anyone go back to a dumbphone from a smartphone?

[nickbits]

Well you must be a very dexterous man, the keypads are tiny and you have to click through 3 times just to type one letter and try and see the result on a "1.5 screen then to send to the proper recipient one has to dig through 2 more menus, good luck, most teens wouldn't be caught dead with my phone anyway, a $35 POS Samsung, imagine the horror of your buds seeing you using the Fred Flinstone phone!! LOL

T9 predictive texting is easier when you can't stare at the screen. I think I still was faster using that than on my iphone.

 

[BUTCH1]

T9 predictive texting is easier when you can't stare at the screen. I think I still was faster using that than on my iphone.

I've had 2 dumbphones that had that feature, a Nokia and the Samsung I have now, it's horrible, so bad in fact I have to disable it to text someone..

 

[OverVolt]

I'm leaning toward dumbphone and tablet. Its all the same gadety market of stupid gadgets.

 

[Ichinisan]

... CDMA ... it's more wide spread. Some places have CDMA but not HSPA. ...

I believe this is incorrect...at least in the United States and most of the world. Excluding China, Japan (and maybe Canada based on what you've said).

AT&T reaches FAR more people than Verizon or Sprint. That said, the areas that AT&T covers aren't covered as reliably as Verizon (in my experience). T-Mobile coverage in the US sucks compared to AT&T, but that's another GSM provider stateside and they are a major player in Europe.

GSM is generally accepted as the international standard. CDMA providers outside of the US and canada are rare and only seem to exist in places like Japan (NTT DoCoMo) and China.

Anyway, CDMA "3G" speeds are complete shit and you can't do a phone call and use data at the same time.

 

[shortylickens]

CDMA might be faster and more reliable WHERE YOU HAVE COVERAGE, but GSM is definitely more widespread.

 

[Ichinisan]

CDMA might be faster and more reliable WHERE YOU HAVE COVERAGE, but GSM is definitely more widespread.

CDMA is not faster than GSM. Not even close. GSM HSPA+ is over 14mbps.

 

[Cyco]

ITT: Old peeps that don't like or want technology and then there's the rest of society. FWIW, I'm 40 and my family has 4 smart phones and pay maybe 150ish for unlimited minutes, texts, and 250mb data each month for each line, maybe a slight bit more since I'm paying for our phones, on T-mobile. I don't know if I could ever go back to a dumb phone...as somebody pointed out, toilet time would be boring.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Aside from my siblings and myself, I'm not sure I know anyone else on campus without smartphones. I like being able to tell people to not send texts and just leave voicemail, though, let alone what other expectations they may have of me had I possessed one.

 

[Jeff7]

ITT: Old peeps that don't like or want technology and then there's the rest of society. FWIW, I'm 40 and my family has 4 smart phones and pay maybe 150ish for unlimited minutes, texts, and 250mb data each month for each line, maybe a slight bit more since I'm paying for our phones, on T-mobile. I don't know if I could ever go back to a dumb phone...as somebody pointed out, toilet time would be boring.

Or those who don't want to set aside >$50/month to use a little computer with a tiny screen, which also happens to make phonecalls.


$150/month? Hell no.

 

[lxskllr]

Or those who don't want to set aside >$50/month to use a little computer with a tiny screen, which also happens to make phonecalls.


$150/month? Hell no.

$150 a month, and spying all the time... I'm ok with a tiny computer. Shitty computers are still useful when you need one, but the computer needs to serve me. Not the telecom, Google, facebook, or the government; me.

 

[TheAdvocate]

Or those who don't want to set aside >$50/month to use a little computer with a tiny screen, which also happens to make phonecalls.


$150/month? Hell no.

Yeah, that's insane. And for toilet time, I have my kindle fire hd on my wifi. No monthly charges, bigger screen. They're so cheap that I also have a 2nd one at work that I use to read books and surf at lunch on the free wifi network (not run by my employer) in my building.

It's not technology hate. That's just insane montly "carry" expense. I have TWC triple play at home (thinking about ditching part of it for ooma), and my bill for TV, internet and phone is below $150, combined. I already think that's too much.

 

[Murloc]

never switched because I don't need pricey subscription plans and I cross borders too often to make it cost-effective. I just don't use the phone enough, and being out of the country so often makes it even more useless to pay for a plan as I'd need two to get the same utility as one for a normal person.
I'm on pre-paid.
Also I like the battery life and size of my current phone.

I guess at some point I'll upgrade and never go back because having the internet with you really is useful.
I'd have no use for a smartphone without an internet plan.

 

[Vdubchaos]

If my job took it away/wasn't paying for it....you damn right I would.

No big deal if I lose toilet material and some connivance when I travel (which is not often).

Based on my usage, smartphone simply doesn't make sense for the current monthly payments.

 

[monkeydelmagico]

I'm still using an HTC touch that pre-dated verizon data contracts. If it ever dies I'm probably going back to a dumb phone. They will fit in my pocket. The enormous smart phones they have out now need their own carry bags.

 

[KeithTalent]

Nope. I almost never use my phone to make calls, I use it to do myriad other things though.

KT

 

[SlitheryDee]

I went from a smartphone to no phone for about a year. The bionic I started with died in about 8 months. The droid razr I replaced it with died in about 4 months. Verizon makes you wait 2 years to upgrade, so I just suspended the service on it and waited.

I only keep a phone for the mobile data, so I don't see the point in a dumb phone. It'll either be smartphone or no phone for me.

 

[homebrew2ny]

My work provides me with an iphone but if I were to ever leave and no longer get a work phone, I would not be getting a 'smart' phone on my own. Well, not an expensive one anyhow. I would probably get a cheap semi-smart phone from virgin mobile or something..

 

[Capt Caveman]

Could never go back. Only pay $42/month for unlimited everything thru ST which I get reimbursed thru work.

GPS, browser, email, texting, phone, remote desktop to home/work pcs/systems, weather, traffic, wifi-hot spot, camera, todo lists, note taking, stock trading/banking, scanner for price comparison shopping, music, internet radio, tracking my running, tracking public transportation, etc....

 

[nageov3t]

I couldn't imagine life without it. I'd have to have to go back to carrying around a phone, MP3 player, book/e-reader, directions, etc.

I could live without Facebook, but not so much without GPS.

 

[Gunbuster]

Go back to a dumb phone? not a chance. Though I have changed my view of what type of smartphone to buy. It's nice to have a $60 Lumia that I don't have to care about. Throw it out the window or off a building, or just drop it... who cares, I'm still 9 times ahead of someone with the $600+ galaxy S-whatever of the moment.

 

[Jeff7]

Yeah, that's insane. And for toilet time, I have my kindle fire hd on my wifi. No monthly charges, bigger screen. They're so cheap that I also have a 2nd one at work that I use to read books and surf at lunch on the free wifi network (not run by my employer) in my building.

It's not technology hate. That's just insane montly "carry" expense. I have TWC triple play at home (thinking about ditching part of it for ooma), and my bill for TV, internet and phone is below $150, combined. I already think that's too much.

And a Windows tablet for me. (I don't care for Amazon keeping tabs on me all the time. Though I suppose my ISP will do that instead.)

There's the monthly cost for the cellphone service, and then their friendly arrangement of, "Oh, you want to leave us because our service or pricing sucks? That's gonna cost you something, too." If you enter into that contract, one way or another, they're going to wring some money out of you.


I'm the sort they don't like. I have Internet. That's it. Though the cost does keep ratcheting up every so often.
- VOIP: Skype. (I guess they're also keeping tabs on me. :\)
- No TV service.



I do actually miss my old Nokia phone a bit. That thing could run for a week or two between charges, and it weighed almost nothing. It was a phone though: It didn't, and couldn't, do a whole lot of anything else.

 

[Brainonska511]

I would probably not. I just made the transition to a smartphone, and could never see going back. Got myself a Nexus 4 and then went with the TMobile $30/mo plan. Smartphone costs are not bad if you go with a BYOD and pre-paid plan (if you look at total 2-year cost vs. a post-paid & subsidized phone through Verizon, ATT, or TMobile).

 

[Vdubchaos]

I couldn't imagine life without it. I'd have to have to go back to carrying around a phone, MP3 player, book/e-reader, directions, etc.

I could live without Facebook, but not so much without GPS.

I'm pretty sure you can go without just about anything but shelter/food/water.

:biggrin:

 

[notposting]

What? Verizon's coverage is better than AT&T. Into Europe, GSM (based) is far more common (not even sure if anyone runs CDMA in Europe).

3G speeds are 2/.5, not great but plenty for browsing the web. You can, in fact, do voice/data simultaneously over CDMA with SVDO. However, Verizon is more or less transitioning to LTE and expects to phase out CDMA by 2020 (I think??). Heck, there is nothing in CDMA to prevent usage of SIM cards, that was mostly an American carrier "special touch".

Verizon lists something like 40+ countries where their roaming partners offer CDMA coverage, FWIW.

I believe this is incorrect...at least in the United States and most of the world. Excluding China, Japan (and maybe Canada based on what you've said).

AT&T reaches FAR more people than Verizon or Sprint. That said, the areas that AT&T covers aren't covered as reliably as Verizon (in my experience). T-Mobile coverage in the US sucks compared to AT&T, but that's another GSM provider stateside and they are a major player in Europe.

GSM is generally accepted as the international standard. CDMA providers outside of the US and canada are rare and only seem to exist in places like Japan (NTT DoCoMo) and China.

Anyway, CDMA "3G" speeds are complete shit and you can't do a phone call and use data at the same time.

 

[Gunbuster]

Verizon lists something like 40+ countries where their roaming partners offer CDMA coverage, FWIW.

Verizon coverage might be great, but with the $25 per 100MB roaming data option it's nearly useless. And that's the affordable choice, without the plan data is $20.48/MB.