Nokia 8800 OMGZWTF???!!11
- Thread starter stig
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Sep 2003
- Posts
- 5,830
- Location
- Newcastle upon Tyne
daz said:
It's not a bog-standard phone though. The 8800 is made using watch making techniques. So it's perfectly right to compare it with a luxury watch.
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Sep 2003
- Posts
- 5,830
- Location
- Newcastle upon Tyne
A5H said:
No, and I quote "Wrapped in high grade stainless steel and resin, the superior craftsmanship draws upon the same materials used in surgical instruments and premium watches". So it's not just a normal phone with a steel cover.
And the sliding mechanism too.... "the Nokia 8800 phone integrates ball bearings from the makers of bearings for high-performance cars..."
Last edited:
mrochester said:
This is exactly the kind of stuff that causes people to come back repeatedly asking you the same questions, when people talk rubbish people query it.
The Nokia 8800 is NOT comparable by any stretch of any imagination to a Rolex watch. It would be comparable to buying an expensive casio rather than a cheap one. It's a cheap nokia in an shiny case and does NOT employ any sophisticated techniques in it's manufacture or development.
Now for a company that actually does such things (and produces phones that are genuinely comparable to something like a rolex), you want to look at Vertu
http://www.vertu.com/
We know you like your phone, but you should at least be honest about it when discussing it.
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Sep 2003
- Posts
- 5,830
- Location
- Newcastle upon Tyne
Dolph said:
If anything, at least I've actually provided some evidence for how the 8800 is made. So far you've just said that it does not employ any of those techniques, without actually proving it.
mrochester said:
Just because it's 'meant' to be a looks phone doesn't mean one can't expect it to have more features
And I'm not asking for it to have frivolous stuff like Video/Ringtone DJ or fancy camera modes, could they not just have squeezed in at least a better camera, a better screen or at least not used the basic S40 interface? I mean, I picked it up for the first time and just thought hmm, it's basically my 7210i with a slightly better resolution.And the sliding mechanism...I'm really not just taking shots at the 8800, but I much much prefer the smoother slide of Samsungs, e.g. D500, D600, and they don't need fancy bearings
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Sep 2003
- Posts
- 5,830
- Location
- Newcastle upon Tyne
Doohickey said:Just because it's 'meant' to be a looks phone doesn't mean one can't expect it to have more features
And the sliding mechanism...I'm really not just taking shots at the 8800, but I much much prefer the smoother slide of Samsungs, e.g. D500, D600, and they don't need fancy bearings
Considering we're talking about a year and more ago now, I doubt the 8800 could have squeezed a better camera into the tiny space available for it. Not sure what you expect with regards to a better screen though... it's 208x208 pixels which is higher than most mid-range phones even today. I'm not sure why you would expect it to be series 60 either... series 60 phones are much larger because they have bigger screens, more powerful hardware, extra features etc.
Each to their own regarding the sliding mechanism, but it's by far the best I've ever experienced in a phone. The Samsung and other Nokia slides are all very spongey, plasticy and wobble. If I could get a premium N80 with the same sliding mechanism as the 8800, I'd have it in a flash.
mrochester said:
Oh I realise that about S60 phones, I just didn't expect it to pretty much be the same as a 7250 etc. You say the screen is better than most mid range phones- the 8800 is NOT a mid range phone! For that kind of crazy money! The screen on it is the same screen as on the 6230i!
The camera: the tiny space available? I'm sure Nokia could have made even a little bit more room for a better camera, at least 1 megapixel which was not uncommon on the market at the time of release. But then I have always thought that Nokia have lagged behind other manufacturers (SE, Samsung) a little in the camera department, not just on the 8800.
About the slide, as solid as it feels, I just never liked the way it literally snaps in and out so suddenly, I always felt the need to keep control of it with my thumb to slow it down on sliding up and down, it just doesn't instil the greatest feeling in my to hear a >£400 phone (at the time) slamming itself shut like that. And I have used it extensively, and really did try to get jealous about it (I have a k750i), but I really would never swap my phone for one of those, and I'm not just saying that to be stubborn.
Here's some things I do like about it, to convince you that I'm not just out to pigeon hole the phone in every area:
The sapphire crystal (I think) screen face
Phone dock/cradle
No creakyness when you squeeze it or hold it
Looks cool when closed (looks odd open, imo)
Thin and sleek
And that probably is all I rate about it, I can't commend it on the basis of the performance of the phone, voice clarity, screen, 'features' because it only equals if not loses in those areas to much less extravagant phones at much less extravagant prices. There's not even any way to sync the phone with a computer is there? I don't know if there's a connection from the cradle or not... is there? Exclusivity is the main reason I would get one, but other than knowing I have a phone that not that many other people have, I can't see why I'd want one.
I Bought my Nokia 8800 last september great phone for the price i paid (£150) as part of a £20 per month contract, the phone does everything my previous 6230 did but i was sick of seeing everyone else with one so decided to go for the 8800, as other posters have said it feels nice to hold and looks great,
I only make a few calls each week so the buttons dont bother me and are perfectly useable if a little small, battery life not an issue and has a spare should you need it.
Its good to have the nice presentation style box and charger and the package just looks ace, makes a change from the silly white boxes from the older nokia phones that fall apart easily.
Yes i could get an ugly larger screen nokia for half the price and much larger storage space and play Doom on the train like a nerd, but i use my phone for the basic features and thats about it.
I only make a few calls each week so the buttons dont bother me and are perfectly useable if a little small, battery life not an issue and has a spare should you need it.
Its good to have the nice presentation style box and charger and the package just looks ace, makes a change from the silly white boxes from the older nokia phones that fall apart easily.
Yes i could get an ugly larger screen nokia for half the price and much larger storage space and play Doom on the train like a nerd
, but i use my phone for the basic features and thats about it.
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 20,160
- Location
- Woburn Sand Dunes
mrochester said:
stainless steel is cheap as arse. Its what your cheap knives and forks are made of, its nothing remotely exclusive or expensive.
i'll refer you again to the c500 and its successors. the 8800 had dimentions of 107 x 45 x 15 closed. the c500 (2 years old) has a bigger screen, (lower res 176 x 220 on the c500, 240 x 320 on the c600) is a smartphone running winCE and has dimentions of 108 x 46 x 16. So it was/is entire possible to pack all the good in to a small phone.
instead, nokia choose to bin it all and put it in a cheap stainless steel case a flog it to posers.
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Sep 2003
- Posts
- 5,830
- Location
- Newcastle upon Tyne
They might pack in a lot of hardware, but they take a HUGE hit in the style and looks department to do so. I don't NEED a phone with every bell and whistle. So if the choice was between a butt ugly phone with all the trimmings or a really stylish phone which just does the basics well, well, I'm sure you can guess which I'd take
. I'm about style, not functionality 
Like it or not, the 8800 obviously does have a market considering it's sold over a million units.
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 20,160
- Location
- Woburn Sand Dunes
mrochester said:They might pack in a lot of hardware, but they take a HUGE hit in the style and looks department to do so. I don't NEED a phone with every bell and whistle. So if the choice was between a butt ugly phone with all the trimmings or a really stylish phone which just does the basics well, well, I'm sure you can guess which I'd take
that's not the point is it? you said they couldnt pack the tech into a package that small. im telling you they did all that a year before the 8800 was released. regardless of if its style, how you view its 'looks', they did it and did it easily.
people obviously have different opinions on what makes a phone. personally, i i believe its backwards that people concider the looks of the front of a posers important when its either in your pocket, or stuck to the side of your face. how good does that 8800 look for the back?
...like a stainless steal case. Nothing special.
Last edited:
That Case is awesome though, did my £90 ipod nano cost more than about £10 to build?, doubtful, but it looks great, its not about the materials is about the creativity, for me its the best looking phone on the market and worth what i paid, for you it may not be.
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Sep 2003
- Posts
- 5,830
- Location
- Newcastle upon Tyne
james.miller said:
Well unless we get a ruler out to measure each individual component, I fail to see how this would be settled. Don't forget that the 8800 is a slider design, so that mechanism takes up space too. It also has more outer surfaces than the C series phones, so these areas eat more into the available internal space. Although the differences in dimensions are small, I bet the extra 2mm depth to the 8800 could have seen a higher res camera module and a larger screen (the sliding part where the camera and screen are located is very very slim, maybe about 5mm or so, so just packing in the screen and camera they did into such a tiny space is a good job if you ask me).
Regarding your other comment about posers. I would personally prefer to keep my 8800 away from prying eyes - after all, it makes you a perfect traget for an opportunistic theif. The phone is for my own personal enjoyment, and enjoy it I do with the smooth, cool, stainless steel casing, glass screen cover, extremely sharp screen, slim design and wonderfully smooth slider. There's simply no other phone you can buy that boasts all those features, hence it has sold so well.