On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 11:21:55AM +0000, d wrote:
On Tue, 21 Aug 2012 11:57:15 +0100
David Cantrell wrote:
If you'd actually used a journey planner, you would know that you are
talking about something completely different. A mere map can't include
all the buses, or know how frequent they are, and how frequent all the
trains are, or which lines are open, and so be able to find the best
route for you across all modes of transport and tell you how long it'll
take (kinda important for when you have to get from your hotel to the
station to get your train home), taking into account your preferences
for number of changes, how far to walk etc.
You're assuming any information you'll get on your phone will be up to date.

It has been every time I've used the application I recommended, and if
it turns out that, for example, the Northern line is closed, then I can
just tell the application to not use it.

Add to that travelling in a foreign country, where you might not be able
to read things like "this station is closed at weekends" or "北京地�",
and you will see that an application running on your phone in your
language is clearly better than a map.
Fine, but that means you're relying on a device that could be lost

That's your own stupid fault

stolen,

As is that, usually.

have no connection

Not likely in any place with a significant transport network.

or a flat battery.

I forget when was the last time I was foolish enough to let my phone's
battery run out when I needed it. Years ago, at any rate.

Then what? Pidgin english with the
nearest local who looks like he might know when the next bus shows?

Sure. That might even work when *you* are lost abroad and don't speak
the local language, because so many people speak English to some
degree. It won't work when a Chinese tourist who doesn't speak English
is lost in London, where no-one (yeah, yeah) speaks Chinese.

--
David Cantrell | Reality Engineer, Ministry of Information

Compromise: n: lowering my standards so you can meet them

On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 11:30:13 +0100
David Cantrell wrote:
Fine, but that means you're relying on a device that could be lost

That's your own stupid fault

stolen,

As is that, usually.

Thats as maybe, but given that the original suggestion was to replace maps
etc with apps on a smartphone then this has to be taken into account.

have no connection

Not likely in any place with a significant transport network.

It might not be down to lack of a network but lack of a roaming agreement
with your phone company. Also if they only offer 2G then good luck with
using anything web based and assuming free wifi will always be available as
an alternative is assuming rather a lot.

I forget when was the last time I was foolish enough to let my phone's
battery run out when I needed it. Years ago, at any rate.

If you use smartphones a lot the battery can go within a day which isn't much
use if you're spending the day away from the hotel. Unless you carry the
charger and adaptor everywhere you go and hope you can find a socket somewhere.

degree. It won't work when a Chinese tourist who doesn't speak English
is lost in London, where no-one (yeah, yeah) speaks Chinese.

If someone visits a country that doesn't speak a language they know and they
don't even bother to learn basic emergency phrases in the local lingo then
more fool them.

B2003

wrote:

If you use smartphones a lot the battery can go within a day which isn't much
use if you're spending the day away from the hotel.

I charge mine every night, but it rarely if ever needs more.

Neil
--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK. Put first name before the at to reply

On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 10:51:08AM +0000, d wrote:
On Tue, 21 Aug 2012 11:40:50 +0100
David Cantrell wrote:
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 08:36:50AM +0000, d wrote:
Basil Jet wrote:
As we approach the point where everyone has a smart-phone, we might
Who is "everyone"? I don't, most of my family don't, a lot of my friends
don't. Don't confuse teenagers and hipsters with "everyone".
The key word "approach" should have told you that we're not there yet.
And what makes you think we will get there?

Simple economics. We are already at the point where nigh-on everyone
(91% of adults; 99% of people aged 25 to 34) has a mobile phone. The
price of manufacturing smartphones is dropping quickly (retail price,
unsubsidised, has already dropped from hundreds of pounds to tens of
pounds), and even at their current prices they are eating into the
market for dumbphones. A great many people who have dumbphones would
prefer to have a smartphone but are prevented from having them by cost.
Once almost everyone can afford a smartphone, or they start being given
away "for free" with a phone contract, the cost of manufacturing
tiny numbers of dumbphones for the handful of weirdos who still want one
will increase because there will be no economies of scale.

Already a quarter of adults have a smartphone and half of all teenagers.

And this is obviously for values of "everyone" which deliberately
doesn't consider the vanishingly small population of digital refuseniks,
You seem to be implying that not buying a smartphone is some kind of social
or political statement rather than the simple fact that some of us simply
don't need or want one and therefor don't see any reason to buy one.

It won't be long before it's hard to buy a dumbphone. At which point,
yes, not having a smartphone will indeed be a statement.

This is obvious. If you try to buy a *really* dumb phone, of the sort
that was common a decade ago - a Nokia 6310i, for example - you just
can't. It doesn't matter that there's still a small market for them,
they're just not made any more.

I don't
have a home surround sound system

Nor do most people.

or the latest core i7 PC for the same
reason - does that also make me a "refusenik" in your eyes?

Not having a computer of any kind would.

who will be economically and socially irrelevant just like those who
If you need to have a smartphone to be socially relevant then there's
something seriously wrong with your social life and probably social skills.

Have you not noticed how many businesses and other organisations assume
that their customers and members have mobile phones and email? I have,
mostly because my mother is one of the refuseniks.

Being socially relevant has nothing whatsoever to do with your social
life or skills, and everything to do with how others wish to interact
with you. If you choose not to be able to interact and take part in
activities in ways that people think are normal and convenient, then
you are socially irrelevant. An awful lot of groups these days rely on
email to contact their members, ranging from the local chess club to
patient support groups and political parties. Therefore if you refuse
to have email, you are removing yourself from that part of society and
that social interaction. Mobile phones aren't there yet, but I expect
that they will be soon.

To take one example, the British Go Association http://britgo.org/
recently stopped publishing its newsletter on paper and posting it to
members, and now distributes it by email. There are a handful of
members who don't have email, but that handful was deemed to not be
important enough to justify the costs of catering to their choice of not
having email.

And to be bring us back to what started you off on your foolish Luddite
ranting - navigating public transport networks - would you like to guess
which are the top three categories of paid-for content/applications on
phones? They a
* games
* music
* travel

So aside from entertainment, finding your way around is the most
important thing that people do with their smartphones that you can't do
with a dumbphone. The people have spoken.

--
David Cantrell | Official London Perl Mongers Bad Influence

EINE KIRCHE! EIN KREDO! EIN PAPST!

On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 12:29:34 +0100
David Cantrell wrote:
price of manufacturing smartphones is dropping quickly (retail price,
unsubsidised, has already dropped from hundreds of pounds to tens of
pounds),

Depends. You can pick up some old symbian stuff for 90 quid but thats
about as low as it goes at the moment.

Once almost everyone can afford a smartphone, or they start being given
away "for free" with a phone contract, the cost of manufacturing

There are not being given away and they're not free as you well know or you
wouldn't have put it in quotes. Contracts cost a fortune and they get the
full retail price of the phone back and then some over the period.

tiny numbers of dumbphones for the handful of weirdos who still want one
will increase because there will be no economies of scale.

I think you'll find dumbphones are still pretty popular in many parts of
the world where basic communication, reliability and a long battery life is
more important than playing Angry Birds. Not only that, not everyone wants
to carry around a phone with the profile of a small brick. A lot of smartphones
are like going on a trip back to the early 90s in size.

Already a quarter of adults have a smartphone and half of all teenagers.

Got a link for that?

It won't be long before it's hard to buy a dumbphone. At which point,
yes, not having a smartphone will indeed be a statement.

Only in your mind. You seem to be unable to distinguish between a making
a statement and complete indifference.

or the latest core i7 PC for the same
reason - does that also make me a "refusenik" in your eyes?

Not having a computer of any kind would.

Why would it? Its quite possible to live without one. I couldn't because
I work in IT but I can quite see how others could.

with you. If you choose not to be able to interact and take part in
activities in ways that people think are normal and convenient, then

Facebook & twitter are not activities. Meeting down a pub or playing sports
is an activity. The former are poor facsimiles of a social life for losers
who don't actually have one.

And to be bring us back to what started you off on your foolish Luddite

Luddite? Having a smartphone seems to mean a lot to you, perhaps its a sort of
crutch or comfort blanket for some insecurities or inadequacies you have in
your social or professional life because it gives you the illusion of
connection. Either way you seem unable to comprehend why others may not give a
**** about owning an over priced hand held computer with no keyboard. Which is
your problem, not theirs.

which are the top three categories of paid-for content/applications on
phones? They a
* games

Don't care, I'm not 15.

* music

Don't care.

* travel

Can use a proper computer for that or visit a travel agents.
That really the best you've got?

with a dumbphone. The people have spoken.

No, you have spoken and I suspect your apparent addiction to tech like any
addiction makes your judgement unreliable at the best of times. If poking
and prodding your iToy all the time like a wired up lab rat makes you happy
then good for you. For others like me I'm afraid you come across as just a
little bit sad.

B2003

On 22 Aug 2012 11:15:55 GMT, Neil Williams wrote:

wrote:

If you use smartphones a lot the battery can go within a day which isn't much
use if you're spending the day away from the hotel.

I charge mine every night, but it rarely if ever needs more.

I need about two and half charges a day on my Samsung Galaxy S II, so I
carry extra batteries and have a separate battery charger. Problem solved.

--
jhk

In article ,
d wrote:
On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 12:29:34 +0100
David Cantrell wrote:
price of manufacturing smartphones is dropping quickly (retail price,
unsubsidised, has already dropped from hundreds of pounds to tens of
pounds),

Depends. You can pick up some old symbian stuff for 90 quid but thats
about as low as it goes at the moment.


10 seconds on amzazon found (I literally searched for android 3g
phone and picked, I think, the thrid option)

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Unlocked-Qua...dp/B008ITLOB4/

Which is (just!) below a hundred quid. I expect some slightly more dedicated
searching will find something cheaper.

I think you'll find dumbphones are still pretty popular in many parts of
the world where basic communication, reliability and a long battery life is
more important than playing Angry Birds.

Indeed; I have one myself for the battery life and small size. And a
smartphone. Horses for courses, innit?



--
Mike Bristow

On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 15:57:10 +0200
Jarle H Knudsen wrote:
On 22 Aug 2012 11:15:55 GMT, Neil Williams wrote:

wrote:

If you use smartphones a lot the battery can go within a day which isn't
much
use if you're spending the day away from the hotel.

I charge mine every night, but it rarely if ever needs more.

I need about two and half charges a day on my Samsung Galaxy S II, so I
carry extra batteries and have a separate battery charger. Problem solved.

Meanwhile my Nokia dumbphone will go a week on a single charge in normal use.

B2003

On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 15:04:09 +0100
Mike Bristow wrote:
Which is (just!) below a hundred quid. I expect some slightly more dedicated
searching will find something cheaper.

For 2nd hand stuff almost certainly. For new stuff from a well known
manufacturer, maybe, maybe not.

Indeed; I have one myself for the battery life and small size. And a
smartphone. Horses for courses, innit?

Apart from not needing one the other main reason I don't have a smartphone is
size. I don't want to go back to a 1990s style brick in my pocket.

B2003

On 22/08/2012 14:04, d wrote:
On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 12:29:34 +0100
David Cantrell wrote:
price of manufacturing smartphones is dropping quickly (retail price,
unsubsidised, has already dropped from hundreds of pounds to tens of
pounds),

Depends. You can pick up some old symbian stuff for 90 quid but thats
about as low as it goes at the moment.

So this article is a complete work of fabrication and lies:

http://www.reghardware.com/2012/08/2...ndroid_phones/