|>Ok, this is not a Nokia, but I would like to point my finger on one issue.
I read of this last month. 1.3 Mpix were available at that time, this
month 2.1 Mpix chips will become available.
Nice too, their a different beast than what are being used now.
smaller, less current demand.
--
,,
( "> w
,(> )>| "Girls are like pianos. When they're not upright, they're grand."
( ^^ '
<resent>
I read of this last month. 1.3 Mpix were available at that time, this
month 2.1 Mpix chips will become available.
Nice too, there a different beast than what are being used now.
smaller, less current demand.
--
,,
( "> w
,(> )>| 668: The Neighbor of the Beast
( ^^ '
<resent X2>
I read of this last month. 1.3 Mpix were available at that time, this
month 2.1 Mpix chips will become available.
Nice too, they're a different beast than what are being used now.
<resent X2>
|>Ok, this is not a Nokia, but I would like to point my finger on one issue.
I read of this last month. 1.3 Mpix were available at that time, this
What's the point in having a phone with a 2.1megapixel camera built in ?
I thought the purpose of phones with built-in cameras was for sending pics
using MMS. Which probably why most phones have CIF or VGA res. cameras.
You can get a decent multi-megapixel digital camera for less money if you
just want to take photos.
--
Michael Turner
Email (ROT13)
zvxr.gh...@ivetva.arg
"michael turner" <zvxr.gh...@ivetva.arg> wrote in message
Do you really think that 2.1Mpix will give you better photo quality with
those plastic, small, crapy lens inside phones?
Now we get ~40KB of:
Chromatic a. , blur picture, hi compression, low saturated colors etc...
2.1Mpix will give you 500KB with those photo related problems (common in
cell phones and very cheap digital camers "trust", apitek etc) ...
And still there is no auto focus system for cellphones with camera ?
only damn fix focus....
0,3Mpix photo from a cheap canon A40 (resized from 2.1Mpix) looks 101010110
times better then any photo from taken with a cell phone, does not it?
"Bjorn" <humo...@online.no> wrote in message
news:edw5c.910$px6....@news2.e.nsc.no...
> Because nokia are fucking theives.
> They will release the new phone, wait for everyone to buy it then release
> the i model 2 months later and not let you update the firmware,
Updating the firmware will NOT give you the 'i' version's *hardware* and
features.
Updating a 3510's firmware will not give you the 3510i's
*colour* screen, see also 8910 and 8910i. Same with the 6310, updating the
firmware will not give it the 6310i's Java capabilities.
Anyway there's only four phones in the Nokia range that have 'i' in their
numberings,.
<snipped>
there used to be quite a few 'i' model nokias in the old days, then
they stopped for a while and now they're back!
That is quite an accusation!
Many companies do such a thing.
They issue them for a 1st release, and let the complaints or suggestions
roll in from the initial customer's and then re-release the phone.
Most companies do this.
Car manufacturer's refresh models, add different engines, specs.
Computer companies are the best.
Technology moves on so quickly, and unfortunately, the "early adopters"
often suffer
The one phone, although it ain't Nokia, that I know of where a firmware
update would give you the 'i's features, was the SE t68. However
I never actually bothered getting my t68 upgraded to the 'i' version.
600euros vs say, 500 for the 6600.
Bear in mind that if this company sells 1% of the number of phones that
Nokia sell, then they'll likely be pretty chuffed. When you are a small
company you can afford to differentiate yourself in different ways. It's
not about keeping up, it's about making the most money in the easiest way -
and for a small company vs the worlds largest handset manufacturer, there
are clearly differences in what they should do.
It looks like a nice piece of kit.
Ben
--
A7N8X FAQ: www.ben.pope.name/a7n8x_faq.html
Questions by email will likely be ignored, please use the newsgroups.
I'm not just a number. To many, I'm known as a String...