Motorola Razr V3 Cellphone: The trend-setter that shouldn't have existed • Hacker News Board

Re: Motorola Razr V3 Cellphone: The trend-setter that shouldn't have existed

#101

Post by swimfar » Sun, Sep 23, 2018, 1:58 PM UTC

Xunxi wrote: post #43

swimfar wrote: post #17

I just bought one a few months ago when my 13 year old Nokia died. I actually dislike the phone quite a bit and prefer my old Nokia. I have to charge the Razr about every other day, even if I haven't used it for calls. It takes too many button presses to do anything. It isn't very responsive (it takes about 4 seconds for each text deletion). If I receive a missed call or text the phone will vibrate every 5 minutes un…

Nokia has revamped its classic phones https://www.nokia.com/en_int/phones/classic-phones

Nokia was bought by a Chinese company who now produces the phones. In addition to having no reputation (good or bad) of quality at this point, the company seems to have remote access to modify the OS and apps installed.

Re: Motorola Razr V3 Cellphone: The trend-setter that shouldn't have existed

#102

Post by cesarb » Sun, Sep 23, 2018, 1:59 PM UTC

rb808 wrote: post #85

As an aside & question - I hate this slim, light goal. What I want is a thick phone with a battery that can stand heavy use for at least 24 hours (preferably changeable), and doesn't really need a case. To me it doesn't make sense to see this obsession with tiny phones that most people put cases on. To be fair, the Razr 3 had good battery life and couldn't have a case, but in this world: Anyone have suggestions?

An interesting option is the Moto Z line with one of its external power pack accessories (in particular the Moto Z Play, which of the Moto Z line is the heaviest and the one with the biggest internal battery). The internal battery is not changeable, but the external power pack feels a lot like a changeable battery.

(Disclaimer: I have one, as do several of my friends and coworkers.)

Re: Motorola Razr V3 Cellphone: The trend-setter that shouldn't have existed

#103

Post by swimfar » Sun, Sep 23, 2018, 2:00 PM UTC

usaphp wrote: post #30

swimfar wrote: post #17

I just bought one a few months ago when my 13 year old Nokia died. I actually dislike the phone quite a bit and prefer my old Nokia. I have to charge the Razr about every other day, even if I haven't used it for calls. It takes too many button presses to do anything. It isn't very responsive (it takes about 4 seconds for each text deletion). If I receive a missed call or text the phone will vibrate every 5 minutes un…

Did you lose a bet or something? I can understand carrying a dumb phone that you like, but using a dumb phone that you absolutely hate? With so many options available...

Obviously I didn't know about about all this before I bought the phone. On paper it seemed like it would be a nice upgrade. I don't send 100's of texts, so I haven't been bothered to look for a different one.

Re: Motorola Razr V3 Cellphone: The trend-setter that shouldn't have existed

#104

Post by avcdsuia » Sun, Sep 23, 2018, 2:18 PM UTC

stirlo wrote: post #58

eitland wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saw something that probably was an iPod the other day. For a few seconds I thought it was a new iPhone (can't remember seeing an iPod in years). I want a phone in that size: - Small. - With touchscreen, - With a browser - With downloadable or even uploadable apps (basic ones like maps and messaging clients would be enough, don't need games or 3d, just don't want to rely on my operator or the manufacturer to create a…

So an iPhone SE? Or an Apple Watch with Cellular? There’s an impossible trade off between being “small” as in credit card sized and having a usable browser.

Anyone here uses Apple Watches as new gen pagers? Do you get a whole day LTE standby time with some useless stuff disabled?

Re: Motorola Razr V3 Cellphone: The trend-setter that shouldn't have existed

#105

Post by IkmoIkmo » Sun, Sep 23, 2018, 2:25 PM UTC

ksec wrote: post #71

In 2003, industry best selling and flagship Razr cost $500 In 2018, Apple's flagship iPhone cost ( starts ) $999. I still don't know what to make of those "numbers". A lot fo jobs outside of Tech Sector had lower salary now in real terms than in 2003, and housing price are many times of those in 2003.

I'm not sure the comparison is that significant. We tend to omit two aspects when we deride price changes:

One is just inflation. No need to explain that. In 15 years at 3% annual inflation rates, the $500 becomes $780.

Second is that the product has changed, massively. The better comparison is to a flagship phone-only, which is $30. Or to compare the iPhone to a range of products, e.g. a phone, but also a television, a videocamera, photocamera, pocket-microphone, GPS tracker, mp3 player, navigation system, fitness tracker, and some kind of pocket computer that lets you browse the internet, read news, take notes etc. It's quite remarkably different from a phone, and we sort of have to thank Apple for this 'issue' in them calling it the iPhone and getting smartphones as a permanent product category. When really it's a computer first, phone second. Try selling an iPhone that can't do anything but make calls, then try selling an iPhone that has its call function disabled, the latter would outsell the former by a large margin.

Re: Motorola Razr V3 Cellphone: The trend-setter that shouldn't have existed

#106

Post by buckminster » Sun, Sep 23, 2018, 2:25 PM UTC

ctdonath wrote: post #95

usrusr wrote: post #75

"The RAZR was the first phone to recognize that cellphones [...] were on the tipping point to becoming fashion accessories" Meanwhile, Siemens bet (and lost) a whole sub-brand of absurd design experiments on the idea of phones becoming fashion accessories. Xelibri had all the boldness and cluelessness of a teenager getting killed climbing up a power line pole to impress the girls. Xelibri were truly "phones that shou…

Don't forget the monumental flop of the Microsoft Kin. $500,000,000 on development, only 500 sold.

So you could get a million dollars worth of phone for a few hundred. Bargain!

Re: Motorola Razr V3 Cellphone: The trend-setter that shouldn't have existed

#107

Post by SomeHacker44 » Sun, Sep 23, 2018, 2:42 PM UTC

I had a series if RAZRs before Palm based phones were a thing. I did enjoy them greatly and carried them on a belt holster that was more convenient in my mind than the pocket that now houses my modern phone.

Despite the article’s claim of how revolutionary this phone was, it always felt like an evolution of the Motorola StarTAC to me. I purchased the first one of these, it must have been 1997-1998, and I recall paying $1,200. It had literally unlimited battery life because it had two separate batteries, one on each half of the clamshell, and you could hot swap them while on a call. Various sizes were available. They could be charged faster than they ran out and I carried a spare or few with me.

Granted it had just a (I do not recall now) one or two line dot matrix display and a limited feature set (there was messaging but I do think it predated SMS). But to me that StarTAC was the innovative phone and not this RAZR.

I love how dynamic and interesting the cell phone hardware industry used to be. Now every phone announcement usually elicits boredom from me. Of course, the same could be said of computer hardware in the 80s and 90s, and CPU architectures, etc. The world has seemed to converge on one or at most a few designs of most things hardware and real innovation seems to come at a much slower pace.

Re: Motorola Razr V3 Cellphone: The trend-setter that shouldn't have existed

#108

Post by Const-me » Sun, Sep 23, 2018, 3:37 PM UTC

peterburkimsher wrote: post #87

eitland wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saw something that probably was an iPod the other day. For a few seconds I thought it was a new iPhone (can't remember seeing an iPod in years). I want a phone in that size: - Small. - With touchscreen, - With a browser - With downloadable or even uploadable apps (basic ones like maps and messaging clients would be enough, don't need games or 3d, just don't want to rely on my operator or the manufacturer to create a…

I have an iPod and iPhone 4S as my main devices. The iPod has excellent battery life, and I've upgraded it with an iFlash SD adaptor. The iPhone 4S has a small screen, and removable battery on a Third Rail case. I had a quick look last week after the iPhone SE was discontinued. The highest small-screen (3.5") resolution is the iPhone 4 display (960x640). It's even higher than newer phones, according to dpi.lv. The be…

> I couldn't find anybody manufacturing high-res small size touchscreens.

RPi only supports 2 lanes of MIPI DSI interface, iPhone 4 screens (that are still manufactured and offered for $5-15 on aliexpress) use 4 lanes precisely because they are higher resolution.

Re: Motorola Razr V3 Cellphone: The trend-setter that shouldn't have existed

#109

Post by Zak » Sun, Sep 23, 2018, 3:59 PM UTC

matwood wrote: post #94

megablast wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, but the new iPhone has a huge screen, great browser, email, 64gb ram, > a million apps, 40x the radio bands, 30x the resolution, 3x the battery, 100x the speed, video, and more.

Not only that, but it has replaced other devices. The modern flagship cell phone is a great value when you realized it replaces the digital P&S camera, the video recorder, the music player, and for some uses the computer.

Some more (sometimes incompletely): GPS devices, scanners, portable video players, E-readers, paper books, magazines, and newspapers, credit cards, voice recorders, business cards, portable video game systems.

Of course, a brand new flagship isn't necessary to perform all these functions. The 2016 model Sony I bought used for $200 in 2017 is capable of doing all these things. It even has removable storage, a headphone jack, and a dedicated camera button (all lacking on most flagships). Flagships are luxury items or fashion accessories, and they're still a good value relative to other luxury items.

Re: Motorola Razr V3 Cellphone: The trend-setter that shouldn't have existed

#110

Post by abandonliberty » Sun, Sep 23, 2018, 4:09 PM UTC

rb808 wrote: post #85

As an aside & question - I hate this slim, light goal. What I want is a thick phone with a battery that can stand heavy use for at least 24 hours (preferably changeable), and doesn't really need a case. To me it doesn't make sense to see this obsession with tiny phones that most people put cases on. To be fair, the Razr 3 had good battery life and couldn't have a case, but in this world: Anyone have suggestions?

Just get a good case. Unfortunately most rugged phones are behind on the hardware side.

Sonim has some pretty cool devices even engineered to work with gloves. Or you can go with a samsung active model.