here are my tips on shooting better videos on your smartphone. If you've been to an event, whipped out your phone and been disappointed later by blurry, jerky, muffled, badly lit footage, then these tips are for you! From light to movement to mundane practicalities, it's all covered below.
You know, I'd got heartily fed up of explaining to all and sundry why the 'FM transmitter' in my Nokia smartphone was so insanely great. Not because my enthusiasm for the feature was waning - far from it. But because just about everyone heard the 'FM' bit and switched their brain off - surely it had to be a radio receiver, as featured in just about every phone since 2004? "No, no, no!" I would exclaim - "it's the exact opposite!" If you, too, are still confused then you might like to read on - it seems that Nokia has finally put an end to the confusion by renaming the feature. Thankfully!
It's official. I'm a camera phone junkie. Well, actually, I'm a convergence junkie, but adding in camera and camcorder is such a huge slice of daily functionality that I just can't keep away. And, in this context, I find myself alternating between the two and a half year old Nokia N86 and the newer (around a year old) N8, the latter the undisputed camera phone king and the former still a contender with the very top units on other mobile OS. Unable to make my mind up, I thought a breakdown of the strengths and weaknesses of the touch-based device and the d-pad based phones might be useful. In what areas does the non-touch device still shine and can it match the class of 2011?
