Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 12th Apr 2013 22:14 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless As I'm working on a long and detailed article about Psion and Symbian (similar in setup to the Palm article), I need to dive into a number of devices that I have never personally owned. One of the devices that was atop my list was what I think is the ultimate Symbian device: the Nokia E7 - the last of the long line of Communicators, released in early 2011. While more detailed information about it will find its way into the Psion/Symbian article, I figured it'd be interesting to give a few first impressions.
Thread beginning with comment 558433
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by MOS6510
by manjabes on Sun 14th Apr 2013 13:57 UTC in reply to "Comment by MOS6510"
Member since:

As a phone, any recent Symbian runs circles around supposedly modern iPhones or Windows Phones (admittedly, less so with Android, but still). There are things that my precious E52 did with glowing ease but which my "fancy" new WinPhone cannot do. Likewise the oh-so-magnificent iPhone.
Yes, on the app front, there is NOTHING nice regarding the Symbian. The SDK is/was AWFUL and Qt was too little too late to remedy it. The app quality is reminiscent of the SDK.
But I don't agree with the unilateral Symbian-bashing going on at technology sites (incl. here, unfortunately) purely based on the "app"-factor. The Symbian actually provided one heck of a phone.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by MOS6510
by MOS6510 on Sun 14th Apr 2013 17:55 in reply to "RE: Comment by MOS6510"
MOS6510 Member since:

Any cheap mobile phone will probably and most likely be a much better phone than an iPhone/WP/Android, because that's its only purpose and everything about it is geared for that.

Despite being named (smart) phones today's phone are really small computers. Using them to make and receive calls is for most people just a small percentage of the total number of things they do with them.

And I think this is where most if not all Symbian based phones fall flat. It's a non-touch OS that was made touch. There aren't many apps and the ones that are around don't work very well. The system in general is slow compared to other phones.

So yes Symbian phones are nice phones, but people don't want phones, they want computers in their pockets.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment by MOS6510
by addicted2088 on Sun 14th Apr 2013 19:32 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by MOS6510"
addicted2088 Member since:

Let me see. My Symbian "phone" (the N79 and E51) had true multitasking, things could stay in the background and be running. I could use an emulator to run Curse of Monkey Island, I also tried Quake on it. I had a nice little Office app on it, some good games (if and when they came by), I had instant messaging apps, I had an IRC client, I had a browser (though it wasn't the ones we're used to now on Android, iOS or WP, but improved quite a bit in Belle), I had a dictionary app, I could run an FTP server using an app to transfer files, etc. WhatsApp was there, awesome clients like Gravity for Twitter and Facebook (unmatched I'd say by any modern day app) were there, and so much more.

Basically, IMO, Symbian as much of a handheld computer as these new OS, and in fact better in multitasking, speed, smoothness etc at lower requirements (helped by its long development cycle and decade old roots of course), it's just that wasn't brought up to par on time when it came to the UI. And it didn't have as many apps.

So yeah, I do agree with the app factor, as apps are what people want on their smartphone, but Symbian was every bit a smartphone OS and as capable as these modern day OS. Which makes it even sadder that Nokia failed to react on time and we had to see such an awesome OS go, while we're now stuck with iOS and Windows Phone which barely let you do things the way you want (not that that's a bad thing for the majority of users), and Android, which does a lot, but runs on a crappy Java and Dalvik-based core that wants so much horsepower to run smooth and 3x RAM to have as many apps in the background as Symbian. (I love Android, I use it since it's the only real alternative to Symbian for me right now, I love some of its features, but I see its issues clearly unlike the fanboys).

But again, Symbian was as capable an OS as any other. Not just a phone.

PS: It's possible I may not have understood what you were actually trying to say and might have ranted unnecessarily. If I did, then I apologize.

Reply Parent Score: 1