4 ms·

It did not get a very good review from Engadget: http://www.engadget.com/2010/12/06/johns-phone-review-the-worlds-simplest-cellphone/ http://www.engadget.com/2

• jacobolus 16y ago
  Seems like an okay review to me, if the purpose in buying the phone is to get something that can make phone calls: > So, how did it work? Well, to make and receive calls it worked fine. The ringer was suitably loud and the vibration was strong enough to get noticed in a pocket. The audio quality during calls was also decent -- not spectacular but not awful either.
  • timrobinson 16y ago
    "Both these switches deserve a special place in Gadget Hell for the very worst in industrial design. Not only do they require a fingernail to operate, they also don't work most of the time." Even if the only thing you want to do with your phone is make phone calls, you still need to: 1. Turn the phone on when you want to make a call 2. Turn the phone off, or lock it, when you don't want to make any more calls
  • scott_s 16y ago
    I think you skipped the conclusion: So is the John's Phone "The world's simplest cellphone." No. The fact that all three of the device's switches are so frustrating to use is simply unforgivable on such a basic cellphone that's supposedly rooted in "great design." We wish that the company had spent as much time on the phone's industrial design as it did on its slick promotional materials and cutesy graphics. Even then, you'd better be sure that the simplicity is worth the €70 - €100 price tag (depending upon model) -- for that you could take home a fully-loaded 3G featurephone from Nokia. A nod, perhaps, as to why the John's Phone exists.