What's a lazy Friday afternoon without a bit of completely unsubstantiated rumor mongering? Sure, it's
possible that
Ed Zander himself wrote this
SCPL mockup on a napkin over a recent lunch, but we're thinking it more likely the doings of a fanboy with too much time on his hands. Anyways, the specs are as set above: 0.2-inches thick (compared to the 0.27-inch chubster
X820 from Samsung),QVGA display, 512MB flash memory, microSD slot, 3.5mm headphone jack, FM radio (pushing it), Bluetooth 2.0 and a titanium-alloy build. We'd be pretty happy with about half of that, but we're sure this won't be the last savory rumor to drool over before we find out for reals.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
shamste @ Jun 2nd 2006 5:25PM
You seem to be mistaken. It is a 3.5mm jeck, not jack.
perfectionist_etc @ Jun 2nd 2006 6:14PM
The maximum capacity of microSD is 1GB at the time, right?
Cris @ Jun 2nd 2006 6:29PM
I think this is a fake because the jack "is" 3.5mm on a phone that is 2mm thin. Also the resolution written on the screen on the diagonal is dumb; the diagonal is used for the size of the screen in inches, not for the resolution. The best part is at the end of the list there is an "etc". haha.
DK @ Jun 2nd 2006 6:45PM
Oh man, the 320x240 diagonal dimension on the screen is priceless. As is the "etc" feature point. Come on Engadget, stop posting this garbage. If I were interested in unsubstantiated rumors and fanboy-ism I would go somewhere else... like to HowardForums for example.
Pirateinmymind @ Jun 2nd 2006 6:46PM
We all realize this is a fake, but Cris I just thought I would let you know the Specs say 5 mm not 2 mm. In which case a 3.5 mm jack could theoretically fit.
flamer's grill @ Jun 2nd 2006 7:08PM
0.2 inches =/= 2mm. 0.2 inches DOES equal 5mm, as stated on the mockup. Still, it begs the question: why have a 3.5mm jack at all? This think will play mp3s, but is the battery technology available for this thing to operate for more than three hours continuously?
Doubtful. Also, Ed needs to read that JD Power survey and realize that the american public doesn't want a candybar phone. I know I don't; I've used the SLVR and it is way too short to fit comfortably in my hand. Anything more than a ten minute conversation and my hand = cramped. This phone looks shorter and thinner than the SLVR. Maybe Ed & Co. are anticipating bluetooth ubiquity in the next few years. I still prefer a phone to a headset, though.
Craig Buchanan @ Jun 3rd 2006 7:23AM
Put a decent camera in that (1 megapixel or more) make it cheap and I'll buy that in a shot.
I bet though, it will be really, really expensive. I better start saving then.
Podcast @ Jun 3rd 2006 8:27AM
Hey, looking on this features I can say that this cellphone will be awesome. And it's Motorola! I respect this company. It's a pitty there are no any shots of phone
Jason @ Jun 3rd 2006 9:55AM
"Ed needs to read that JD Power survey and realize that the american public doesn't want a candybar phone"
Oh, well if the American Public doesn't want a candybar phone what's the point? We all want LG flip phones that are free with contract, because we're the American Public.
flamer's grill @ Jun 3rd 2006 11:41AM
Actually, you want a Sanyo flip phone for free, apparently. You should have read the engadgetmobile article where you were told what you wanted by JD Power. I think it was posted yesterday.
eight @ Jun 4th 2006 8:05AM
"Doubtful. Also, Ed needs to read that JD Power survey and realize that the american public doesn't want a candybar phone."
The American Public also don't buy high end phones. A phone of this spec would no doubt be aimed at the European market initially - a market where candy bar phones sell like hot cakes.
ipod speaker @ Jun 4th 2006 9:01AM
I used to work at their libertyville plant. It takes Motorola forever to pop out a new design. If this is for reals...you won't see it for a looong time.
W @ Jul 26th 2006 5:08AM
Does anyone know what chipset do they use in SCPL platform? Freescale or TI?
How can they make a slim phone that cheap??