Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 26th Feb 2018 18:20 UTC, submitted by jido
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless

Over the weekend, Nokia released a new feature phone, the 8110 4G - a re-imagining of the phone used in The Matrix. I really like the design of this phone, and at a price of just €79, it looks like a steal. The most interesting part of the phone, other than its lovely design, is the operating system it runs. It's called KaiOS, a distant cousin to Firefox OS.

KaiOS is not Firefox OS. Our platform is based on the original Mozilla project. We even have people from the original Mozilla team in our engineering and UX departments. But KaiOS has been developed into something much more robust and expanded than the original Firefox OS. Think of us as distant cousins, not siblings nor children.

It's a HTML5-based operating system already in use in a whole bunch of phones today - they claim it's already on 30 million phones in India and North America - and on the 8110 4G, it has that traditional, classic Nokia design with a modern touch. I'm really curious to see just how powerful or expandable (maybe even hackable?) this feature phone platform is.

Order by: Score:
Comment by Kroc
by Kroc on Mon 26th Feb 2018 19:45 UTC
Kroc
Member since:
2005-11-10

[S]Super exciting, but ironically, not a replacement for my 2009(?) Sony Ericsson Elm: 5 MP camera, and GPS + Google Maps (J2ME) cannot be understated for critical requirements for a dumb-phone. I'd _love_ to have one of these new Nokia devices, but it's got to have a GPS first and foremost.[/S]

My bad, checked the specs on the site, and it looks like it has GPS! Now need to find out about a Google Maps solution.

Edited 2018-02-26 19:46 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by Kroc
by Parry on Tue 27th Feb 2018 11:52 UTC in reply to "Comment by Kroc"
Parry Member since:
2014-06-03
Only one color possible : BLACK !
by _QJ_ on Mon 26th Feb 2018 19:48 UTC
_QJ_
Member since:
2009-03-12

-"You ever have that feeling where you're not sure if you're awake or still dreaming?" ;-)

Reply Score: 3

TooShy Member since:
2011-03-02

Trinity: Neo... nobody has ever done this before.

Neo: That's why it's going to work.

;-)

Reply Score: 0

OS
by ebasconp on Mon 26th Feb 2018 20:31 UTC
ebasconp
Member since:
2006-05-09

Repeat after me:

* Userland is not an OS
* Userland is not an OS
* Userland is not an OS
...

Reply Score: 1

RE: OS
by FlyingJester on Mon 26th Feb 2018 20:56 UTC in reply to "OS"
FlyingJester Member since:
2016-05-11

Good thing Firefox OS is more than just a userland.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: OS
by ebasconp on Mon 26th Feb 2018 20:58 UTC in reply to "RE: OS"
ebasconp Member since:
2006-05-09

Yes, but the title says:

"It's a HTML5-based operating system..."

An HTML5 engine is a top most layer in userland. When I was young it would not have been called an OS at all.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: OS
by The1stImmortal on Mon 26th Feb 2018 21:39 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: OS"
The1stImmortal Member since:
2005-10-20

Yes, but the title says:

"It's a HTML5-based operating system..."

An HTML5 engine is a top most layer in userland. When I was young it would not have been called an OS at all.

Eh. The same argument was had over whether windows 3.x was an "operating system" or a "shell". Ultimately as long as everyone understands each other, doesn't really matter.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: OS
by leech on Tue 27th Feb 2018 05:46 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: OS"
leech Member since:
2006-01-10

"Yes, but the title says:

"It's a HTML5-based operating system..."

An HTML5 engine is a top most layer in userland. When I was young it would not have been called an OS at all.

Eh. The same argument was had over whether windows 3.x was an "operating system" or a "shell". Ultimately as long as everyone understands each other, doesn't really matter.
"

It was a goddamn shell sitting on top of DOS...I'll stick by that! Windows 95 was only different because it actually handled the memory and such.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: OS
by moondevil on Tue 27th Feb 2018 08:27 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: OS"
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

I would agree up to Windows 3.1, when enhanced and V86 modes were introduced.

After switching to 386 protected mode, with its own executable, driver model and memory management. MS-DOS was reduced to a boot loader similar to UEFI nowadays.

Reply Score: 4

RE[6]: OS
by vocivus on Tue 27th Feb 2018 10:58 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: OS"
vocivus Member since:
2010-03-13

[q]I would agree up to Windows 3.1, when enhanced and V86 modes were introduced.

Huh, I thought those were both present in Windows 3.0 and Windows/386 2.x

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: OS
by moondevil on Tue 27th Feb 2018 12:33 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: OS"
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

Not fully.

Windows 3.1 dropped real mode support and required a minimum of a 286 PC with 1 MB of RAM to run. The effect of this was to increase system stability over the crash-prone Windows 3.0.


While Windows 3.0 was limited to 16 MB maximum memory, Windows 3.1 can access a theoretical 4 GB in 386 Enhanced Mode.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_3.1x#Improvements_over_Windows...

Edited 2018-02-27 12:39 UTC

Reply Score: 5

RE[5]: OS
by jockm on Tue 27th Feb 2018 17:13 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: OS"
jockm Member since:
2012-12-22

Except that after startup Windows 3 (unlike Windows 1 and 2) replaced most of DOS with it's own internal code and never touched DOS again. I argue it was an OS that used a different OS to boot

Reply Score: 4

RE[5]: OS
by Megol on Tue 27th Feb 2018 18:36 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: OS"
Megol Member since:
2011-04-11

"[q]Yes, but the title says:

"It's a HTML5-based operating system..."

An HTML5 engine is a top most layer in userland. When I was young it would not have been called an OS at all.

Eh. The same argument was had over whether windows 3.x was an "operating system" or a "shell". Ultimately as long as everyone understands each other, doesn't really matter.
"

It was a goddamn shell sitting on top of DOS...I'll stick by that! Windows 95 was only different because it actually handled the memory and such. [/q]

...

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: OS
by nej_simon on Tue 27th Feb 2018 11:26 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: OS"
nej_simon Member since:
2011-02-11

Oh come on, you understood what he meant just like everyone else.

Reply Score: 4

not a bargain
by unclefester on Tue 27th Feb 2018 01:15 UTC
unclefester
Member since:
2007-01-13

"...and at a price of just €79, it looks like a steal."

It's not bargain at all. Less money will get you a very decent Android phone like the Moto C or Huawei Y5. I can get a prepaid Android phone with better hardware for literally 1/4 the price at the supermarket.

Edited 2018-02-27 01:17 UTC

Reply Score: 5

v RE: not a bargain
by leech on Tue 27th Feb 2018 05:48 UTC in reply to "not a bargain"
RE[2]: not a bargain
by nicubunu on Tue 27th Feb 2018 08:18 UTC in reply to "RE: not a bargain"
nicubunu Member since:
2014-01-08

That cheap Android may be slow if you use it as a smartphone, but if you use it as a feature phone, the speed is not that important. The big downside would probably be a short battery life.

Anyway, I agree is NOT a "steal", one can buy a feature phone for a lot less. So cute, affordable, but not an amazing bargain.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: not a bargain
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Tue 27th Feb 2018 16:22 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: not a bargain"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

No, if you use it as a feature phone, it will suuuuuuuck. Use a feature phone, notice how everything is fast as hell. They all used to be this fast. I get smart phones being slow every now and then as the phone part isn't the most important part. But if it were, I wouldn't use it.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: not a bargain
by nicubunu on Tue 27th Feb 2018 16:45 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: not a bargain"
nicubunu Member since:
2014-01-08

What is slow? The dialer starts in 1 second instead of 1/10 of a second? Who cares about that?

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: not a bargain
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Tue 27th Feb 2018 17:53 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: not a bargain"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

You feel it, trust me, you feel it.

You know what the lag was on a digital tone princess phone of the 1970's for dialing? 0 ms. Press a button, tone issued on the wire. We've really regressed in terms of phone usability, but no one really cares because we aren't phoning as much.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: not a bargain
by bassbeast on Wed 28th Feb 2018 03:57 UTC in reply to "RE: not a bargain"
bassbeast Member since:
2007-11-11

Nope, sorry. I got an Alcatel Flint from Cricket when my last phone died, cost a whole $20 for a factory refurb, $50 for a new one. it has a quad core, 1.5Gb of RAM, 5.5 inch screen, 8MP camera. Hell it even plays 3D games, not that I care as I hate touch controls.

So...yeah $79? Not a deal, not when you can get a really decent Android for less.

Reply Score: 4

RE: not a bargain
by flanque on Tue 27th Feb 2018 10:07 UTC in reply to "not a bargain"
flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

Yes but, it comes with Snake pre-loaded!

Reply Score: 6

RE: not a bargain
by cb88 on Fri 2nd Mar 2018 15:46 UTC in reply to "not a bargain"
cb88 Member since:
2009-04-23

I had a ZTE Open C for awhile with firefox OS... I ran the stock and updated 2.1-2.2 versions of FFOS on it... it was pretty usable in the later versions and only cost me $50.

That said this seems overpriced the ZTE Open C was a low cost very durable phone not the fastest but way better than anything else in that price range.

Reply Score: 2

just â¬79, it looks like a steal
by Parry on Tue 27th Feb 2018 11:50 UTC
Parry
Member since:
2014-06-03

Considering this is basically a repackaged JioPhone, I'm not sure I agree.

https://www.thequint.com/tech-and-auto/gadgets/nokia-8110-reliance-j...

Reply Score: 2

Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

Jio phones weren't in the matrix. Not cool.

The 8110 was, thus its cool and worth the price.

Reply Score: 7

Lets see...
by M.Onty on Tue 27th Feb 2018 14:52 UTC
M.Onty
Member since:
2009-10-23

Firstly: Well done to HMG / Nokia Mobile for making a splash with something that's not a glass rectangle. Even if these moves are more than a little cynical (far less so with the 8110 4G than with the 3310 2G, though), at least the industry is reminded there's space for an iota of innovation and fun.

But as to the phone as a practical proposition...

The bad:

- Its longer and thicker than my Blackberry Q5, and the same weight.

- How are we meant to fit a banana in our pocket? Is it designed for people with particularly curvy hips? I suppose it has to be tried to know. But surely a very slight bend would be enough let it 'helicopter' on a table, which is of course very important...

- 2MP is too poor to even photo an A4 page of print and read the text.

- How do the buttons feel? The 3310 had worse button feel than the Nokia 105 and other cheapies, so lets hope they don't pull another stunt like that, on the cynical assumption that all the excitable fools who bought the 3310 hadn't used a feature phone for ten years so wouldn't know the difference.

- £70 is a lot if its just a feature phone. Nokia 105 costs £8.

However all that could be worth it...

- Will the browser be significantly better than Opera Mini; i.e. a cut down but 'real' browser? Which browser engine is it?

- What is the nature of this app store? Can we sideload?

- How long before someone hacks it and I can run Mutt on it? Yes, I know that's ridiculous. But still.

- Does it do a good job of combining the stripped down S30 UI and menu layout (S40 wasn't quite the same, to my mind) with KaiOS? In effect, will this be a return to muscle memory phone UIs that can also compete, even slightly, on features?

Reply Score: 3

RE: Lets see...
by zima on Tue 27th Feb 2018 19:18 UTC in reply to "Lets see..."
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Will the browser be significantly better than Opera Mini; i.e. a cut down but 'real' browser?

I wouldn't call Opera Mini worse, just different. Sometimes even better... (when a phone has ~small screen, with page layout reordering; or when phone has little RAM and processing power; or when you want to save on data charges)

Reply Score: 3

leech
Member since:
2006-01-10

Maybe they should bring back what got me interested in them in the first place, Maemo!

Would love a re-imaged N900...

Reply Score: 1

I like the idea, but not the looks
by spinnekopje on Wed 28th Feb 2018 03:09 UTC
spinnekopje
Member since:
2008-11-29

I mostly don't need a phone, but when needed I want people to able to call me, so a dumbphone is good enough.
For me, there is absolutely no reason to buy a smartphone which needs to be recharged every couple of days (if you are lucky).
I do have an old smartphone (without sim inserted) running lineageos and needs to be plugged in about once, maybe twice a week and it connects to the wifi when I need to refresh geocaches (that's what I use it for in combination with my garmin gps).
If I can find a 'dumpphone' that does 2 weeks on a charge, but has the option to set up a hotspot, it would be great for me.
Would a pay much for it? No, because I only feel the need for that about once or twice a year!
Looks are personal taste offcourse, so no need to discuss that.

Reply Score: 1

Yes!
by Poseidon on Wed 28th Feb 2018 15:21 UTC
Poseidon
Member since:
2009-10-31

Not only am I getting one, I’m writing to them to see if they can offer a camera-less, microphone/speaker physical disconnect physical switch enabled one to go full matrix and paranoid.

Reply Score: 1

Smarter then it looks
by Iapx432 on Wed 28th Feb 2018 16:05 UTC
Iapx432
Member since:
2017-09-30

Check out voice commands:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOZTldHze-w

This phone could be seriously useful!

Considering ditching my iPhone and getting the 8110 and the new Gemini ClamShell.
http://www.osnews.com/story/30155/Gemini_is_a_tiny_Android_laptop_w...

Better of both worlds.

Reply Score: 2