7 ms·

"Consider the MicroTAC, one of Motorola’s first cell phones. It did not sell well." It was nothing to do with the MicroTAC being £3,000? No, it was the direct

"Consider the MicroTAC, one of Motorola’s first cell phones. It did not sell well." It was nothing to do with the MicroTAC being £3,000? No, it was the direction of the flip. Right. The later MicroTACs with LCD sold loads. At the time, most people seemed to prefer them to the early StarTAC.

eterm 10y ago
I noted that, also the 7 years between the two phones is disregarded completely, despite the large overall growth between 1989 and 1997.
creshal 10y ago
The StarTAC also came out seven years later. The market for $1000 mobile phones was a bit bigger in 1997 than the market for $3000 phones in 1989.
- masklinn 10y ago
  > The market for $1000 mobile phones was a bit bigger in 1997 than the market for $3000 phones in 1989. Not to mention adjusting for inflation the MicroTAC was 4 times the price of the StarTAC, not just 3. Clearly the shell direction is the one thing which made the StarTAC. Not SMS support, not being 25% the price and 25% the weight (assuming a slim-battery MicroTAC), not the vibrate mode, it was the flip opening up instead of down.
asimuvPR 10y ago
I have a friend who used the starTac until AT&T forced him into something else. He fought for months trying to keep his old phone working. He moved to an iPhone but says it doesn't compare.
- StavrosK 10y ago
  Plus you can keep the StarTAC in your bikini.
- GFischer 10y ago
  It's been several years since I moved to a touchscreen phone, and I still hate them for the "making calls and answering" workflow - I used to be able to make calls and answer without having to physically look at the phone - the StarTac's flick to open would be a good example of that. Of course, touchscreen phones make great computing devices, which makes their inadequacy as phones irrelevant.
  - marssaxman 10y ago
    Hmm, I actually find them to be pretty lousy computing devices, since it's so difficult to type on them. You can poke around and read email or news articles, and take or look at pictures, but actually doing anything with a touchscreen phone is... well, I generally don't spend more than a couple of minutes trying, because it rarely works and it's less frustrating to just wait until I have a real computer at hand. They have some decent hardware in there; shame it's so difficult to make it do anything interesting!
  - kej 10y ago
    I had a Samsung i760 [1] before iOS/Android took over, and it was the perfect combination of phone and smart device. When you needed a phone you could dial or answer without looking, but when you needed a smart device it did that, too. [1] http://i-cdn.phonearena.com/images/phones/9018-large/Samsung-SCH-i760-1z.jpg http://i-cdn.phonearena.com/images/phones/9018-large/Samsung...
  - loup-vaillant 10y ago
    If only we stopped calling them "phones"… They're palmtops after all.
    - floordaemon 10y ago
      I use a tiny disposable Tracfone and a new iPod Touch. Sure I could combine them in an iPhone, but I don't think they need to be tied together.
      - asimuvPR 10y ago
- Guildpact 10y ago
  The StarTac was a legend of a phone. It was good at calling, getting reception, volume, and quality. My dad held onto his for as long as possible before being forced to switch to a smart phone. Smart phones compensate for lower call quality and reception with their processors and apps, there is always going to be a tradeoff, to most it is worth it but if your business relies on a lot of phone calls and being able to take those calls wherever you are then having something like the StarTac is great.
  - bshimmin 10y ago
    I have had an iPhone since they came out in the UK in 2007, and I love being able to check my email and idly browse the web on it (I don't much care about apps, I'll be honest). But, to be honest, I quite miss my Nokia 3210 which had fantastic battery life, never dropped calls, got reception in places my iPhone never does, and never, ever spent ages trying to send an iMessage instead of an SMS when there's a really bad 3G or 2.5G signal (which frustrates me almost to the point of violence).
  - asimuvPR 10y ago
    True. My friend is a VP of some construction big-co and relies heavily on his phone. The StarTac would survive the most hostile environments without much issue. iPhones? Well, he has gone through about a dozen in spite of him using the expensive covers (otter).
    - trop 10y ago
      My StarTac did actually detach at the flip sometime in 2001. Still usable for months after, though. If I recall, there was just some sort of bus cable between the two pieces. I would have to hold them next to each other to make calls.
    - codemac 10y ago
      It is truly depressing how the idea of a SIM card holding storage as well (your contacts!) didn't get bigger. It'd be awesome if my sim card ( or something the size of the old simcards ) had as much storage as it could manage. With today's microSD densities, you can realistically hold everything and more than what's on your phone (though the storage medium itself is less resilient..). Then you go to work, pop it in your hardcore resilient phone. Go home, pop it in your tablet. This however empowers users almost exclusively, there isn't much advantage to a consortium of companies implementing this.

eterm 10y ago

I noted that, also the 7 years between the two phones is disregarded completely, despite the large overall growth between 1989 and 1997.

creshal 10y ago

The StarTAC also came out seven years later. The market for $1000 mobile phones was a bit bigger in 1997 than the market for $3000 phones in 1989.

masklinn 10y ago
> The market for $1000 mobile phones was a bit bigger in 1997 than the market for $3000 phones in 1989. Not to mention adjusting for inflation the MicroTAC was 4 times the price of the StarTAC, not just 3. Clearly the shell direction is the one thing which made the StarTAC. Not SMS support, not being 25% the price and 25% the weight (assuming a slim-battery MicroTAC), not the vibrate mode, it was the flip opening up instead of down.

asimuvPR 10y ago

I have a friend who used the starTac until AT&T forced him into something else. He fought for months trying to keep his old phone working. He moved to an iPhone but says it doesn't compare.

StavrosK 10y ago
Plus you can keep the StarTAC in your bikini.
GFischer 10y ago
It's been several years since I moved to a touchscreen phone, and I still hate them for the "making calls and answering" workflow - I used to be able to make calls and answer without having to physically look at the phone - the StarTac's flick to open would be a good example of that. Of course, touchscreen phones make great computing devices, which makes their inadequacy as phones irrelevant.
- marssaxman 10y ago
  Hmm, I actually find them to be pretty lousy computing devices, since it's so difficult to type on them. You can poke around and read email or news articles, and take or look at pictures, but actually doing anything with a touchscreen phone is... well, I generally don't spend more than a couple of minutes trying, because it rarely works and it's less frustrating to just wait until I have a real computer at hand. They have some decent hardware in there; shame it's so difficult to make it do anything interesting!
- kej 10y ago
  I had a Samsung i760 [1] before iOS/Android took over, and it was the perfect combination of phone and smart device. When you needed a phone you could dial or answer without looking, but when you needed a smart device it did that, too. [1] http://i-cdn.phonearena.com/images/phones/9018-large/Samsung-SCH-i760-1z.jpg http://i-cdn.phonearena.com/images/phones/9018-large/Samsung...
- loup-vaillant 10y ago
  If only we stopped calling them "phones"… They're palmtops after all.
  - floordaemon 10y ago
    I use a tiny disposable Tracfone and a new iPod Touch. Sure I could combine them in an iPhone, but I don't think they need to be tied together.
    - asimuvPR 10y ago
Guildpact 10y ago
The StarTac was a legend of a phone. It was good at calling, getting reception, volume, and quality. My dad held onto his for as long as possible before being forced to switch to a smart phone. Smart phones compensate for lower call quality and reception with their processors and apps, there is always going to be a tradeoff, to most it is worth it but if your business relies on a lot of phone calls and being able to take those calls wherever you are then having something like the StarTac is great.
- bshimmin 10y ago
  I have had an iPhone since they came out in the UK in 2007, and I love being able to check my email and idly browse the web on it (I don't much care about apps, I'll be honest). But, to be honest, I quite miss my Nokia 3210 which had fantastic battery life, never dropped calls, got reception in places my iPhone never does, and never, ever spent ages trying to send an iMessage instead of an SMS when there's a really bad 3G or 2.5G signal (which frustrates me almost to the point of violence).
- asimuvPR 10y ago
  True. My friend is a VP of some construction big-co and relies heavily on his phone. The StarTac would survive the most hostile environments without much issue. iPhones? Well, he has gone through about a dozen in spite of him using the expensive covers (otter).
  - trop 10y ago
    My StarTac did actually detach at the flip sometime in 2001. Still usable for months after, though. If I recall, there was just some sort of bus cable between the two pieces. I would have to hold them next to each other to make calls.
  - codemac 10y ago
    It is truly depressing how the idea of a SIM card holding storage as well (your contacts!) didn't get bigger. It'd be awesome if my sim card ( or something the size of the old simcards ) had as much storage as it could manage. With today's microSD densities, you can realistically hold everything and more than what's on your phone (though the storage medium itself is less resilient..). Then you go to work, pop it in your hardcore resilient phone. Go home, pop it in your tablet. This however empowers users almost exclusively, there isn't much advantage to a consortium of companies implementing this.