Mobile-na Nokia
More of a response to a post by B a l a j i than anything else…
Granted, you should judge a mobile more by it’s features than anything else, but given that lots of people are careless, an accidental drop could cause your phone to go bust…
I don’t say other phones are worthless in this regard - I did drop my Samsung C-100 quite a few times without anything happening to it - but, from personal experience and the words of friends, I can safely say that most Nokia’s are nearly indestructible.
Deviating from the topic at hand, my personal preference is for Nokia mobiles for more than one reason.
- The first reason is the solid design. From the rock solid 3315 (my first mobile), to the 6681 (my current mobile), I’ve not faced any hurdles when my phone has dropped from a height of about 4 feet. All that I’ve faced were a few scratches, which weren’t much anyway…
- The second, and probably more valid one (for B a l a j i anyway) is the user friendliness of the set. Of all the sets that I’ve seen (Sony Ericsson, Samsung, Motorola, Nokia), Nokia stands out as the easiest to use. For example, I’ve not had any trouble finding the Bluetooth control panel in Nokia. The same is a different matter in the Motorola Razr and Sony Ericcson W550i phones though…
October 20th, 2006 at 9:32 am
Thanks for linking me….
As far as the user-friendliness aspect is concerned… i think its more of a mental block that ppl towards other mobiles.
Each phones have their own interface and it hardly takes a couple of days to get used to….
I myself had Nokia 2100, which I used to play with in the absence of a ball…. It took me only a couple of days to get used to my W550…. And now I fumble a lot with Nokia mobiles and feel that the interface is not as good as Sony Ericsson….
In short… user friendliness is within us
November 1st, 2006 at 11:24 am
Hi Nirenjan,
You said that “u have dropped your SAMSUNG C-100 couple of times and nothing happened” makes me to envy on you as my first mobile SAMSUNG C -100 dropped first time after 15 days of buying damaged the LCD part .
As the model was very new to the market ( nov 2003) and graphics colour display beiing the main feature of the mobile,i couldnt find an alternative display and was forced to use it for only talking.
NOKIA stands out for casing and its rigitness comparing to its competes.
Balaji is right wrt user friendlyness of mobile . u will get used to any mobile if u hld it for alteast a day.
November 1st, 2006 at 5:30 pm
Hi!.
I’m thinking about dropping TracFone and going with T-Mobile. I’m
looking at a Nokia 6101 for my Grandpa. My only problem is that my
Grandpa is a little hard of hearing and can’t hear some of the ring
tones that are on some cell phones. He had a Nokia 5180ip and couldn’t
hear it half the time.
I got him a Nokia 1100, it was a little better but not much. I then
got him a Nokia 2600 and there was one ringtone on it that was pretty
good for him and he could hear it pretty well. Forget the vibrate
function. They all suck equally in all cell phones.
Does anybody know if the Nokia 6101 is as loud as the Nokia 2600? Or
can the ring tone be put through the speakerphone on the Nokia 6101 to
be really loud like the Nextel junk?
I need something really loud for him. The 6101 has all the bells and
whistles he wants. He’s not really old, just can’t hear crap.
He’s pretty well set on the 6101
Any help will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks
November 7th, 2006 at 4:26 pm
I most defenitely agree with you on the Nokia phones being indestructible part. My friend had my Nokia NGage QD phone in his pocket when riding a motorbike. It slipped and crashed into the ground, when the bike was moving at 80 KM per hour. But for a few big scratches and dents to the casing, it still works the way it was before.