Comments on: 3 technological advancements that are somewhat still useless

By: Knockout Prices

Knockout Prices — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 13:22:28 +0000

I think faster cars are useful as in they give people something to aim for and also it makes many people happy. Fancy watches, why not? If people want to express themselves and be crazy let them be?

Automatic Customer Service, well I think they should be fed to the dogs.

By: Gadget Mania

Gadget Mania — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 07:46:28 +0000

I agree with the all the points. I really don’t see how they help in a bigger and better way. This is the problem with people they do not how to prioritize things.

I am sure there will be many who will not agree with you and I think that shows how right you are.

By: Bes

Bes — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 03:47:36 +0000

That sounds cool. I went about searching for some pictures of the phone after you mentioned it, and I must say, it looks quite nice. 2 weeks charge time and 7 hours talk time is awesome. I like phones which have better address management system, and having multiple numbers for each contact is nice.

Too bad it wasn’t a hit among those who want cameras, microwave ovens and swiss knives in their cell phones.

By: John Diffenthal

John Diffenthal — Thu, 25 Jan 2007 22:41:13 +0000

Actually they did manufacture a phone like that, they just don’t make it any more. It was the Nokia 6310i and I liked the design and functionality so much that I owned 2, both of which I kept much longer than I should have done.

It was the perfect business phone.

It would hold a charge for 2 weeks and it had about 7 hours talk time. IR, Bluetooth, long battery life, tri-band and a really clever contact system allowing multiple contact numbers for the same person (much better than my current Motorola which makes each separate contact number a separate contact line in the address book).

As a phone for people who weren’t sure that they wanted a phone it was a complete failure – no camera, no video capture, no MP3 player.

By: Bes

Bes — Thu, 25 Jan 2007 21:58:27 +0000

That’s a very good example John. Simplicity and functionality should be the main priority in many products, and watches are no exception. If someone wants a function, they can access it when they want. Otherwise, they can simply focus on the core properties of the product they have.

I also want cell phones which you do not have to charge every day or even every 6 hours. How about something that lasts a few week and has longer battery life also? Imagine being on the move and constantly talking. The battery will run out within a few hours. Battery lives have not improved much over the last 5 years but we get to see more gadgets added to cell phone which drain up the battery life itself.

Thanks for the comment. I really appreciate it.

By: John Diffenthal

John Diffenthal — Thu, 25 Jan 2007 13:48:40 +0000

I agree about the watch – I own a Rado Diastar which appears to be a simple black and gold analogue if anyone looks at it. As an analogue watch it works absolutely perfectly – it is a beautiful, clear design and the battery lasts for over 2 years. Play about with it and you will find that it has all the digital features most people could want but they remain hidden until required.

My particular bane is the mobile phone – when will manufacturers realise that some users want long battery life and long talk time and have little interest in cameras, video capture or MP3 players?