Talk:Nokia E70/Archive 1

message: It is true that the phone has a SIP implementation. In its current version, this does not work as most would expect, as does not provide mechanisms for NAT traversal. The phone does not support STUN, ICE etc. This means that the phone must be connected directly to the PABX -- it will not connect through a firewall or router. It is said that Nokia is working on implementing STUN and that this shold be done by end 2006.
89.150.136.51 21:51, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  SIP functionality is currently severely restricted 

message: The phone is able to handle up to six concurrent connections, of which only one can be a headset. But it will successfully connect to a PC, a GPS receiver and a headset at the same time.
A2DP is not supported, however. This was quite a surprise, at least to me!
kvols 195.249.172.62 14:52, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bluetooth connectivity 

message: I could not find this information over Nokia's site, and I believe it's important: what is the main processor for this smartphone? Pmbarros 17:30, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nokia don't publish this information for most handsets (the very newest ones have started to get it listed in the stats on Forum Nokia). I don't think it's especially important anyway - it's a phone, who cares what specialised embedded CPU it uses? Wibbble 18:14, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

text: According to this page, the heart of the E70 is an ARM9 processor (actually there is another proc dedicated to communications). This table adds more precision : main cpu is a 220 MHz ARM-926. — Xavier, 23:13, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Forum Nokia is a reliable source, but other websites can't be relied on. I don't know that I'd read that article the same way you have, though: it says that the E70 is a dual-chip design, and that the E61 uses that ARM9 CPU. The E70 and E61 don't have the same memory characteristics, so they may not have the same CPU characteristics. Wibbble 08:05, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Processor? 

message: Which commercial network will this phone work with? All of them, or just AT&T and T-Mobile? --147.226.167.108 03:43, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please keep in mind that the talk page is to discuss the article, not the subject of the article. If you have questions like this, try asking on a forum or discussion board. Wibbble 18:59, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Company Contract?

message: In order to move on with this, I think it might be useful for any involved parties to sum up their positions at this time. I'll start with myself. In order to keep this usable, please don't respond to points in the normal reply style - just state your position in a section below. Hopefully this will help us draw out any common areas and what areas still need to be worked on.
====Wibbble====
I don't think that the 'review' link is appropriate as a review. There's more than enough review links there already, and I'm not even convinced that a section of external links for reviews is a good idea at all (on this or any other similar article).
I don't think that one humorous 'review' from one non-mainstream source is notable enough to justify inclusion in the article as a 'trivia' or 'popular culture' section. I think that if it were one example (of popular culture references) among several, or if there had been some reaction to the review (from the mainstream media (ie, things that could be quoted as reliable sources) or the manufacturer), or if the source was much higher profile, then it would probably be justified. As it stands, I don't think this merits inclusion in the article. Wibbble 23:09, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Summing up

message: I don't think that the 'review' link is appropriate as a review. There's more than enough review links there already, and I'm not even convinced that a section of external links for reviews is a good idea at all (on this or any other similar article).
I don't think that one humorous 'review' from one non-mainstream source is notable enough to justify inclusion in the article as a 'trivia' or 'popular culture' section. I think that if it were one example (of popular culture references) among several, or if there had been some reaction to the review (from the mainstream media (ie, things that could be quoted as reliable sources) or the manufacturer), or if the source was much higher profile, then it would probably be justified. As it stands, I don't think this merits inclusion in the article. Wibbble 23:09, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[User:wibbble|Wibbble]]

message: As a notable piece of pop culture, the link should included.  The notability of the website has been established above through traffic listings, rankings, google hits, and mention in the New York Times.  There is ample wikiprecedent for including maddox, which is not limited when a company had made an official response.  In a google search for "iPhone Nokia E70"  the first 6 results are maddox's article or other people commenting on maddox's article.  Whether there happen to be several instances of Nokia E70 in pop culture or one doesn't nothing to affect the appropriateness of this inclusion.--Loodog 19:58, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[User:loodog|loodog]]

message: Looking at the pros and the cons analytically, the pro-inclusion arguments overwhelm the cons. For me, the bottom line is that Maddox is a bonafide pop culture "icon". It should be pointed out that there is ample evidence of this, to the point of being almost self-evident. Maddox's stature makes the Nokia e70 part of pop culture by proxy. Mujarimojo 15:37, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[User:Mujarimojo|Mujarimojo]]

message: So far we seem to have at least agreed that it's not appropriate as a review external link, which is something. The dispute is now on solely if this is appropriate for a 'popular culture' section. I think that at this point it might be worth bringing in some impartial outside help - I'm considering opening a Request for Comment on this issue. Anyone have anything to add/objections before I do this? Wibbble 18:33, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sound like the best thing to do.--Loodog 22:35, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  agreement 

message: Assuming the Maddox comment gets to stay, how about we discuss how the wording should be then maybe we can find something we'll all like?
I'll start off by suggesting something like this:
the E70 has been compared to the iPhone in a humorous and offensive rant by internet satirist Maddox. <insert reference here>
Now can we please all get along and start focusing your energy on the LG Shine (KE970) article which starts off like this 
The actor Pierce Brosnan said that all of his family members want a Shine because of its “fantastic” style
 this should be removed and fast, not humorous maddox comments, wikipedia is allowed to be fun right? Opspin
:Remove "humorous" and "offensive", which are both subjective.  Before my addition was reverted, I had added "Internet celebrity Maddox wrote an article in July 2007 praising the Nokia E70, in particular as a superior, less hyped alternative to Apple's popular iPhone."--Loodog 16:13, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I saw in a reliable source once that Maddox's webpage introduced more people to this phone than the actual companies actual marketing division but I eated it. 152.2.81.214 19:16, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Isn't there supposed to be a cat picture that goes along with this sentence?--Loodog 20:22, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wording of Maddox Mention 

message: Does it support flash?  Which browser version? Mathiastck (talk) 21:45, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flash? 

message: I may have unreliable sources, but is it not true that this phone has been discontinued by Nokia?
If this is the case, I feel this should be mentioned in the Wikipedia article, as people may end up reading the article, deciding they want one, and finding out they can't buy one anywhere.
I do not know specifics so I will not add it myself, but I am fairly sure that the phone has been discontinued.
Also it would be good to know if anybody knows if it'll ever be recontinued or rereleased as I do want one myself. :)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.149.111.198 (talk) 09:41, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  No mention of this having been discontinued?