Do We Really Need Smartphones?
While I’m sure my employer might disagree with this particular viewpoint, Rom Feria over at Tech Without Wires points to a UK study that suggests smartphones, such as the Nokia N95 pictured here, aren’t necessary. The study suggests Brits use voice calling and SMS more than they use the advanced features.
Certainly in the third world mobile phone market that I inhabit–i.e. the United States–this is fairly true. Most people I know outside of work only use voice. A few people also use SMS. I, however, use my mobile phone to consume and create content a significant percentage of the day, despite being literally surrounded by desktop computers at home.
Smartphones aren’t for everyone, to be sure, but to say they are completely unnecessary is an oversimplification. What do you think?
Bookmark with: del.icio.us Digg it Furl iFeedReaders ma.gnolia Maple.nu RawSugar reddit Simpy StumbleUpon
Related Posts:
- iPhone Is Taking Over? Please.
- The Nokia Tune: Grande Valse
- Is This Thing On?
- The Nokia N95-4 (8GB, North America)
- iSkoot Will Fix The Encryption Issue On Nokia S60 Client
Pingback by Blog » Blog Archive » Do We Really Need Smartphones?
[...] PhoneBoy wrote an interesting post today on Do We Really Need Smartphones?Here’s a quick excerptCreative Commons License This work originally came from The PhoneBoy Blog and is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. Fingerprint: e37ac627f3d973694c212ff9430d215a. [...]
Comment by spg
while there will be a future for smartphones we will learn that the big ‘killer app’ for mobile data will simply be internet access for laptops. this will consume the bulk of all bandwidth. but it will not catch in huge numbers until we have no more ‘fair use policies’ and pricing is only slightly above that of DSL/Cable. also it will be a replacement for DSL/Cable in many cases not a supplement. particularly among those people i know who are a little less tech minded(the overwhelming majority of society) it is accepted as fact that all of their internet access(at least on the consumer level; perhaps not in the office) will be wireless. eventually the telecoms will have no choice but to deliver what the consumers really demand.
Comment by PhoneBoy
Right now, the wireless technology isn’t quite up to the same speed level as the wired solutions. Furthermore, the backend infrastructure of many of these carriers simply aren’t able to handle the same speeds and feeds as a conventional wired ISP. Then there’s the issue of spectrum. Is there enough to service everyone?
With all these issues, I’d say we’ve got another decade or so before wireless internet connections overtake the wired ones.
Comment by spg
there is an an enormous amount of perfect spectrum(for all but the most rural areas); the problem is that it is the hands of two companies that are not showing the momentum needed: sprint and clearwire. they will eventually work together it was all planned that way long ago by Craig McCaw when he started putting away spectrum into a second company(clearwire) before the sale of nextel to sprint. recently there is talk of partnership with intel and google. i do not think that it will be ten years. and it may come first as DSL/Cable alternative before the technology shrinks down to phone size. if google wins the 700 mhz auction it could all happen much faster since that spectrum is more suited for early build out since it require less towers per same area; but in the end the sprint/clearwire batch of spectrum at 2.5 Ghz is only chunk big enough to really give lots of people lots of bandwidth. and lets not forget all the dark fiber that google is laying and how that will fit into the picture.
Comment by PhoneBoy
@spg Sprint is in serious financial trouble. They need to do something to get out of the tailspin they’re in. Clearwire isn’t quite big enough to pull it off. Maybe Sprint needs to buy Clearwire so McCaw can come fix Sprint?