Nokia 215
lumiaconversations.microsoft.com
lumiaconversations.microsoft.com
A few weeks ago, after an upgrade to iOS 8, I became unable to connect to wifi on my iPhone 4S and the speed of the OS became pretty bad, after it had been perfectly responsive since I first got it nearly 3 years ago.
Combine this with the fact that my expensive purchased-for-durability phone case, the third in the phone's lifetime, was starting to crack, and I started looking at other phones.
My contract is up in a couple of months. I went to a store and looked at the Samsung Galaxy Note 4 and the iPhone 6.
I found the Note 4 intriguing because I've been occasionally following John Carmack's discussions about the Gear VR (Oculus Rift that connects to the phone) and I thought it was coming out in a consumer version, but it looks like they are still labeling it as a developer kit, which makes me think there must be a reason for that (i.e. it's not really ready for prime time). Also, the phone is just massively huge, and I don't want to buy it, especially since given my way of doing things I'd end up buying some horribly large case on top of it.
Then I looked at the iPhone 6. First of all I do think it's too big in terms of screen size -- though I do like the thickness and weight of it quite a bit. But the base model is 16GB, and getting either a 16GB or a 64GB on contract was $200+ or $375+ respectively. I thought about it and almost broke down and bought a 128GB model outright for over $1000. In the end, I just couldn't justify it.
I think it's time for me to go back to sending SMSs on the telephone keypad. And time for me to stop getting warnings that my damn phone is not backing up (no wifi and me not plugging it in), time for me to stop worrying that the phone will die if I forget to charge it for just one evening, and time for me to stop buying expensive, crappy cases.
I really want this phone. And if I don't get it, I'll probably get something that is just like it.
TL;DR: I'm a fan.
They need a similar phone that is targeting the market that can afford smart phones but realized it doesn't need most of the features at the expense of battery life.
Like a phone with this feature set plus 3G/4G connectivity with WiFi tethering capability to say your tablet and a beefier battery.
Basically a classic Nokia phone and 3G/4G router to connect all your smart devices to while you're on the move and in need of a internet connection.
No wifi though, you'll have to either use bluetooth or USB (USB works better).
Every market can afford smartphones. 3G, wifi, tethering, dual SIMs (quite important in some areas), etc.
If Nokia can sell it in targeted markets, it will match functionality of similarly priced phones with much larger screens and much extended functionality, but the Nokia brand will bring the premium price tag, and in my opinion cheap reliable Androids will continue to win, the price of reliability being word-of-mouth amongst unknown but become-known brands and models, vs known but insufficiently featureful mainstream branded phones.
They exist ? Low cost Android devices are absolutely nasty. They are buggy, extremely prone to viruses/malware, complex with terrible build quality.
There is always a market for simple, focused devices that "just work".
What?
I see what you mean, but that market still has different segments and what you talk about (phone with this feature set plus 3G/4G connectivity with WiFi tethering) is just one of them. I for instance couldn't care less about these features. And I'm pretty sure there's an entire segment which just wants a phone which just calls and texts without bells and whistles and a battery life that makes sense for a portable electronics device. Let's say at least 3 weeks. So yes with this one all I see is somthing which I can use to call and has 29 days of standby so I'm in :P Don't care about the price. Oh, it's ultra-cheap? WIN WIN :]
I almost never use any of my smart phone's features except tethering.
The phone's screen is too small for comfort I would rather use my nexus 7 which I always have with me anyway however a phone of that size would be too awkward so why not just separate them.
A dumb phone with modem capabilities and great battery life and a smart device for everything else.
On its own, the phone would use 2G/2.5G.
Well if your primary use of a "phone" is to make GSM voice calls and send SMSs then what you're looking at is completely overkill. The vast majority of people that buy top end phones do so for things like: pocket sized, always available, excellent quality camera, near desktop-like internet browsing, and then the entire application ecosystem including maps, lifestyle applications, games, etc.
There are going to be tradeoffs to be made depending on what your requirements are, including price and battery life.
Only my brother uses it for Internet browsing.
I know of only one guy who uses it for the agenda features (and it's a blackberry).
Admittedly these headline figures appear to count users with any mobile activity, even if they have far more activity from other platforms.
I prefer desktop too, but I think it's a mistake to underestimate mobile.
[1] http://techcrunch.com/2013/08/13/facebook-mobile-user-count/
[2] http://techcrunch.com/2013/10/03/mobile-twitter-161m-access-...
[3] http://techcrunch.com/2014/12/26/amazon-2014-holiday-sales/
You are right, of course, that printing from a phone camera is futile, but printing from a P&S is much the same unless you've purchased something at the top of the line.
A couple of years ago, I decided I wanted to simplify my life. Cut everything down to an iPad with keyboard, plus my work Blackberry.
It's romantic, but it sucks. I went the other direction: 15" MBP Retina with quad-core + 16GB and an iPhone 6+. Almost $3k in toys, but way more productive. And the Apple stuff has gotten good enough where I leave my chargers at the office. My 6+ was at 3% last night. Put it in airplane mode over night, and it lasted long enough to give me my alarm at 6:50 am, plus a few checks of e-mail in the morning and 15 minutes of hotspot around 8:30.
I can really recommend it. Also on a side note I feel like I'm leaving the world behind when I only take the dumb phone out.
I want a phone just like this. The only thing I want that smartphones brought us is turn by turn navigation. The rest can take a hike. Put Nokia's Snake game on there, the old ways that Nokias worked (such as the ability to turn the phone off, and have it wake itself as an alarm), keep the 10 digit "interface" for ideal texting and 100% lag-free dialing, the 10+ day battery life of no 3G/4G, maybe Opera Mini per this Nokia.. and we have a deal.
To me that is technology perfected. I don't want much more than a phone in my pocket. If technology that works and is pleasing makes me a Luddite, then so be it. But it's time to bring some sensibility and more usability to products. Nokia was that.
If anyone from Nokia/MS reads this, yes, please, the above and make a higher quality build version. A $100 or $150 phone that I described, preferably with old school Nokia quality or iPhone metal frame would be amazing.
> I thought about it and almost broke down and bought a
> 128GB model outright for over $1000
I love my phone like a child, and it is in my hands for probably at least 2 hours a day. I am happy to spend cash dollars on that.
Also, you wear your clothes at least 14 hours a day. That does not imply you need to buy the most expensive brands you can find, just that they need to fit their purpose. You can pay more than $1000 for an iPhone with 128 GB of storage, true. You can also buy an expandable device, add a 128GB (or bigger - up to 1 TB is available) and end up paying half that price (or less).
The analogy just doesn't work, over a 2 year period the difference between $500 and $1000 isn't much. If in the US, the cost is usually hidden in the monthly cost. So the visible cost is $200, and even the free phones over same time period isn't much of a difference in price.
On the subject of spending, put money into your bed, you spend a lot of time there, well worth a few thousand.
Apropos beds: I built mine, about 15 years ago. It cost me all of $30 in wood and sundry.
To summarise, throwing money at a problem is usually not the best solution. Throwing as much money at a problem as someone will take is hardly ever the best solution.
The 105 has even more standby & talk time per charge, allegedly, and I only charge my 100 once every week/fortnight depending on use.
Worth a look but not much cheaper so if having access to the internet, or having a torch, is important to you it won't be so appealing.
But then as my phone gave up on me before I found a replacement I started using a "cand bar" phone and found out that I actually like some smartphone features - like a good autocomplete keyboard, the ability to track my post packages, check bus timetable and occasionally to look up something on the internet (I'm a patient man, it doesen't need to render webpages _that_ fast).
And I came to conclusion that I would enjoy a relatively small, well build and long lasting smartphone that doesen't need to run games (and many apps at once) or have GPS/Nav, voice control,... and whatnot features that I don't use (and can't even remove usually). I think that the technology itself is advanced enough for such a device - there're even some cheap Chinese ones that look promising for what I need (for example Xiaomi Redmi 1S or Redmi 2).
I can recommend the Moto G, it too is a flagship phone at a much too low price, they recently introduced a 2nd gen but it's more expensive. You can get the original second hand for around €100, I am certain it won't disappoint.
I love the feel of the hardware, but for >95% of the phone's life it's been wrapped in a waterproof case, so I don't really benefit from it much.
And I totally hear you about the way the phone feels. Every time I got a new case, I would leave it naked for a few hours, just -[fondling]-touching and admiring the damn thing.
Yeah, it isn't a thing you should have to do, but if it fixes the problem...
I've never had really good luck with system upgrades on Apple products.
I've been using an Xcover 271 for years. It gives me a couple of weeks of battery and, if I really need to, I can still use a simple web browser to look up timetables etc. (but it's enough of a burden that I won't use it for fun) and there's Google Maps preinstalled (also, a big slow for just browsing around but it has been a life-saver several times!)
But the Xcover is somewhat slow and because it has this 'ruggedised' brand image it costs more than it should. A very basic entry-level phone with technology that's five years newer but still costs nearly nothing is probably a good sweetspot. If it breaks the option of buying a replacement won't be considered any longer than one second.
I'm a huge Nokia fan for two main reasons: The phones are durable and they are so cheap that they're practically disposable.
I can't speak for this phone (the 215), but you can buy a Lumia 520 for ~$50 dollars and a 635 for ~$75. My son is 16 months old and constantly smashes the phone into the floor and I'm perfectly ok with that.
For the price you'd drop on an iPhone 6+, you could probably buy 10 Lumia 520s and break them on purpose at your leisure and it would still be cheaper. People will make fun of you for Windows Phone, but it does have Bluetooth, web browsing, really good contact integration, and good email integration. For me personally, using mobile websites is good enough that I don't care if there are apps or not.
was worried microsoft would do away with this line!
But it has only 8MB RAM (that's MB, not GB).
I have a basic phone and the only reason I hold to my iPad at all times is the fear of being given an appointment at a place I can't find.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TracFone_Wireless#Straight_Talk
I could perhaps afford an iPhone what-have-you (even though i am a poor PhD student -- maybe you have a point), but i genuinely like the fact that my phone lasts really long between charges and that i am not even tempted to have FaceApp or TwitBook, etc.
If my life was arranged a little differently (read: more stability) i wouldn't even have a mobile at all, but for the moment i can't rely on having only a home phone.
One thing that I want to see in such type of phones is whatsapp support with an extremely good battery life. If such a phone comes up, it will be second phone for every person who is suffering from the battery problem of android ecosystem.
MS needs to preinstall whatsapp , otherwise a lot of people will prefer a phone with whatsapp pre-installed, I know that most of us would laugh about it, but believe me, In my country people buy phones just because the box has these logos: whatsapp, FB, twitter.
You are assuming that a cheap Android would offer a good experience. I won't have another Android precisely because I had a poor experience with 2 cheap Android phones.
Nokia had Series 30 and 40 (both non-Symbian) and 60, 80, and 90 (all platforms on Symbian).
If they can sell this type of device at or near cost (which it seems like they are), and increase Bing marketshare at the expense of Android/Google, it's a win for them.
I miss my 6310is.
All the feature phones I've looked at don't have 3G/4G with tethering, which means they're unsuitable for my use case.
http://www.cnet.com/uk/news/nokia-207-and-208-are-most-affor...
I used to have an E71 and used that for tethering. It worked well, but it really drained the battery - I think it would last maybe an hour. You might be better off looking into a 'mifi' device, or just getting a tablet with mobile data.
http://www.microsoft.com/en/mobile/phone/515/ http://www.microsoft.com/en/mobile/phone/301/
No 4G though -- I imagine that Series 40, Nokia's venerable in-house operating system, doesn't support it at all.
Not sure how well it would fare against constant tethering though.
I bought one on a whim and after playing around with it, i'm considering moving full time to it from an iPh6. The camera and screen are the biggest down grades, but otherwise it's just as functional.
A feature phone that doubles as a 3G hotspot seems like a weird idea. You would add semi-expensive 3G chip, but not use it for the phone is self.
Perhaps I just mean a mifi device.
I kind of like the option of having a multi-day battery life too.
The phones that I really like seem to never be available in the US. Admittedly, I have a unique taste in phones. I love the idea of a minimal phone OS with a qwerty keypad (or number pad). The new Blackberry Classic looks really nice too, but it's not available in the US and Blackberry has all but abandoned ship in the US market.
Nokia is getting so close to scratching that itch with this phone. I really hope there's a US version with similar specs somewhere up the pipe.
I just don't see the need to own a smart phone anymore for myself. If I wasn't at a computer all the time I could justify it but it no long serves a purpose.
I really hope they sell this in the us eventually. I suppose you can still buy an unlocked one and use that however. Just make sure it has the right keyboard and language.
- I'm way more able to keep in touch with friends & arrange to meet up. Partly the onscreen keyboard (vs. T9), partly Yelp, partly Maps, partly the variety of messaging apps (half my friends don't use txt anymore)
- I'm actually able to use a cheaper phone plan by leveraging data & wifi (most dumbphones lack wifi)
- for whatever reason, having my email in my pocket has actually resulted in me spending less time looking at my email
Also, Blackberry sells the Classic unlocked in the US through it's online store[1] and Amazon[2] and you can also get one on contract through US Mobile[3].
[1] http://shop.blackberry.com/store/bbrryus/en_US/pd/productID.... [2] http://www.amazon.com/dp/product/B00OYZZ3VS/?_encoding=UTF8&... [3] https://www.gousmobile.com/blackberry-classic
[1] http://crackberry.com/blackberry-classic-and-passport-confir...
So that's what a torchlight is for! Thanks, landing page!
And someone got paid on a marketing team so everything's good.
edit: oh, but it's not a landing page. It's a blog page.
Another thing about the current generation of smartphones: unlike this Nokia offering, they are not yet "good enough". Chances are, you will replace your phone in 1-2 years, or at least you'll want to. Their speed is still growing very fast, and the demand on the CPU/GPU/RAM is growing very fast too. I can see buying this phone and keeping it for 5+ years: nothing in what it can do will see substantial improvements over that time period. Contrast this with the top of the line smartphones where simple things in 2017 will take 2x the processing power that they do now, because of the improved UI, etc.
Eventually, I think smartphones will settle down. I remember when PC's were getting faster and faster in the late 1990's, early 2000's. It seemed that you could upgrade every year and still not keep up. Eventually they got "good enough" where you can keep the same PC for 5-10 years (except power-users such as programmers, gamers, etc.) I look forward to a day when iPhones and such are a commodity such as this Nokia.
Moreover over these kind of phones exists, it is just that we have choice not to buy them.
Can't tell if blatant troll or not... the only phone worth considering? I went from a Moto X 2013 to an iPhone 6. I'm in the process of returning the 6. I heard everyone talk about the coherence of iOS and how rock solid an OS it is. This thing has crashed more on me, or just stopped passing data traffic via wifi or cellular more times in the last 2 months of ownership than my Moto X did in a year. The camera is outstanding and something I'll truly miss, but I can live without a camera in exchange for a phone that let's me put alerts on silence without being forced to silence my alarm as well...
I dropped my 515 from 12 m (40 ft) and it kept working…
My backup travel phone is a dual-sim candybar, allowing me to leave my smartphone back at the hotel room while still taking my usual sim with me + a local sim of the country I'm visiting. This gives me a lot of freedom to really roam and still be reachable if I want to be, have some options if there's an emergency, to not really worry about my phone being lost or stolen, and not be tied to a power outlet.
My telephone company let's me have two sim cards which makes this really easy (whichever phone is turned on most recently is the active phone). I leave my spare phone in my car when I'm not traveling.
Firefox Smartphone is a better choice for India. Same price tag and a much more open compute platform.
There are also several Chinese made Android smartphones around INR2000 which are attractive to budget conscious purchasers.
Remember that in India the phone is often the only compute platform a user has, and it is an aspirational purchase.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ewanspence/2013/09/05/could-we-s...
There may be some strange brand contortions coming next year!
I'm currently shopping around for a phone for my father, he doesn't want a smartphone. He needs a simple phone, through which he can make VOIP calls(Skype/Viber etc). Its perfectly alright if the phone doesn't have a camera, or GPS. But for sure it needs to have WiFi connectivity, you should be able to tether, should be rugged and durable and should be cheap.
Internet is taking off big time in India. And people want to make free calls over VOIP all the time. Smartphones are expensive, and aren't exactly very durable and rugged. Plus they get out of fashion very soon. A simple phone, Nokia standard, which you could use as a internet phone over WiFi with apps like Skype, Viber would sell like hotcakes here.
To me, the big question is whether I can tether a tablet to it. A lightweight, convenient dumbphone with a tethered tablet in my backpack might be a nice form-factor.
Why ?
Microsoft has made it crystal clear that they want to be an internet services company. Which means that whatever OS they use isn't that relevant if it means more users of their services.
> RAM: 8 MB
That's not much, considering what it can do. Decode H.264, run Opera Mini, and more.
Edit: Internet is useful for chat apps like messenger, they mostly replaced text messaging for me.
(Opera mini is also a requirement.)
This is too much to ask, I agree. But then if I just want a phone to make calls and text then I would buy something even cheaper than this phone.
[1] http://www.microsoft.com/en/mobile/phone/215/specifications/
http://www.cnet.com/uk/products/nokia-215/
'Europe' availability specified. 2G in UK for some years to come. Might get one on payg and I can listen to my music and take the odd low res pic of funny signs (what I mainly use the camera for).
This phone has 8MB of RAM for example, which not only is a very cheap component to buy, but given the amount of phones Nokia will be producing, it will cost them even less. Same for camera, and every other component. In 2015 some things that used to be very expensive, like multi megapixel cameras, are worth less or more like a few peanuts nowadays if bought in large amounts.
I know it's a cheap phone, but then don't market it as an internet device. It's 2015. 3G even in a cheap phone should be standard if you call it an internet-ready device.
2G connectivity is slow... but I would love super-lite webpages. Like m.mobile; maybe w.watch? This could also use them. Needs less bandwidth, data, CPU, RAM, battery - and clearer because just the text.
If it has an x86 CPU (specs don't say), it could be the world's smallest DOSbox. 8MB RAM is plenty for DOS.
1 http://www.retromobile.nl/images/productimages/big/8850zilve...
It's very easy to get a cheap phone, but touch screen phones tend to have worse battery life, and many of the entry-level phones don't have a browser or location services (GPS functionality is a big plus when travelling.
This is not the first modern and cheap phone they have. Yet they are not available to purchase. So yeah, nice news, but not really relevant unless you live in Africa.
(Yes, I know they say Europe this time, but I don't really believe them)
I hope they get the UI right; old Nokia phones had a great UI before they added all the 'smartphone'-crap.
And I hope they'll sell them in Austria too; this looks like a great backup phone.
I hear you!
Those were the days, when your phone would react instantly to keypresses, and so reliably that you could type and send entire SMS without looking at the screen.
"or as a secondary phone for just about anyone... has the same durable build quality you’ve learned to rely on over the years... stand-by time of up to 29 days"
After Microsoft claimed to have banished the 'Nokia' name forever, they now evoking imaging from Nokia's days of glory. Of course, the question now on every Indian's mind is - Can the Nokia 215 hold a candle to the legendary 1100?
I get that all this stuff works really well in marketing products, but its getting really stale.
Maybe somebody could make a product and make money in this segment but the odds of that somebody being Microsoft are nil. The only context in which this makes sense is keeping this part of the former Nokia alive long enough to sell it.
Building an affordable phone with Internet access capability is not biggest demand currently.
10 years ago, Nokia discovered what was missing in communication market. A cheap, good looking and everlasting phone. They sold it to literally everywhere in the world. It was like buy one and use forever.
I am not really sure what is the biggest gap in communication market but it is definitely not this. Here are the things i can list which i think the most important ones to focus on.
- Battery life
- Unique and beautiful designs (Phones are getting too similar to each other)
- Durability
- Making phones use cases wider to interact real life scenarios.
Lets see if we are gonna see something original in 2015 otherwise people will as usual wait for iPhone 7, Galaxy S6, and Nexus 10.
(The OS is listed on the product page: http://www.microsoft.com/en/mobile/phone/215/specifications/ )
But these new "Series 30+" phones are not based on the old Nokia OS any more. Instead they use a completely different feature phone platform licensed from MediaTek, and it doesn't seem to include Java ME at all (probably to save on license costs).
Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Series_30) calls Series 30+ "a little version upgrade of Series 30 platform" but I have no idea if that's true. If so, it would suggest that Series 30+ would support J2ME: the contrary would be surprising, as you said.
Thanks.
http://discussions.nokia.com/t5/Asha-and-other-Nokia-Series-...
http://discussions.nokia.com/t5/Asha-and-other-Nokia-Series-...
This info comes from poster Abi99, who seems to be a highly regarded member with over 11,000 posts on the official forums:
"The Nokia 220 is — after the Nokia 108 — the second phone from Nokia which uses MediaTek Feature Phone MAUI as operating system, called Nokia Series 30+."
"The new Nokia Series 30+ platform (MediaTek) does not allow to add apps."
Nokia 130 - $25
Nokia 215 $29
Not sure why Nokia keeps coming out with new phones but I like it. Yeah it may be expensive in 2nd / 3rd world countries still but I personally like the no distractions of a dumb phone. If they called a cellphone a tether when they first came out, they are handcuffs now and I like the feeling of breaking free from it all and focusing on other things in life like the people in my life, or self improvement etc...
http://www.microsoftstore.com/store/msusa/en_US/pdp/AT-T---N...
Edit: Looks like Series 30+ is not even Nokia OS anymore. It's a completely different OS licensed from MediaTek.
This phone is merely your usual Nokia phone with 2G and facebook push notifications.
So how exactly is the Nokia 215 supposed to be charged in the first place?
Especially during peak times.
Besides, MS doesn't have to do everything. There are plenty of providers of solar charging equipment that no doubt will work with this phone. In fact, here's a random search result: http://www.amazon.in/10000mAh-Portable-Direct-Powered-Batter...
The "2 weeks" of battery life or even 4 weeks thing is at least a decade old. It's nothing new. Old Nokias and Sony Ericsson's used to promise that all the time. The thing is that's just idle time. You're not going to keep your phone in idle that much.
This type of marketing definitely came from the Nokia guys themselves - this "old type of thinking". It reminds me of when laptop makers used to promise "8h of battery life" on their laptops 5 years ago, when their laptops only lasted 2-3h with normal use. They were also thinking idle/almost no usage-time, and being misleading about it in their marketing campaigns.
For most people here, I imagine that phone will last them 3-4 days, which is nothing to scoff at, but it's also not nearly as much as "1 month" of battery life as they imply, and you also lose so much more compared to a smartphone. Yes you get "Internet", but it will also be a pain to use it on that non-touch tiny screen.
The price is also not that special. There have been feature phones costing that much for years. The only difference is now some components have become cheap enough that they can also add some that make having Internet on it a little more usable than before.
People here are aware Firefox launched a $25 Firefox OS smartphone right?
Yeah, I'm going to go ahead and call BS on that too. Here's the info about standby time you can find for iPhone6:" "Up to 16 days (384 hours)"
I'm interested in knowing if anyone even got half of that. And if you actually start using your phone it'd go down a lot more (which you probably would want to, since you know... you bought it to have as a phone)