Letters to the Editor
-
Different strokes for different folks
That actually looks interesting. The iPhone looks like a beautiful piece of design that I'm looking forward to seeing, but I probably won't be spending money on it anytime soon for exactly this reason: I use a cel phone to make phonecalls, and nothing else. It annoys me that every few years when I buy a new phone I have to pay, even on the low end models, for a dozen features I'll never use ... I actually had to go out of my way last time to find a phone that didn't have a camera in it.
It's nice to see that with the iPhone and the Jitterbug, we're perhaps starting a new era of figuring out what different types of cel phone customers want, rather than what features service providers can jam-pack into them. Up until now it's felt like cel phone design has only been targeting teenagers and young executives who want to constantly snap pictures, update their blogs, and send text messages to each other and don't give a crap about interface design.
I'm curious, though, if the Jitterbug has a built-in phone book. That is one feature I couldn't do without ... I can't remember everyone's phone numbers when I'm on the road. :)
-
False Dichotomy
Although iPhone and the Jitterbug are both cellular telephones, they are otherwise completely different devices with different aims. The Jitterbug makes phone calls and it probably does this quite well, but it lacks a wealth of features that can be useful with good design. The iPhone is an unknown, so it's very difficult to make comments regarding it's complexity or it's design unless you've actually used one; let us note that very few people actually have. So, it seems unfair to compare the two in a straight comparison. Both devices have considerably different aims.
Furthermore, the layers of abstraction and menus that daunt so many is the consequence of poor design and not just the addition of cameras and texting. I expect that the iPhone will be thoughtfully designed with small and subtle touches to make the device more useful. We shouldn't base our definition of good technology on whether grandpa can use it, rather we should base technology on how well it works, or fails.
-
And I got a basic phone for nearly free! So there!
What irritates me in tech columns is the same stuff I find in movie review magazines. They are all hot to sell you The Latest Thing. There's no historical perspective, no thinking outside the box, no genuine critical judgment at work. Now, I'm not accusing Mr. Manjoo of being a media whore, but let's be honest; most things offered in tech columns are enticements for you to spend more of your money on crap you don't need.
Cheap is what we want, indeed. My current cell phone - my only cell phone - is a heavy old antique Nokia 5100-series sold by Tracfone. I don't yap continually on cell phones, since I have a nice landline and answering machine at home. I don't need an electronic leash where my bosses and everyone else can interrupt my days off and jerk at my life. I do need to make occasional remote calls; there's no other way to get around a strange city and meet up with friends at a convention. And on at least three occasions it saved my life when my car broke down.
I paid...nothing for the phone. It came to me free, a reconditioned phone free with a year's access to the network and 400 minutes for about $100. I spent a little on extra batteries and a car charger. It doesn't text message, send e-mail, access the net or provide me porn videos. It makes calls, answers calls and has voice mail. And it isn't the latest redesign by some pretentious designer, charging an arm and a leg ($130 plus network costs) for "style."
Both the Jitterbug and the iPhone are simply schemes to get you to pay - again - for services you can get elsewhere, better, cheaper. You really think you can browse a web site with a three-inch screen? Better to dig out your laptop and see it in a near-human size. No camera phone takes pictures as good as a genuine camera. And since you undoubtedly already own those devices, your purchase of The Latest Things are waste, and continuing support of a bloated, fashion-fascist-driven economy.
-
First off it's the customer service model that's supposed to be different
Jitterbug is supposed to be built around the idea, probably alien to most of you, that if you have a question or problem, you call, some human being picks up and then they help you.
Secondly - I am the probably the only middle aged person w/o a Blackberry who is a heavy SMS user for work and personal. The point is that at best most people don't use most of the features on their phones to begin with. Initially they start out using all of them but soon stop. I've never met anyone who watches TV on their phone, and they have to pay to get it. Or ignore it as it were. Most people don't have picture mail and so use it sparingly since ad hoc use is very expensive. The quality of the phone MP3 players is weak, and the storage is light. At best you can get a 2GB microSD card and the codecs are not well made. Voice dialing? Nope - too arduous to program. Browsing w/o 3G? forget it it's torture. And I would guess that 98% of all the connection software out there either doesn't actually exist or doesn't actually work. The Samsung A900M (no longer made) has good blue tooth which works in conjunction with bt headphones and an iPod to autoanswer the phone. That's a nice one but it's largely unrelated to the phone.
I have a Moto Q that I like because it mimics my PC office productivity software. And it's a phone. And I can type the hell out of it. Camera? Bleh. Only in a pinch.
In fact I can't really think of any new functions they could cram into a phone and make me want it. Better 3G bandwidth EVDO like the Cingular 8525 (HTC Hermes) would be great if the carrier didn't massage your prostate on the costs. And 802.11g would be ok although it seems overkill with Bluetooth.
But none of these things address the near-Gitmo customer service you get from the carriers which is something Jitterbug was intended to address. Will it? Don't know, hope so.