The slimmest 3GSM conference

Slim is in. Content may be king, but slim is the buzz word from the 3GSM conference this year.

We had Nokia with the N93i, a slimmer version of the poular N93:

n93-wince.JPG

We had the slimmest NSeries phone to date, the N76:

n76-wince.JPG

and the slim business phone, the Nokia E65:

e65-wince.JPG

Sony Ericsson, not to miss out, launched the slimmest Walkman branded phone, the W880:

w880-wince.JPG

And then there was Samsung, taking slim to an all time record with the amazing Ultra Edition II range.

The U300 is just 12.1mm:

u300.JPG

The U600 is just 10.9mm:

u600.JPG

and the U100 beats them all at just 5.9mm!

u100.JPG

Not only is the U100 the slimmest phone ever, it packs in an impressive range of features for a phone of its dimensions. The screen is a very clear TFT screen sporting 256k colours. Built in to the slender handset is a 3 megapixel camera. There is also an MP3 player, support for TV out and an email client. The U100 has 70MB of internal memory.

Comments

Powered by Facebook Comments

You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

6 Responses to “The slimmest 3GSM conference”

  1. bob007 says:

    U100 for me. I have the x830 right now and this is even thinner! really nice to pop it into ur shirt pocket. U100 has 3 megapixel camera too. When is it out?

  2. Mr C Hubby says:

    Not sure on Nokia’s thinking here, sure the N93 could do with losing some weight (couldn’t we all:), but its a bit stupid to do it at the expense of battery life!

    Samsung on the other hand have got the right idea, Love it!

  3. Julius says:

    The N93i – nokia what are you doing, literally the same as the N93 but slimmer, curves are good too!!!! What is the point Nokia are you really that bored in your offices?!?!?!

  4. Mac keth says:

    Sony erricson is the one i have had since a long time,its gimmicky look is all what make you feel about it.

  5. 网络营销 says:

    i like U100

  6. [...] View original post here: The slimmest 3GSM conference [...]

Leave a Reply