• Hawke@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    17 hours ago

    I’ll say I’m correct on a technicality. 2006 is not “long before smartphones” only a year or so. The N73 is a sort of proto-smartphone, even if the term wasn’t in use yet.

    • plantfanatic@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      15 hours ago

      I’m really curious what other metric there is for a smart phone than “accessing the web” and/or “downloading apps”. Thats the barebones definition of smart TVs or any other appliance or equipment, why are phones somehow different?

      Why are people trying to define it so specifically? So they can feel better about themselves?

      • Hawke@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        14 hours ago

        The point where it becomes a general-purpose computing device, I think. Programmability is generally what makes it “smart”, i.e. not having the limitation of predefined “features” which make it a feature phone.

        • plantfanatic@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          14 hours ago

          Isn’t a feature phone a “dumb phone”? A phone meant for calling and texting, with preinstalled programs, and that’s it. So yeah, installable apps and a browser would instantly make it a smart phone.

          • Hawke@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            14 hours ago

            It’s all relative but more or less yes.

            Dumb phone has no software features (e.g. Nokia 5110 or so — unless you count the snake game), feature phone has software features but limited to the ones that come with the phone (rarely installable at all), smart phone has actual software aka “apps”