John's Phone: a minimalist cell phone

Basic Nokia phones that don't do much more than calls and SMS and that are very simple to operate and very sturdy, can be found (new) for around EUR 20.

Not for everyone. For example, I send one text message every two or three months. I could easily live without the ability to send or receive texts.

The thing I don’t like about this phone is the silly pen-and-paper address book. Are there any phones out there that just make phone calls, and nothing else?

Strikes me to have two major markets: (1) people who only want to talk to people via phones (e.g. some of the elderly) and (2) as a fashionable item. The gold one would be a head-turner and topic of conversation.

Some people want to get rid of SMS from their way of life (or never adopted it in the first place), and hark back for simpler times. This phone appeals to that.

Maybe it could have a scanner, too, so that you could write SMS on paper and feed it to the phone.

The back of each John’s Phone features a flap with an address book behind it. The left of the flap contains an opening with a small pen: these two unique accessories allow you to update your address file at any time, even when your phone is switched off.

http://www.johnsphones.com/about/specifications/item49

http://www.ciao.co.uk/Nokia_1100__Review_5583589

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia_1100

If it had SMS capability and a small display how would this John's phone be better than for example Nokia 1100?

I'm sure there are some pretty switched on grand parents out there, but I don't fancy the idea of sending my grandmother an SMS. I'd need to call her and no doubt visit her to explain the whole SMS thing.

I have a friend with a parent who is getting on in years, she described a device very similar to this "If only something like this existed" - I've just sent her the link, I imagine a purchase will follow soon after.

(in 2010, I received and sent 6 txt messages, 3 people texting me, and 3 responses from me telling them to email me instead)

Actually, I think those are called tracfones, but they have a stigma of being used by only elderly people. Dang it.

> So, how did it work? Well, to make and receive calls it worked fine. The ringer was suitably loud and the vibration was strong enough to get noticed in a pocket. The audio quality during calls was also decent -- not spectacular but not awful either.

What came out were ludicrously small phones that made dialing and usage a pain.

There's a limit to how small phones can get before they get downright unusable. I remember back then some even had voice dialing to compensate, which was - and still is - just a plain bad idea.

Granted, if I did have a smartphone, or was a "power user" of my current phone, then perhaps I'd feel the same way as you do.

"You can allocate 10 speed dial numbers, each under one of the ten digits. You can allocate a telephone number (in this case, 0612345678) to a speed-dial number (in this case 1) by entering: * * 1 * 0612345678#. Subsequently, hold down the ‘1’ button for two seconds to automatically call the telephone number entered. To delete the speed-dial number in the above example, enter * * 1 * #. If you wish to alter a telephone number allocated to a speed-dial number, simply write over it with the new number."

Cheap? You can pick up a cheap pay-and-go phone here in the UK for about £25 ($50) or less :)

And it handles text messaging.

I'm not sure it is even good for old people - from the engadget review it looks very fiddly.

At 99 euros, they can forget it.

Think Vertu, but not crap and designed by someone with actual taste and not stupidly priced and...OK, so perhaps not Vertu.

Also hardening and a large battery would increase weight (though I don't know if this is how it's heavy).

EDIT: Reminder to self - don't try to be funny.