You sure you don't work for Cingular. Seriously though, the hump isn't a deal-breaker for me. The thing's gonna be in my pocket, desk, or next to my ear at most times, so if people want to point and laugh at me for using a phone with a hump, I'll let them. Well worth the cost for WM5.

---

optikalsaint - Sun Dec 04, 2005 9:41 pm
Post subject:

---

if it wasnt for the fact that i have my heart set on wifi id totally get this phone. hell even without the wifi if the minisd slot was on the outside i could just buy an extra card. i prefer the smaller size of this phone compared to the qtek/imate versions

---

Kris Kumar - Sun Dec 04, 2005 9:42 pm
Post subject: Re: Don't Call the Hump Ugly

---

Good to hear that.

The decision should be based on whether you need Wi-Fi or not. And also what is the level of price you are willing to pay for the Smartphone and the level of support?

---

Mike Temporale - Sun Dec 04, 2005 9:45 pm
Post subject:

---

Wow kris! Excellent post. Quasimodo offers some good after all. There's no question that the antenna is larger in the 2125. Lets hope it makes a difference. Personally, the SP5m is significantly better than my old C500/5600. So I don't know how much more they could improve. It would be nice to try it out and see.

---

Reland - Mon Dec 05, 2005 1:56 am
Post subject:

---

Hey, guys. This might not be the right place to ask, but does anyone know of a site similar to this one where I can find answers to my more elementary questions about smartphones and cell phones in general?

---

Rebecca - Mon Dec 05, 2005 4:29 am
Post subject:

---

Better reception or not the problem with this phone will be sales.

People buy beautiful phones. The majority of people will look at it and say it is ugly. They won't care about technology.

One problem for us is that Cingular will blame it on WM and not on the uglyness of the phone.


Another problem is Cingular targeting this phone to business people.
Today most business I know are using the Blackberry because it does not has a cammera. Also many professionals use the RAZR because it offers "minimal bulk, elegant and conservative desing and no camera".

Cingular is not promoting that this phone has a high-res screen, 1.3MP of cammera resolution. They are targeting it at business and what business people want is "minimal bulk, elegant and conservative desing and no camera" .

Again this will cause low sales and Cingular may blame it on the phone being based on Windows and not becuase of the cammera or the ugly desing.

---

Rebecca - Mon Dec 05, 2005 4:33 am
Post subject:

---

By the way the could have made the hump smaller and extend the antenna on the top of it.

The SDA has the wi-fi antenna on top https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/oet/forms/blobs/retrieve.cgi?attachment_id=562885&native_or_pdf=pdf

They could desing this phone with a smaller hump.

---

robertotores - Mon Dec 05, 2005 4:38 am
Post subject:

---

The hump is butt-ugly!

Most people will laught at this phone, the ugliest phone ever carried by Cingular.


It the screen angle has been fixed I could consider it, but I am concerned of people laughting and me and saying: "you did not had money for a good phone and so you bought quasimodo". MORONS.

---

robertotores - Mon Dec 05, 2005 4:48 am
Post subject:

---

Does anyone knows what's the SAR rating for the SMT 5600?

For Quasimodo the FCC reports 1.316 for the USA band, for the Wi-Fi SDA it is just .89

1.36 is a bit high in my opinion.

---

Kris Kumar - Mon Dec 05, 2005 5:40 am
Post subject:

---

Good points. I am also surprised that Cingular (and HTC) is not offering the non-camera variant of this Smartphone.

Business people I am sure prefer elegant and conservative style. But IT department tends to buy a "practical" device for the enterprise. An example of a not so good looking duckling, that has done well in the enterprise market - the BlackBerry.

---

Mike Temporale - Mon Dec 05, 2005 6:51 am
Post subject:

---

You've come to the right place. Just create a new post in the appropreiate forum, and we'll do our best to answer it. There are lots of knowledgable people here and I'm sure someone can answer your questions.

---

chandler - Mon Dec 05, 2005 9:01 am
Post subject:

---

The MPx220 has a hump too! It's where the quad-band antenna is. And it gets excellent reception, compared to my other phones.

---

sven - Mon Dec 05, 2005 10:14 am
Post subject:

---

When did the Razr lose it's 1.3Mp 4x zoom camera? I agree it's worthwhile to offer phones without cameras, but I'm not sure you can sell a higher end phone without one in the US. Seems the OEMs and Carriers don't think so either, if you've looked for one.

---

encece - Mon Dec 05, 2005 11:36 am
Post subject:

---

I dont mind the phone not having WiFi....but I still think it's UGLY! As stated by Mike before....the SP5m doesnt have the hump and reception is great. How much better does it need to get. (Though I am using 850 in my area so I cant comment on 1900 problems.)

---

choo_choo - Mon Dec 05, 2005 11:56 am
Post subject:

---

Hey, the SMT5600 is no longer on the Cingular web site.

---

optikalsaint - Mon Dec 05, 2005 12:31 pm
Post subject:

---

i dont thtink this phone will have any problem selling itself. it looks to be a solid phone. its not a moto razr but its still an awesome looking device, hump or not.

also i have never sold the razr to any business individual. reason being is because it looks like it breaks easily. plus when you have people that can talk to clients on the phone for hours at a time the razr just cant keep up. the most common reason we get them returned is because they cant keep a charge longer than a few hours.

also when it comes to business it has nothing to do with looks it has to do with the phone meeting the clients needs. if the phone as all the form and function that the client needs then the hump really wouldn't become an issue unless the sales associate made it an issue... but that really wouldn't make sense because that sales associate wouldnt be eating if he was stopping people from buying phones because of something as superficial as a 'hump'

---

Rebecca - Mon Dec 05, 2005 12:38 pm
Post subject:

---

What GSM band does cingular use?

---

Rebecca - Mon Dec 05, 2005 12:41 pm
Post subject:

---

Definitely it is very ugly. This Hump (Quasimodo) looks like an afterthought.

The best desing from an engineering point of view would have been to make the battery insertable from the side (a side battery cover and make the whole back on top of the battery an antennae.

---

adwignall - Mon Dec 05, 2005 1:54 pm
Post subject:

---

I'm in the minority, I like the look of the phone, hump and all

---

mpaquette - Mon Dec 05, 2005 2:15 pm
Post subject:

---

I gotta say that I think the hump is ugly. Is this phone going to be the Pontiac Aztec of the phone world? Those that own one will defend it's looks religously and those that do not own one will call it ugly and give it names like quasimodo. If the SP5 has comparable reception without the hump, then that's the phone for me. Plus I get WiFi and it's not locked by Cingular. Just say no to locked phones with a hump!

---

aristoBrat - Mon Dec 05, 2005 3:18 pm
Post subject:

---

Cingular uses both 850 and 1900.

---

encece - Mon Dec 05, 2005 5:02 pm
Post subject:

---

Remember the VOX....or VOQ or whatever it was called?

The ugly factor was one of the main reasons for it's failure. Not the only one, but it's main one.

If they would have just filled in the area forward of the hump....it would have been a much better look and had more of a general appeal.

---

Kris Kumar - Mon Dec 05, 2005 5:52 pm
Post subject:

---

---

robertotores - Mon Dec 05, 2005 5:54 pm
Post subject:

---

Say no to Quasimodo!


Or in other words the Cingular Aztek!!!

---

Kris Kumar - Mon Dec 05, 2005 5:54 pm
Post subject:

---

Voq was just simply bulky. I believe the size was the negative aspect. It was not pocketable.

Of course you can argue that the size made it look ugly.

---

Kris Kumar - Mon Dec 05, 2005 5:55 pm
Post subject:

---

I believe all the new deployments are 850Mhz.

---

Rebecca - Mon Dec 05, 2005 5:56 pm
Post subject:

---

Quasimodo is better looking than this phone.


Humps suck

---

Rebecca - Mon Dec 05, 2005 5:58 pm
Post subject:

---

Thanks!

Then Puerto Rico must be 850 since we got GSM latter than the states.

---

robertotores - Mon Dec 05, 2005 6:01 pm
Post subject:

---

My thoughts are the same.

People won't care about the screen WM5 or cammera. First looks is what counts and most people will first see the ungly hunchback resembling hump.

There are many phones with excellent reception and no hump, why they have to use an ugly hump.

CINGULAR'S QUASIMODO IS A FUGLY PHONE

---

aristoBrat - Mon Dec 05, 2005 9:20 pm
Post subject:

---

Just depends on what licenses they have in which markets. (i.e. my area is a newer Cingular market, but all 1900mhz because Verizon and Alltel have had both of the 850mhz licenses around here for forever... booo!)

---

sven - Mon Dec 05, 2005 9:36 pm
Post subject:

---

Jeez you guys are shallow. If it had two humps, like boobs, would it be better?

---

optikalsaint - Mon Dec 05, 2005 11:40 pm
Post subject:

---

windows mobile boobs 5? hmmmmmmmmmm...

---

redbluff - Tue Dec 06, 2005 5:43 am
Post subject:

---

I have the 2125. We are a corporate customer and have done extensive testing with the device. I can tell you the WiFI us still there. The components are identical to the SP5 and SP5M. We compared them side by side. The guts are the same. Cingular disable WIFI via software. Because we are a large user we have asked them to activate it for our users. We are awaiting their reply.

---

Kris Kumar - Tue Dec 06, 2005 6:11 am
Post subject:

---

---

amg212 - Tue Dec 06, 2005 10:42 am
Post subject:

---

If that is indeed the case, shouldn't the phone be flashable with imate firmware, thereby activating the features? A flash couldn't possibly create wifi where the hardware is missing - but if what you're saying is true, then getting wifi working on the device should be trivial.

I can't imagine why Cingular would disable WiFi if it were physically in the phone - Yes, some people would use it instead of EDGE (at times), but does it make sense that someone would by a smartphone with the intention of using it predominately when they have an available WiFi connection? My point is - I doubt it would materially cut into sales of EDGE... Also, Cingular could certainly command a higher price for the Wifi capabilities.

The next theory is... Maybe Cingular doesn't want to include a feature that it isn't prepared to support. But, other phones (e.g., the SX66) shipped with Wifi... So there goes that theory.

I find it easier to believe that Cingular might have ordered phones with the Wifi hardware stripped out... But software cirppled? Hmmm...

---

Kris Kumar - Tue Dec 06, 2005 10:53 am
Post subject:

---

Same here.

Not sure how easy it is to get it past the FCC. Is the FCC convinced easily, if the manufacturer tells them that the phone has Wi-Fi but it is disabled via software.

I know that the TI OMAP processor that goes into these Smartphones has Wi-Fi support. But I believe the antenna and other related components might not be there.

When I look at the IBM Thinkpad I have. They have versions that has WiFi and those that don't. The difference is a small printed circuit board that goes into a socket and it enables Wi-Fi. The circuit board has the wires for the antenna also. HTC could also have something similar for these Smartphones. And add-on mini board.

Anyway, too many ideas. Time will tell. <sigh>

---

dwest218 - Wed Dec 07, 2005 12:14 am
Post subject:

---

Can you compare this phone to either a SMT5600 or MPX220 in terms of Rf or reception???????? Which is better?? The best thing would be to compare it to a SP5m or SP5 but I doubt that is possible.

---

dwest218 - Thu Dec 08, 2005 1:04 am
Post subject:

---

Well if you dont like the hump then get the sp5 or sp5m w/o the HUMP and enjoy WIFI. There is evidence already of the sp5m working with Skype very well and making very CHEAP phone calls w/o using minutes. See this post.....

http://www.howardforums.com/showthread.php?t=745447&page=5

---

optikalsaint - Thu Dec 08, 2005 2:52 am
Post subject:

---

i dunno, im kinda digging the hump... maybe because it comes out in a couple days and i want a new phone

---

Kris Kumar - Thu Dec 08, 2005 5:55 am
Post subject:

---

Pretty cool!

---

Mike Temporale - Thu Dec 08, 2005 8:26 am
Post subject:

---

I'm working on a cool pictorial showing off the humps. Stay tuned, and watch the front page...

---

optikalsaint - Mon Dec 12, 2005 12:24 pm
Post subject:

---

haha thats a loaded gun for rebecca you know

---

Mike Temporale - Mon Dec 12, 2005 1:06 pm
Post subject:

---

OH my.... I didn't realize what I said. It wasn't meant like that, honest.

---

optikalsaint - Mon Dec 12, 2005 2:54 pm
Post subject:

---

haha!

---

robertotores - Thu Dec 15, 2005 1:40 pm
Post subject:

---

Guys respect the laydies.

We have enough with cingular offering an obscene phone with an erection.

---

Rebecca - Thu Dec 15, 2005 4:20 pm
Post subject:

---

No ofense taken Mike.


Rebecca,

Official owner of the trademarked word: "HumpPhone"

---

optikalsaint - Fri Dec 16, 2005 4:24 pm
Post subject:

---

dont just trademark it, get a patent on humps in general. heck, now you can patent pretty much anything

---