www.engadget.com/2009/12/14/xperia-pureness-availa...
I hope Sony Ericson as a division finds itself worse off than Palm and Motorola once were...
Discussion about
This Phone is Officially a Joke
that's a different phone, that's the Xperia Pureness, not the Xperia X10. That phone has been questionable since day 1.
well said
i have no choice but to agree with my buddy steveo, this shit is DOA
i have no choice but to agree with my buddy steveo, this shit is DOA
LMAO, HEY!!! Good to see you join the convo & kicking this well overpriced can down the road. Cant believe I ever took interest in this thing. See you in the Nexus One forums (as opposed to the Motorola StarTAC forums, lmao)?
crap. my bad. wow. $900 for THAT?! i'd hate to see what the x10 is priced at. this cant be good...
let's hope not, I would hate it too if it were priced too high, then again, I'm not with AT&T and if they are saying this is for that carrier, then this would save me that much money.
No, it's not a problem. The Pureness is a premium phone for people who usually have other people to do things which require mobiles for poor (and we're talking relatively) people - like the iPhone, Blackberries, etc.
A more 'regular joe' unit like the X10 won't be priced at $900 - at least, not on contract.
I can fully understand why the engadget crowd don't get it - but e.g. very few of my clients carry a phone because someone else with them is carrying one always - and if they do, it's usually a pretty basic one in terms of features. Anyone remember the titanium Nokias? They were a big hit among these guys because it did everything they actually needed, was small and looked great. The Pureness slides into that market - and although the market is small, it's definitely there.
Fact is, some people are too smart for smartphones.
A more 'regular joe' unit like the X10 won't be priced at $900 - at least, not on contract.
I can fully understand why the engadget crowd don't get it - but e.g. very few of my clients carry a phone because someone else with them is carrying one always - and if they do, it's usually a pretty basic one in terms of features. Anyone remember the titanium Nokias? They were a big hit among these guys because it did everything they actually needed, was small and looked great. The Pureness slides into that market - and although the market is small, it's definitely there.
Fact is, some people are too smart for smartphones.
Bruce Sterling talks about this very thing (at least sort of!):
themedium.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/17/let-them-ea...'
Bruce Sterling, the cyberpunk writer, proposed at the South by Southwest tech conference in Austin that the clearest symbol of poverty is dependence on “connections” like the Internet, Skype and texting. “Poor folk love their cellphones!” he said.
In his speech, Sterling seemed to affect Nietzschean disdain for regular people. If the goal was to provoke, it worked. To a crowd that typically prefers onward-and-upward news about technology, Sterling’s was a sadistically successful rhetorical strategy. “Poor folk love their cellphones!” had the ring of one of those haughty but unforgettable expressions of condescension, like the Middle Eastern gem “The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.”
“Connectivity is poverty” was how a friend of mine summarized Sterling’s bold theme. Only the poor — defined broadly as those without better options — are obsessed with their connections. Anyone with a strong soul or a fat wallet turns his ringer off for good and cultivates private gardens that keep the hectic Web far away. The man of leisure, Sterling suggested, savors solitude, or intimacy with friends, presumably surrounded by books and film and paintings and wine and vinyl — original things that stay where they are and cannot be copied and corrupted and shot around the globe with a few clicks of a keyboard.
themedium.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/17/let-them-ea...'
Bruce Sterling, the cyberpunk writer, proposed at the South by Southwest tech conference in Austin that the clearest symbol of poverty is dependence on “connections” like the Internet, Skype and texting. “Poor folk love their cellphones!” he said.
In his speech, Sterling seemed to affect Nietzschean disdain for regular people. If the goal was to provoke, it worked. To a crowd that typically prefers onward-and-upward news about technology, Sterling’s was a sadistically successful rhetorical strategy. “Poor folk love their cellphones!” had the ring of one of those haughty but unforgettable expressions of condescension, like the Middle Eastern gem “The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.”
“Connectivity is poverty” was how a friend of mine summarized Sterling’s bold theme. Only the poor — defined broadly as those without better options — are obsessed with their connections. Anyone with a strong soul or a fat wallet turns his ringer off for good and cultivates private gardens that keep the hectic Web far away. The man of leisure, Sterling suggested, savors solitude, or intimacy with friends, presumably surrounded by books and film and paintings and wine and vinyl — original things that stay where they are and cannot be copied and corrupted and shot around the globe with a few clicks of a keyboard.
If I understand correctly, the generalization is that poor people cling to connectivity because they have no one else do their bidding.
I think the counter argument can be made with examples like Steve Wozniak. The guy sure as hell hasn't missed a meal and he carries two iPhones!
Personally, I feel that those who feel this way have lost touch with what matters. They have placed themselves above everyone else and use their wealth as way to justify the belief that everyone who carries a cellphone and uses it to keep "connected" is of a lower social class.
This is, of course, if I understand correctly.
I think the counter argument can be made with examples like Steve Wozniak. The guy sure as hell hasn't missed a meal and he carries two iPhones!
Personally, I feel that those who feel this way have lost touch with what matters. They have placed themselves above everyone else and use their wealth as way to justify the belief that everyone who carries a cellphone and uses it to keep "connected" is of a lower social class.
This is, of course, if I understand correctly.
No, you didn't. That you pick the Woz as an example kind of demonstrates that.
It's not about who they have to do their bidding. It's about filtering crap that doesn't ultimately matter. I wish I had that luxury.
It's not about who they have to do their bidding. It's about filtering crap that doesn't ultimately matter. I wish I had that luxury.
at least its under a $900 right?
androidandme.com/2009/11/phones/yikes-sony-ericsso...
well, you've got to hand it to Sony... they're dumb as rocks... wait... i guess that really wasn't a compliment, was it? well if anyone needs me, i'll be over at the Nexus One discussion pages. That phone is rumored to sell at $200, and is far more feature rich overall.
(although i guess i'll miss the "concierge" service that comes w/ the pureness... sad...)
androidandme.com/2009/11/phones/yikes-sony-ericsso...
well, you've got to hand it to Sony... they're dumb as rocks... wait... i guess that really wasn't a compliment, was it? well if anyone needs me, i'll be over at the Nexus One discussion pages. That phone is rumored to sell at $200, and is far more feature rich overall.
(although i guess i'll miss the "concierge" service that comes w/ the pureness... sad...)
Well its $530 which I believe is a good chunk less then £530. They might be the same with contract but pound for pound the nexus One has more specs then the SE I believe so for it to be cheaper is actually shocking. But Sony does have a habit of adding its own tax to devices.
Not to be a devil's advocate but how much are these smart phones (in general) compare to when a carrier decides to sell them with contract?
If this item is still at $299 or higher when a carrier sells then with a contract, well this phone really is just trying to be priced just like every Sony gadgets out there and they'd fail again once more.
If this item is still at $299 or higher when a carrier sells then with a contract, well this phone really is just trying to be priced just like every Sony gadgets out there and they'd fail again once more.
