Nokia Asha 310 hands-on

3. hepresearch (unregistered)

At this point, it is not a matter of function. It is true that this phone will do many things that, say, an S60 Symbian smartphone could do in 2005; however, S40 is still nothing more than just a UI running on top of nothing but Java... thus, it has everything in common with a feature or basic phone over the last decade or more, as far as the actual OS goes. It is powerful for a feature phone, almost as powerful or equally as powerful as BREW MP, depending on your viewpoint, but it can never be a 'smartphone' by definition.

... sort of in the same way that HSPA+ is not really '4G', even though some people call it that... it isn't bad at all, but please... let's at least be honest. This idea that everything must find a way to be called a 'smartphone' just in order to sell at all is ridiculous!

4. the_best (Posts: 139; Member since: 14 Oct 2012)

thanks i did not know that.
But i dont entierly agree with with your views on the brand of smartphone, even though there are other things people value when buying their phones. Brands like smartphone, 3g or 4g are taken for granted, and so when people say they dont have that or it isnt that, even when it works in the same way, the product looses a lot of value for the average consumer. An exelent example right now is the new HTC camera with 4 mp, that will take a lot of convincing, even if the techguys says its as good or even better than other cameraphones.

For a techguy working with the device its world apart from the real thing i guess, but for a regular consumer whos just using it, its a smartphone.