While Nokia has been playing the numbers game with its naming protocol, unveiling a new labelling system today, it has also found time to bring out a new smartphone to sit smack bang in the middle of it all. The Nokia 500 packs a 1GHz ARM11 chip, which according to IntoMobile, is basically the equivalent of 400MHz on something …
I'm in the market for a new phone. I wouldn't mind a good new Nokia phone. All they have to do is, y'know, make one.
according to some earlier benchmarks I cannot find right now, ARM11 is at cca 60% of Cortex based chip with similar rating (megahertz).
It means 1GHz CPU used by Nokia should be similar to 600MHz CPU used in Nokia N800 or iPhone 3GS (it's working clockspeed in those devices, not maximum possible).
The problem is Nokia 500 does not include GPU, multimedia features of ARM11 are worse than those of Cortex and ARM11 uses older manufacturing methods (it means chip size a energy requirements of the ARM11 chip are not (much?) better than those of Cortex chip, despite ARM11 is more simple).
@hyartep : arm11
"ARM11 uses older manufacturing methods (it means chip size a energy requirements of the ARM11 chip are not (much?) better than those of Cortex chip, despite ARM11 is more simple)."
ARM cores are IP, not chips, so while the manufacturing process used for this particular SoC may be older (I haven't seen that information anywhere yet myself, so I just don't know) - that doesn't stop Qualcomm, Samsung, Freescale or whoever from qualifying the layout on a smaller, or more efficient, process.
So as well as destroying their current Market they want to scatter the remains by ensuring that no consumer can place the new device in relation to the rest.
Well done Nokia, well done. They should just drag you out the to the yard and shoot your decrepit shambling corpse.
"ensuring that no consumer can place the new device in relation to the rest"?
I'm not sure why you think that's a problem -- why do you need to know where to "place" a device? Surely you walk into a shop, check out the specifications and how the device looks, then buy the device you like the look of that has the right stuff written next to it? Does it matter that the phone you bought is supposed to be consumer, multimedia or business or supposed to be top, middle or bottom of the range? How does that change its suitability for _you_ as an individual?
As an example, lots of teenagers seem to like Blackberrys, which are a "business device", and many people use their iPhone for corporate email and doing things like remoting servers, yet the iPhone is a "consumer device".
the product number is nothing more or less than an identifier to use when comparing phones or asking for support -- it doesn't need to tell you what the manufacturer thought the device would be used for.
You have a point but A lot of people choose their handsets by looking for the revamp of their previous model. Hence manufactures tend to keep or recycle a winning name. Eg I want the newer version of the e72 oh look its the e73. Galaxy S oh look galaxy S II.
Market cap less short terms is only $6B
At a market cap of USD $20B and with short term investments of $14B, Nokia should now be considered In Play for a leveraged buyout. The parts are worth more than the whole.
Nokia: Good hardware, OK OS, no apps
Thing is, if you want a mid-range smartphone phone that has a good camera, good audio for music, good signal reception and an adequate web browser you'd have to go with Nokia. If you are happy to overlook a little sluggishness and don't care about apps, you'd have to pay an extra £100 to £200 to get an equivalent Android or Apple handset to Nokia devices.
No GPU, fail
Why bother releasing a Symbian phone without a GPU?
I've used the Nokia X6 with Symbian and it was awful compared to any other touchscreen phone out there now.
Firstly it was slow due to an old CPU, secondly, the touch couldn't make up it's mind if it wanted double tap or single tap, then the menus and screens would take a long time to update and movement was jagged.
Android is the new Symbian
Rob Moss FAIL?
"Why bother releasing a Symbian phone without a GPU?"
Because a GPU is not needed if the intention is not to use the phone as a gaming device.
"I've used the Nokia X6 with Symbian and it was awful compared to any other touchscreen phone out there now."
Right, so what? FYI: the X6 is OLD, it is from 2009 which is *antique* by todays standards, and the Symbian S60 it runs has very little in common with the modern Symbian^3 Anna which runs on the Nokia 500. If you're really surprised when a 2 year old entry-level smartphone can't keep up with the latest Andoid smart phones then you should get your head examined.
Now, if you look at more modern offerings from Nokia like the N8 or the C7, the situation is different. They hold up quite well against similarly priced Andoid phones, and while they may lack the high number of fart apps that are available for Android, they come with global offline navigation as standard, don't track your whereabouts for their manufacturer, and unlike other smartphones can sustain several days with a single battery charge and provide great call quality. Go figure.
Differentiation doesn't really matter any more
One might come preloaded with social networking apps, another might have inbuilt Exchange support, but if you're missing anything you can download it from the app store.
The only real differentiation these days is the kind of input it's got, how many megapixels the camera's got, does it have GPS, does it have wifi, and does it have TV out, all of which can be progressively charged more for.
So in a sense this is good news, Nokia are actually taking notice of the market.
Isn't Symbian dead now?
They must surely be including a GPU, previous Nokia phones running ARM11 processors have had a GPU - why would they turn around and decide not to give one to this phone?
For £150 it's abit of a bargain really, I wonder if people will run with it as enthusiastically as with the N-900?
- DAYS from end of life as we know it: Boffins tell of solar storm near-miss
- Put down that Oracle database patch: It could cost $23,000 per CPU
- Bose says today IS F*** With Dre Day: Beats sued in patent battle
- The END of the FONDLESLAB KINGS? Apple and Samsung have reason to FEAR
- Review Porsche Panamera S E-Hybrid: The plug-in for plutocrats