4 ms·
The resemblance isn't as big as the previous remakes IMO. Especially because they didn't bother to make a metallic grey/silver or grey/gold colour option like t
by GekkePrutser 5y ago
The resemblance isn't as big as the previous remakes IMO. Especially because they didn't bother to make a metallic grey/silver or grey/gold colour option like the original! Edit: Ok the black one comes kinda close to the original 'dark' model but even the black/grey was metallic on the orginal.
It's kinda funny that it has only dualband GSM, making it pretty useless in most countries now that 2G is being decommissioned. For comparison, the original 6310 was tri-band! So the original was actually better, after exactly 20 years no less. Even some of the other specs are literally the same! 16MB RAM, 8MB storage. Yes, MB. In 2021. Really.
And 0.3mpx.. That's 640x480. It's the same as my Kodak digital camera from 1999. Lol. They're really going for retro this time. I thought the idea was to have the same design with more modern specs. Not to have 20 year old specs except with a colour screen and a "camera".
Even with those 0.3mpx you can take about 10 photos before the 8MB storage is full. Wow. Like, how much does 8 GB flash cost these days? Cents??
I really don't understand what market they are aiming this thing at. The "I just make calls and text" crowd won't have a use for a camera, even a crap one. They'd often not want a camera at all (In some cases those are not permitted at work!). The rich retro crowd can't use a 2G phone in most countries. Customers in poor countries won't care if it's retro because if this is all they can afford now, they certainly didn't own a 6310 20 years ago, that was pretty much a 'flagship' phone in those days.
I really wonder whether it was even worth the trouble of designing it.
- scyzoryk_xyz 5y agoIt’s pretty clear the aim here is people who read papers with glasses and listen to FM Radio. Designing it most likely was a minuscule cost for a company like Nokia. More of a marketing move really.