Talk:Mobile phone/Archive 8

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

The problem with definition of term "mobile phone"

The definition of the term "mobile phone" in this article: A mobile phone (also known as a cellular phone, cell phone and a hand phone,smartphone) is a device that can make and receive telephone calls over a radio link whilst moving around a wide geographic area. It does so by connecting to a cellular network provided by a mobile phone operator, allowing access to the public telephone network. By contrast, a cordless telephone is used only within the short range of a single, private base station and In 1983, the first mobile phones went on sale in the U.S. at almost $4,000 each.

So, this definition united two terms: the "mobile phone" as portable or pocket phone, and the "mobile phone" as the colloquial expression of the cellular phone (for example, cellular phone in Russia called as "mobil'nik", "mobila", "truba", etc). Is that right?

Mr. Martin Cooper in 1973 not demonstrated the cellular infrastrucure, there was only one base station. The first cellular system presented in Chicago in 1978. That is why the phrase of the article: "The first mobile telephone call made from a car occurred in St. Louis, Missouri, USA on June 17, 1946, using the Bell System's Mobile Telephone Service.[7]" is also not correct.

I propose to include in article the section, named as "Prehistory of the mobile phone (cellular)", and describe there all the automatic pocket radio phones before 1978 (Kupriyanovich phone, Bachvarov phone, RAT-0,5, Pye Telecommunications' phone, and, of course, Martin Cooper phone). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Izmerov (talk • contribs) 08:19, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

I also have problem/issue with the definition/term of "Mobile phone" here for years ago, so this is my idea to fix this 'generic' mobile phone definition issue:

1. "Mobile phone (system)" term is intuitively a general meaning of "portable telephone" which you can carry around anywhere unattached to a fixed point/node/terminal ('intuitively' means we don't have to search Wiki for the term's meaning, we can auto-define it in general by ourself simply by using our basic language logic). Any (tele-)phones fit in this definition will be in this section, this includes SatPhone/satellite phone (which is strangely uncovered/missing in this telephony index article) which today has appearance almost resembles the cellphone handset, only the protruding mini antenna (can be telescopic/retractable on some models) like the old day AMPS ones differs it ("Sat-Phone" can covers 'blank' area uncovered by cellular network as its main advantage, this is the true "Anywhere/Mobile-Phone").

2. "CellPhone" is a handset/terminal to connect to cellular (radio) network. This terminal can be mobile/fixed since of the radio wave/band is used as medium for 'data' (note: 'voice' is audio data) transmission. "CellPhone/CP" term should be used when referring to this cellular-network handsets/terminals in order to differ it SPECIFICALLY from other mobile phone systems. So by technical definition it is correct, see telco-tech books for more details (e.g: W.Stallings, etc).

3. For general suggestion to others, when you define a thing please be more SPECIFIC, use SPECIFIC terms please. This will greatly reduce the unnecessary issues generated by the GENERIC/GENERAL terms such as the 'mobile phone' here. "CellPhone" need no further explanation since intuitively it 'connects' to cellular network system, amazingly auto-explained by itself. Try to use "mobile phone" in area unfamiliar with the term and "SatPhone" or even "CordlessPhone" might also come in mind, especially in those techie minds. Marketing mind is generic, more catchy/general is better; Technical mind is specific. more specific is better. "HandPhone" (some local stupids even try to abbreviate it into "HP" which making it worse in computer-telco industry brand-terminology that already has Hewlett-Packard in it and in the same industry which is prone to misleadings [e,g; An ads says: "Free HP for every 1000 points you got!", Sorry? Is it referring to the cellphone or the printer/computer giant brand? LOL!]) is popular marketing term for cellphone in some under-developed countries such as Indonesia, the techies there are 'compliant' to marketers/traders without sound complaints, only small smart idealist techies rejected the stupid term and use "cellphone" (Indonesian: "PonSel" or "telePon Selular") term instead, and those braves are still fighting today. "HandPhone" term intuitively refers to a (tele-)phone that held by a hand (for some monkeys, their feet are also hands. BTW, already designed a "FootPhone" anybody? or Eye-Phone [i-phone?] for the eye-held one? ;)), so this will include any phone that held by hand, such as those PSTN/Home fixed-point/node phones, cordless phones, cellphones, satphones (satellite), WT/HT (Walkie/Handy-Talkie), etc.

Conclusion: Such the "mobile phone" (or even the stupid marketing mindless defines-no-specific-system "handphone") term should be avoided when discussing cellphone or its cellular network system. "CellPhone" (which runs on cellular radio network system) is under/part of mobile phone domain, "SatPhone" (which runs on satellite radio network) is also under/part of mobile phone domain, even those no-dial-needed personal 'phones' such as WT/HT/field radio comm may come under this "mobile phone" domain if no specific network system is required in definition. You decide it, either jumping into wrong assumptions easily by those generic (stupid marketing) terms or be more technically specific for identifying the right one.

"Making things right, faster, and much simpler by be more specific. Simple as that!" - WCh1974.

The choice is yours smartguys, not those marketers! -- [WCh1974 @ 2013-05-09] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.79.2.166 (talk) 22:05, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

WCh1974 correctly highlights the confusion introduced by using British vernacular in what should be a simple article. The problems stem from the current usage in Br.E. as defined in Collins Dictionary (of Glasgow) of cell telephone as "a mobile phone" and, circularly defines a mobile telephone as "a portable telephone that works by means of a cellular radio system" . Unambiguously, the American Heritage Dictionary defines mobile telephone as "any wireless telephone that operates over a relatively large area, as a cellular phone or PCS phone" and equally unambiguously a cellular telephone as "A portable telephone that uses wireless cellular technology to send and receive phone signals". That the usage of "mobile" to represent a cell technology is pecularly British is evidenced by the frequencies of usage in contemporary written works...The Corpus of AmE (COCA) shows that Cell phone is used 10 times more frequently than mobile phone (6444:543), whereas the Corpus of BrE reverses that with a mobile phone being used 144 times for 2 usages of cell phone. Popular speech has many examples of confusing or ambiguous uses in both AmE and BrE. So, the use of "mobile" to refer to cellular technology is certainly reasonable for speakers of BrE. But it would seem that a scholarly article in an encyclopedia would want to avoid it. N0w8st8s (talk) 16:56, 3 September 2013 (UTC)n0w8st8s

But as has been mentioned elsewhere, the article is written in British English is an acceptable style, and will be used in other countries too (as will the US usage). The article does specifically refer to a cellular phone, so the US usage is also correct. So, there is nothing wrong with using the British English term, or the US English term.. or any other English language variant. Shritwod (talk) 20:33, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your thoughts. To be clear, the discussion wasn't meant to be about style. Sorry if it was taken that way. It is about CONFUSION. The stylistic difference between colorize and colourise introduces no confusion and is truly just a matter of STYLE. So if style were the thing we were talking about, we would not be talking about it at all. We were talking about the confusion that comes because the word "mobile" can refer to Cell phones, LAN phones, Satellite phones and more. We weren't trying to be pernickety with this titbit so please don't take offence. Seriously, the article is quite good, so if it has sufficient clarity for your purposes it's certainly fine with me. N0w8st8s (talk) 14:27, 8 September 2013 (UTC)n0w8st8s

Mobile phone criticism

There must be a comparison section where impact of mobile phone on as good or bad should be discussed in detail.or following link can be added in the external link section. Mobile phone boon or ban. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iwantvarun (talk • contribs) 13:03, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

The truth about mobile phones: e waste, radiation hazards, road accidents, addiction to games and social networking, BOREDOM (people keep changing models so fast!). Unecessary distraction. One day mobile phones will be remembered (maybe in 2025 or 2030) as the most important miserable piece of technology in the world. BEWARE OF MOBILE PHONES! -Polytope4d (talk) 16:46, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

I agree, there should be a section on criticism/social reception just like there is on the article for video games. Lachlan Foley (talk) 06:51, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Fine ... I look forward to your contribution ChrisUK (talk) 21:53, 28 June 2013 (UTC) One thing that I believe should be addressed is that it is considered a necessity to carry a cell phone at all times by the vast majority of today's society. It is understandable that cell phone help us accomplish everyday tasks and have been monumental in the business world but our grandparents barely ever even heard the word cell phone and we think that we can not live with out them. They allow us to contact people from around the world in seconds, but do they really make us more connected or allow us to become more distant? Pumbasean (talk) 10:11, 27 September 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pumbasean (talk • contribs) 10:09, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Edit request on 24 May 2013

The illsutration shows an iPhone 4 and not an iPhone 5 194.98.34.59 (talk) 09:08, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Not done: The pictures in the iPhone 4 article as well as the one in my pocket don't match the picture in this article. Note in particular the sensor above the earpiece. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 14:48, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Cellular devices

There is an existing WikiProject for articles relating to mobile phones. However, I am unable to revive it. Why is that? Any help would be appreciated. XOttawahitech (talk) 14:50, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Changes to Mobile Phone

CHANGE The first handheld mobile cell phone was demonstrated by Motorola in 1973. The first commercial automated cellular network was launched in Japan by NTT in 1979. In 1981, this was followed by the simultaneous launch of the Nordic Mobile Telephone (NMT) system in Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden.[8] Several other countries then followed in the early to mid-1980s. These '1G' systems could support far more calls but still used analog technology.

TO The first handheld mobile cell phone was demonstrated by Motorola in 1973. The first commercial automated cellular network was launched in the USA by Martin-Marietta Corp in Orlando, Fla in 1974, followed by Japan by NTT in 1979. In 1981, this was followed by the simultaneous launch of the Nordic Mobile Telephone (NMT) system in Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden.[8] Several other countries then followed in the early to mid-1980s. These '1G' systems could support far more calls but still used analog technology.

BECAUSE The date of the first commercial automated cellular network telephone control system seems to have been lost to history. The first control system was put in service in the USA in 1974, not as generally reported as being in Japan in 1979. It was invented and developed by Bill Kahn working for the Martin Marietta Corporation in Orlando Florida. The base patent was filed in 1971 and awarded in 1974 (Patent Appl No. 191,855, Oct 25, 1971, Patent Awarded 3,836,726 Sept 17, 1974).

Prior to 1974, the telephone control systems did not have the capability of switching a call as a person moved about, since one control system could only handle a few calls at a time and could not communicate with other systems nor switch between transmitters. This was off-set by using very high powered transmitter-receivers that could cover a wide area, about fifty miles in diameter. If people didn’t drive very far, transfer was not a problem.

With an automated cellular network telephone control system when a person makes a cell phone call, a receiver-transmitter located on a tower closest to them connects their cell-phone to the telephone network. As the caller moves away from the tower where the call originated, a control system senses their movement and tries to switch the call to a tower closer towards the direction they are moving; otherwise the call would be disconnected. The change to pre 1974 control concept really started in early 1969. At that time I was working for the Martin Marietta Corporation. I was called into my VP’s office where I was shown a small cigarette size pack case and told it was a digital paging receiver. The VP’s first question to me was whether I could design a digital paging system that could control many of these digital pagers.

I indicated I would need about three months by myself to come up with a control system concept. At that point I had no idea what I was talking about from a time standpoint and pulled three months out of the air. I soon found out, three months became engraved in stone. After discussions with Bell labs, I decided that the system had to be a fail-safe, fail-soft system computer controlled system that from a practical standpoint would never go completely down.

In late 1970, while the first paging systems were being produced, I was again called into my VP’s office. He explained to me that there was a mobile telephone system in existence called IMTS, an acronym for Improve Mobile Telephone System. He asked if I could adapt my paging system concepts to make a radically new computer controlled telephone system which could handle significantly more channels than those on the market today for IMTS.

I again asked for three months which I figured would not be too difficult considering this was a modification of the paging system. This this time element was to include many presentation to corporate and meetings with the Bell Labs. So much for having lots of time!

Three months quickly passed and I presented a new system concept to the corporation called HICOM. It used the IMTS signaling but was a fail-safe, fail-soft system using multiple computers and other duplicate major electronic equipment with a 100 channel capability. The idea was the system would never have to be taken down for maintenance and as major components of the system failed others would automatically replace them. I received a go-ahead and my team started work on the nuts and bolts of the system. The first systems were sold to Milwaukee, Atlanta, Canada, New York, St Petersburg in Florida and others including Iraq.

One day in late 1974 I received a call from the head of the St Petersburg system. That system handled both the St Pete area and the Clearwater area. He lamented, people were complaining when they drove between St Pete and Clearwater their call would get disconnected going out of tower range, could we fix the problem.

Being able to measure signal strength of the caller, we set up a system which would continually monitor the strength of all calls. We could then switch a call between the St Petersburg towers and Clearwater towers, one large cell to another cell, without the loss of the call. This then was the first cellular system, the forerunner of today’s more modern systems.

Not as big and dazzling systems those existing today, but in almost 40 years a lot can happen. But, one thing is certain, the USA did develop the first commercial automated cellular network telephone control system.

I have brochures of the system produced by Martin-Marietta if needed.

Renbar (talk) 13:28, 5 December 2013 (UTC) Renbar (talk) 13:28, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Not done for now: This is a very interesting read and I have no doubt that what you say is completely true. However, all the source material you're giving here - your firsthand account, the patent, and the brochures - are considered primary sources. On Wikipedia, primary sources can only be used for straightforward statements of facts pulled directly from those sources. Your requested addition would require secondary sources in order to not be considered original research. If you can provide such sources, please do and your request can be reconsidered. Thanks, --ElHef (Meep?) 00:53, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

ATT states 1946 was the first mobile phone?!?

http://www.corp.att.com/attlabs/reputation/timeline/46mobile.html une 17, 1946 - A driver in St. Louis, Mo., pulled out a handset from under his car's dashboard, placed a phone call and made history. It was the first mobile telephone call. A team including Alton Dickieson and D. Mitchell from Bell Labs and future AT&T CEO H.I. Romnes, worked more than a decade to achieve this feat. By 1948, wireless telephone service was available in almost 100 cities and highway corridors. Customers included utilities, truck fleet operators and reporters. However, with only 5,000 customers making 30,000 weekly calls, the service was far from commonplace.

That "primitive" wireless network could not handle large call volumes. A single transmitter on a central tower provided a handful of channels for an entire metropolitan area. Between one and eight receiver towers handled the call return signals. At most, three subscribers could make calls at one time in any city. It was, in effect, a massive party line, where subscribers would have to listen first for someone else on the line before making a call.

Expensive and far from "mobile", the service cost $15 per month, plus 30 to 40 cents per local call, and the equipment weighed 80 pounds. Just as they would use a CB microphone, users depressed a button on the handset to talk and released it to listen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.11.198.191 (talk) 22:29, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Replace Dead Link Suggestion

Would like to correct a dead link in Further reading section.

Ref: Plant, Dr. Sadie, on the mobile – the effects of mobile telephones on social and individual life[dead link], 2001

Dead Link address: http://www.motorola.com/mot/doc/0/234_MotDoc.pdf

Accurate Working Link to replace above Dead Link: http://classes.dma.ucla.edu/Winter03/104/docs/splant.pdf

Thank you, BPS 22:48, 7 March 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thx2 (talk • contribs)

Links

>> Mobile phones aid Tanzania's homeless boys (Lihaas (talk) 19:01, 10 March 2014 (UTC)).

Semi-protected edit request on 15 March 2014

202.56.196.198 (talk) 10:50, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Kap 7 (talk) 13:40, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

ku

✅ Bah rizan (talk) 06:13, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

iOS 7's Activation Lock (Thefts section): Information out of date

Since this page is obviously semi-protected, someone else needs to update this information: A, iOS 7 was released to the public on September 18, 2013, NOT October, and B, the section doesn't even give the actual iOS 7 name any credit. Thanks. —2602:306:BCA6:8300:1CAA:7945:E4B9:52ED (talk) 21:50, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

I second this motion that this needs to be updated. Again, semi-protected, so I may not do so myself. Here is a link to verify that A) it was released on Sept 18 2013, and B) has some information regarding the activation lock. Whether iOS 7 is itself is credited I do not care, but I suspect that someone else knows Wikipedia guidelines better than I. --Vfdhsvgj (talk) 17:49, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Kosher Phones

This is not an orthodox Jewish set of restrictions as implied in the article. There is no halachic prohibition on texting that I'm aware of, nor any implied in the referenced page. It just a bunch of traditionalists who want to stop their kids from texting while still giving them the ability to phone home. I can see the attraction, but as a middle-of-the-road orthodox Jew, I find abusing the word kosher this way unfortunate. It's being used as a brand. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.42.137.163 (talk) 20:16, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

This section has no importance to the history and engineering of cellular technology. It should be removed at placed with the appropriate article referring to religious law — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.136.235.206 (talk) 21:51, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

The Mobile Phone Has Revolutionized How We Communicate

The use of cell phones has revolutionized how we communicate with each other. A study done by Kumasi, Ghana’s The Institute of Entrepreneurship found that 90% of all people use their cell phones to communicate with friends and family.[1] While being able to communicate with the press of a button is wonderful, it has changed how we view communicating with each other. No longer are family members taking long trips to visit others in person, but now are Skype calling them instead. While this is very convenient, it has taken out the personalization of a real face-to-face visit. In a book titled, “Children and Society,” parents said that they feel like they have less control with their kids even though they can reach them at any time.[2] Families are connected now more than ever, but are losing deep interpersonal relationships because they are never communicating in person. Cell phones have enabled us to be more connected with the world and those that we know. However, they have driven us further apart with less face to face communicating. This has changed our society into a more individualized society rather than a collective society.

[1] Addo, Augustine. "The Adoption of Mobile Phone: How has it changed us?." Issues in Business Management and Economics 1.3 (0): 47-60. Print.

[2] Devitt, Kerry, and Debi Roker. "The Role of Mobile Phones In Family Communication." Children and Scoeity 23.3 (2008): 189-202. Print. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.88.192.62 (talk) 18:15, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

where do this chart come from?

There is a chart showing that in 2007, 97 mobiles are out there per 100 inhabitants. That is completely absurd. A DECADE agao? And 97 out of 100? Understandably a small portion of people have 2 phones, but many, especially older people don't use them and nor do small children. So where is this from? It doesn't even remotely pass the smell test.Whatzinaname (talk) 13:36, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Agree. The statistics claiming that the number of mobile phone subscriptions even in less prosperous parts of the world, like Africa, India or Brazil, is rapidly running up to equal the number of people living there, and therefore just about everyone now has a mobile phone, down to the lowest levels of society - those statistics are extremely dodgy. If you go to a village in the Indian countryside, a tribal camp in Niger or a slum in Rio, do you see everybody waving a cell phone? Nope, not by a mile. This is statistics bullshit being pushed by the ITU, by many cell phone companies, by retailers and some market liberal think-tanks, and at least the latter three of those groups have vested interests in fostering an impression that cell phones are ubiquitous everywhere. The ITU have been channelling the statistics I figure, but they have no real control of their accuracy and do not seem to be making any effort to provide more solid stats.

The point is, those figures for actual subscriptions are provided by the phone companies selling them in any country, and suffer from the following weaknesses (that apply anywhere, but especially in developing countries):

• They are, of course, about the number of subscriptions, not about the number of people holding a subscription. A decent number of people have a work phone and a private phone, and that's more likely the higher up you get.

• They include both pre-paid cards and actual running subscriptions (where you are guaranteed access to the phone networks as long as you pay the monthly fee, and therefore a paid fee equals an active subscription).

• Importantly, there's most likely nothing in these stats to sort out lapsed subscriptions (lapsed for lack of money) or phone cards that aren't being used anymore, that have been stolen or lost, or where the user moved on to another phone card or lost their phone). Even in Europe and the US, it's fairly common that people (esp. young people) drop a subscription or their cell phones get mislaid or stolen, and this kind of thing is more common the further down into less prosperous classes (or poor/violent neighbourhoods) you get. In the really poor parts of the world, there's no doubt this would be even more common; imagine the situation in a slum or among day-to-day rural workers. But if person X gets a phone card, loses it or is unable to keep refilling it after a few months, well, it's gone and then a few weeks or months later he might get another one, etc. The same person could very easily rack up ten different phone cards or subscriptions over the space of a few years, and the phone company would definitely not keep any count of all the lapsed phone connections within their statistics. So what they send to the ITU would effectively be a cumulative lump of all the phone cards and nearly all of the regular subscriptions they have sold over a space of many years: no wonder the figure would snowball in most places and especially in Africa, but it says nothing about the real outreach of mobile phones as an everyday utility. 83.254.154.164 (talk) 03:44, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Acoustics

Do they use piezoelectric transducers, or do they hear and speak by other technologies? Jim.henderson (talk) 16:11, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

New photo please

This article clearly needs an update to the first image "An evolution of mobile phones". A modern smartphone needs to be added.

Treva26 (talk) 14:28, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Edit semi-protected

I would like to edit the "health effects" and "environmental impact" sections to contain information about the chemicals used in the production and dismantling process and how they affect laborers and surrounding environments. I have several paragraphs to add to the "environmental impacts" section, which requires expansion. Thank you.

 Not done This is not the right page to request additional user rights.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request. - Arjayay (talk) 19:16, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Might want to select a different article, too, as it seems odd that these questions would be limited to this particular class of electronic hardware. Jim.henderson (talk) 10:57, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Sound Quality

Suggestion: Could "Sound Quality" which is described in the article, be added as a feature subsection title? I think this would make the article more structured. Thank you Jcardazzi (talk) 13:50, 10 April 2015 (UTC)jcardazzi

Semi-protected edit request on 11 April 2015

36.252.176.170 (talk) 10:48, 11 April 2015 (UTC)no

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Deli nk (talk) 11:27, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Please Edit Health Effects

Please add under Health Effects the following additional information: In February 2010, The Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) published a study in which a control group of pregnant women were monitored during 32 weeks. 14 months after the babies were born, their brains were analyzed. There was little difference in their cognitive abilities and brain health between the children of mothers who used cellphones and the children of mothers who were not cellphone users.

http://www.arpansa.gov.au/RadiationProtection/EMR/literature/February10.cfm

138.237.104.184 (talk) 03:55, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

This request is better dealt with at Mobile phone radiation and health --papageno (talk) 22:06, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

List of mobile phone generations

I know we have List of mobile phone standards, but I started List of mobile phone generations because I went to find out what the Gs are all about and got confused. Could we change the lead of List of mobile phone standards from "...A list of Mobile phone standards or generations is given in the table below...." to "...A list of Mobile phone standards given in the table below..."? I just wanted a clear list or table all under one roof that showed the Gs and their definitions and couldn't find it. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:31, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Why is the reference to the Finnish patent present in the History section? Why are Mobile Phones listed as a "Finnish Invention"?

Why is the allusion to the Finnish patent present in the history? It is not even SOURCED. In addition, the patent has nothing to do with an actual working mobile phone nor was it a working mobile phone nor did it meet the definition of a modern mobile phone. It was simply a SELF-DESCRIBED patent for a pocket sized folding telephone with a thin carbon microphone -- it did not have the other components needed to be considered a Mobile Phone, nor was it an actual model for a working mobile phone had it been constructed. In addition, MANY other patents have been filed, including in the US for a Mobile Phone that was way more functional than the Finnish one could ever be, yet it is still listed here. It should be removed immediately.

The "Mobile Phone" is also listed on the "Finnish Inventions" page -- how is this accurate? The Finnish inventor most definitely DID NOT invent a mobile phone, merely predicted it, which TONS of other people all around the world did as well. So why is the "Mobile Phone" listed under "Finnish Inventions" -- this is completely inaccurate and needs to be removed IMMEDIATELY.

This is the "Finnish inventions" page by the way: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Finnish_inventions — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.241.16.191 (talk) 20:04, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

The statement needs a citation. I can't find a properly cited source in this article or in the sub-article. It's not acceptable to cite a Wikipedia category page as a source. Can someone please find a source and add a citation? If not, I'll either try to find one on my own or will remove the comments. Thanks, Majoreditor (talk) 19:06, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 November 2015

Why is the allusion to the Finnish patent present in the history? It is not even SOURCED. Please remove it completely and replace with no text. In addition, the patent has nothing to do with an actual working mobile phone nor was it a working mobile phone nor did it meet the definition of a modern mobile phone. It was simply a SELF-DESCRIBED patent for a pocket sized folding telephone with a thin carbon microphone -- it did not have the other components needed to be considered a Mobile Phone, nor was it an actual model for a working mobile phone had it been constructed. In addition, MANY other patents have been filed, including in the US for a Mobile Phone that was way more functional than the Finnish one could ever be, yet it is still listed here. It should be removed immediately.

The "Mobile Phone" is also listed on the "Finnish Inventions" page -- how is this accurate? The Finnish inventor most definitely DID NOT invent a mobile phone, merely predicted it, which TONS of other people all around the world did as well. So why is the "Mobile Phone" listed under "Finnish Inventions" -- this is completely inaccurate and please remove it IMMEDIATELY. This is the "Finnish inventions" page by the way: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Finnish_inventions — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.241.16.191 (talk) 20:04, 2 November 2015 (UTC) 96.241.16.191 (talk) 20:24, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 17:43, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Sales stats

I've corrected the main line sales table entries for Gartner. The problem for that was that Gartner had manufacturers A B C D E F G H I J K and others, so the table showed the top 5 A B C D E and for others it copied Gartner's others. The WP others obviously must be F+G+H+I+J+K+others.

The same problem occurs with the side histogram, but that is harder to fix. I am very inclined to just delete that table, but will leave it a couple of days to see if anyone else fixes it. -- SGBailey (talk) 10:59, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Mobile phone. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110508150638/http://news.yahoo.com:80/s/nm/20110429/wr_nm/us_handsets to http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110429/wr_nm/us_handsets
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090522202233/http://news.yahoo.com:80/you-witness-news to http://news.yahoo.com/you-witness-news
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120921054251/http://www.microfinancefocus.com:80/news/2010/02/07/zidisha-set-to-expand-in-peer-to-peer-microfinance-julia-kurnia to http://www.microfinancefocus.com/news/2010/02/07/zidisha-set-to-expand-in-peer-to-peer-microfinance-julia-kurnia/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:12, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

9558833806

Mobile are electronic devices, which are use to make calls , text messages and use internet. It uses battery to operate & ned charging to charge the battery. The charger need Charging electronic point. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.225.102.170 (talk) 12:23, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

3, mahavir estate near anupam cinema opp bhagat estate khokhra ahmedabad — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.241.18.193 (talk) 08:00, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 5 external links on Mobile phone. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110102203433/http://news.yahoo.com:80/s/pcworld/20101229/tc_pcworld/nokia8217smarketsharedropsfurtherinindia to http://news.yahoo.com/s/pcworld/20101229/tc_pcworld/nokia8217smarketsharedropsfurtherinindia
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090925105500/http://www.pe.com:80/localnews/sbcounty/stories/PE_News_Local_S_helpphones13.3d74734.html to http://www.pe.com/localnews/sbcounty/stories/PE_News_Local_S_helpphones13.3d74734.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120514021048/http://www.campustvs.com:80/ to http://www.campustvs.com/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100326155917/http://www.banktech.com:80/blog/archives/2007/06/mobile_payments.html to http://www.banktech.com/blog/archives/2007/06/mobile_payments.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20141020080938/https://www.campussims.com/ to https://www.campussims.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:50, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

mobiles phones FACTS: In 1983, the first mobile phones went on sale in the U.S. at almost $4,000 each.Over 250 million Nokia 1100 devices were sold, making it the bestselling electrical gadget in history. More People In The World Have Mobile Phones Than Toilets.So many Facebook photos and videos are uploaded via mobile that it takes up 27% of upstream web traffic.The technology behind smartphones relies on up to 250,000 separate patents.The average person unlocks his or her smartphone 110 times each day.16:01, 29 November 2016 (UTC)Ayush199906 (talk)

Time spend per day

A 2014 study show that the average American spend 162 minutes on their mobile per day

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Mobile phone. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.tekniskamuseet.se/mobilen/engelska/1980_90.shtml
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://connectedplanetonline.com/mobile-apps/news/nfc-mobile-phone-explode-1110/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131110182623/http://news.cnet.com/FBI-taps-cell-phone-mic-as-eavesdropping-tool/2100-1029_3-6140191.html to http://news.cnet.com/FBI-taps-cell-phone-mic-as-eavesdropping-tool/2100-1029_3-6140191.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.richardling.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:23, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hardware: SIM Card issues

Since this page is semi-protected...

Under Hardware: SIM Card.

Would be good to update the picture to either one showing a nano-SIM, or perhaps both mini- and nano-SIMs. The link in the caption "Typical mobile phone SIM card." is to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIM_card and should instead be to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subscriber_Identity_Module — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.172.210.101 (talk) 22:32, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Image caption incorrect?

The picture with the caption "A New York City driver using two hand held mobile phones at once" got my attention, so I checked its details here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hand_held_phone_in_car.JPG

They read: "Diver in a Mitsubishi Galant using a hand held mobile phone violating New York State law."

To me, those are incompatible statements but I’m European, so who knows, maybe I’m wrong.

(Never mind that "Diver".) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geke (talk • contribs) 10:36, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Remove picture

It's extremely outdated and shows predominately Nokia phones. No mention of the "touchscreen" revolution. Update or delete this graphic immediately! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scott110 (talk • contribs) 08:21, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Americanisms in the lead

"sometimes shortened to simply mobile, cell or just phone"- they are only called cell phones in America and Canada it should be rephrased 'to simply mobile, cell(in the USA) or just phone' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.96.14.189 (talk) 16:33, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

First phone was named LK-1

First phone was named LK-1 and design in USSR in 1957 year. [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.208.100.186 (talk) 07:41, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Americanism

"mobile telephones are often also called cellular telephones or cell phones." Sentence must be completed with "in the U.S.A. and Canada" as this exclusive americanism is not in use in Britain, Ireland nor Australia/New Zealand https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_American_terms_not_widely_used_in_the_United_Kingdom#C — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:8C:4C22:8700:8D78:C5B4:48FD:13F0 (talk) 15:09, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Chargers

I seem to remember it being mentioned in either this article or a similar article when the major brands except Apple agreed in around 2009 to make Micro USB the universal standard for recharging new mobile phones. Maybe that ought to be mentioned in this article or in History of mobile phones. Tk420 (talk) 22:08, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Ideal Conceal

Should the Ideal Conceal be in the article somewhere? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 22:44, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

No. --Wtshymanski (talk) 20:46, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request 30 May 2018

Under the section, Hardware, I will create a new subsection, Battery & Battery Life, (in between or after SIM card and Sound) to make a new contribution on the mobile phone page about mobile phone batteries and battery life Sdeeneed (talk) 17:06, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 17:25, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

I am requesting to change/add in between or after SIM card and Sound insert new subsection, Battery & Battery Life, to make a new contribution on the mobile phone page about mobile phone batteries and battery life that states: "The average phone battery lasts 2-3 years at best. Many of the wireless devices use a Lithium-Ion (Li-Ion) battery, which charges 500-2500 times, depending on how users take care of the battery and the charging techniques used. It is only natural for these rechargeable batteries to chemically age which is why the performance of the battery when used for a year or two will begin to deteriorate. There are many ways to lengthen the battery life on your cell phone to get the most use out of it, such as occasionally letting your phone die completely or charging your phone when it is low but not completely dead to avoid overcharging. Overcharging your phone can cause it to overheat which can be damaging to the Lithium-Ion battery because it can increase the rate of chemical aging. Keeping a phone out of the excessive, and unnecessary heat along with not keeping your cell phone plugged into the charger for excessive amounts of time can extend battery life." Sdeeneed (talk) 22:03, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

References

 Not done: Superseded by subsequent section. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:31, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 June 2018

I will insert new subsection, Battery & Battery Life, (in between or after SIM card and Sound) to make a new contribution on the mobile phone page about mobile phone batteries and battery life that states:

"The average phone battery lasts 2-3 years at best. Many of the wireless devices use a Lithium-Ion (Li-Ion) battery, which charges 500-2500 times, depending on how users take care of the battery and the charging techniques used. It is only natural for these rechargeable batteries to chemically age which is why the performance of the battery when used for a year or two will begin to deteriorate. There are many ways to lengthen the battery life on your cell phone to get the most use out of it, such as occasionally letting your phone die completely or charging your phone when it is low but not completely dead to avoid overcharging. Overcharging your phone can cause it to overheat which can be damaging to the Lithium-Ion battery because it can increase the rate of chemical aging. Keeping a phone out of the excessive, and unnecessary heat along with not keeping your cell phone plugged into the charger for excessive amounts of time can extend battery life." Sdeeneed (talk) 21:59, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

 Note: One small copy-edit i.e. replace the word "our" with "the" in the second sentence. regards, DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 16:30, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

 Note: The use of the word "your" (in various places in the proposed addition) would also be inappropriate, see WP:Pronoun. --David Biddulph (talk) 01:54, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Sdeeneed, thanks for providing all of these details in your citations! If you're citing websites as sources, the standard practice is to use template:cite web, which I did for you. I also fixed a few capitalisation mistakes, such as using title case when the sources (except Apple) use sentence case. The section seems relevant, but it needs work before being added because Wikipedia isn't a how-to guide. I'm not sure we should just keep modifying your comment when working on this section, so let's take it somewhere else and work on it there. Maybe your sandbox? If you're not sure how to use your sandbox, I can copy and paste it there for you, and you'll be able to edit it there.

Two more things: If you reply to me, please do me a favour and ping me by writing {{u|Professor Proof}} somewhere in your comment (it should look like Professor Proof when you click "show preview") and not forgetting to sign. Also, don't forget to indent. Professor Proof (talk) 08:24, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 6 July 2018

106.206.31.134 (talk) 14:05, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. L293D (☎ • ✎) 14:16, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Hand phone

@ImprovedWikiImprovment: Please see sources on special:diff/424176633/424836050 and last archive talk pages. Thanks. --Garam (talk) 00:30, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

@Garam: I put "hand phone" there; what is the issue? IWI (chat) 01:04, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, explanation was not enough. That means, now there are so many titles, and first sentence has poorly readable. So, In the past, we decides to remove some other names according to MOS:ALTNAME and WP:OTHERNAMES. Thanks. --Garam (talk) 06:29, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Yes okay but I completely oppose to the mention of "North America" etc. This is information that is unnecessary. IWI (chat) 20:48, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Article is full off errors and omissions

This article is so ridden by errors and mistakes, gross omissions so I move to DELETE it. Start with the difference between "Cell phone" and "mobile phone". Then we all use GSM phones now, except for the Verizon and Sprint in the US. There is nothing here about GSM phone, just a load of crap on GSM words wrongfully explained at times. There is nothing about "the mobile network" being different to the perceived Internet that we use. This open for huge security breaches. Shut your eyes and the problem is that you drive into the wall. But you can also end up in the sea and even stay on the road. This article is put it bluntly: very foggy. It started off with "Americanism" and it goes on to tons of crap. It must be turned upside down and completely revised based on reality and not wishful thinking and hearsay. I will not waste time to rewrite it just to be rolled over by some "bot". --KHF 00:31, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Although I dislike his carping remarks, I agree with many of User:KHFs criticisms. The difference between cellphones and other types of "mobile phone", such as the operator-assisted mobile phones used before cellular networks, and satellite phones, is not mentioned. If the subject of this article is limited to cellphones, as it is now, then maybe it should be moved to Cell phone? Second, the brief amateur description of how cellular technology works in the "Infrastructure" section is completely inadequate. Third, the differences between 2C, 3C, 4C, and 5C cellular networks should be covered better. Just sayin. --Chetvorno^TALK 20:08, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

First figure of the mobile phone number -

- number .. of the chamber ..

the-the-the ))) .. 

176.59.192.116 (talk) 04:45, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

If as new - nothing.

Only small.

176.59.202.162 (talk) 05:12, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Materials (body of a phone)

It should be covered in the article. body of a phone is made of metal (aluminum, ...) or plastic or glass or ceramic. (a lot of phones use a metal band or a faux-metal finish over plastic trim - not the same if - actually made of metal) First phones that used each material, pros, cons... [2] Flagship phones in 2018 will all have glass backs From metal to glass 89.201.184.245 (talk) 04:48, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

blockchain phone

• World’s first true blockchain phone according to https://medium.com/swlh/blockchain-phone-secure-decentralized-98aa370f3ef2 is BOB (= Blok On Blok).
  Users will be able to switch between Android and blockchain modes on their phones.
  BOB's OS is Function X or f(x). When in blockchain mode every and all bits of data sent using the phone use blockchain technology that is why "true" is used, see 3rd point for "true"
• First blockchain phone call was made in 2018 according to https://medium.com/pundix/making-the-worlds-first-blockchain-phone-call-66784b5436ee
• there were prior to BOB " blockchain-based" phones but were just more blockchain-focused phones, first was HTC according to https://medium.com/@bitassetglobal/5-blockchain-phones-for-crypto-holders-899a56c1cd8c and https://www.technologyreview.com/2019/02/28/66000/what-the-hell-is-a-blockchain-phoneand-do-i-need-one/

Why will this improve this article - it's a new technology specific to the article .
why this isn't a general discussion? Well, it points out specific points relevant to the article and does not ask for discussion, help and whatnot.
Is it original research? Well I used my own words, but there were cases when that was interpreted as original research so I am not sure. 89.201.184.245 (talk) 07:11, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

SMS phone

• There were phones that were described as SMS devices, which premier purpose was messaging. Eamples are Motorola V100, V101, V200. Review at http://www.arcxsites.shh.net/MotorolaV101.htm of v101 that uses: "SMS device", "SMS phone" and gives desciption or definition "uses GSM... shaped like an alphanumeric pager...QWERTY keyboard" https://www.rcrwireless.com/20020124/carriers/motorola-launches-v101-communicator-with-rogers-at-t
• so it was alphanumeric pager which had phone call capability

Why will this improve this article - it's a new category specific to the article. Phablet is the same thing and has it's own page
why this isn't a general discussion? Well, it points out specific points relevant to the article and does not ask for discussion, help and whatnot. It only asks for consenus.
Is it original research? Obviously not. 89.201.184.245 (talk) 07:11, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

"Mobile dance" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Mobile dance. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 26#Mobile dance until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 15:36, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

"Phone dance" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Phone dance. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 26#Phone dance until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 15:36, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 January 2021 and 16 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): ParkerL7. Peer reviewers: Daniel Blomgren.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 04:20, 17 January 2022 (UTC)