Nokia 6500 classic review: Slim inside out

• Elaine
• Report

I am on my second handset, the first one caused me problems as it kept cutting me off and the interference was problematic. Complained and received a second set the reception is better and it does not cut out however I cannot connect it to my bluetooth car kit which the first handset connected to without any problems. I really feel this handset has a lot of problems as my friend has had problems with hers too.

• Reply
• 2008-06-19 21:49
• nxt7

• novosibirsk
• Report

Why NOONE here mentions the SAR?At 0.92 W/kg I prefer different frying pan

• Reply
• 2008-05-05 19:25
• 0Vfi

• Anon
• Report

I like this phone, It's very sexy and does the basic job of a cellphone, but there seems to be some phone software bugs. I've been having problems with connecting the phone to PC Suite.
The camera's night mode is also horrible.

• Reply
• 2007-12-19 15:20
• vx6U

• Jez
• Report

For anyone having problems with the volume on this phone..

There IS a volume control, it's not mentioned in the manual and the instructions on their webpage are wrong.. buuut.. if you hit the up or down buttons on the central navigation square, it raises or lowers the volume, making it more than audible and the sound quality is actually really good. Apart from that hideous whining that everything nokia suffers from.

Enjoy.

• Reply
• 2007-11-26 21:17
• mpG6

• Ashwin
• Report

Has any one among you been able to extract all the default contents(themes,ringtones,games etc) from 6500 classic. Any good soul who done it, pls post it.

Regards
Ash...

• Reply
• 2007-11-11 18:13
• 2@X@

• MYfly
• Report

Bought the phone last week without a contract. Like we already know about over half a year ;-p the phone design looks great - even in real! It is a nice business phone - it's classic! I am not a technique nerd - so the display is great for me, the keypad - you must get use to it - but o.k., the menue is like in the old ones, a minus would be the fingerprints you would see on the battery cover and that the sound volume of the caller is not controllable and it is too low!

The other problem that I found out is that if you want to shoot a photo in the dark, the flash turns up to earlie before the picture is even taken ... Maybe somebody can give me advice how to handle that problem?!

All in all - I like the phone very much! I can recommend it!

• Reply
• 2007-10-30 09:18
• mw{s

• Matias
• Report

Had the phone for about 2 weeks now and is good for someone who just wants a simple and attractive handset. Battery is a lot better than the 6300. It is prone to a lot of fingerprints, especially the back cover. Dirt gets trapped on the sides of the screen and may be difficult to clean out.

• Reply
• 2007-10-29 06:01
• TIAT

• Anonymous
• Report

"The QVGA resolution is not much of a boast but it does a job just good enough"

Pathetic reviews.

A year or so ago, these same people were going crazy about the QVGA displays and how CRISP and BRIGHT and blah blah they looked. Now look at their comments. So what other resolution do u want on a 2.0 inch screen? 1600x1200? lol

Pathetic.

• Reply
• 2007-10-25 23:49
• S90n

• Steve
• Report

Keypad is fine, I find it very tactile and responsive. Better than the 6300's, not as good as 6233's...

• Reply
• 2007-10-24 18:42
• m5Tg

• Anonymous
• Report

Does the keypad really as bad as what it says in the review?

• Reply
• 2007-10-24 18:28
• wrb2

• Steve
• Report

"The Nokia 6300 is a much better phone in my opinion. The 6300 Looks nicer, very much the same features (and better features in some cases) and can accommodate more memory than the 6500."

If memory is your main concern then don't buy a S40 handset. I have a 6300 & 6500 classic and the 6500c is better in every area.

As for the complaint about fingerprints in the review, the only place fingerprints may be seen is on the back on the battery cover. It's impossible to get prints on the front of the phone due to the phones brushed aluminium finish!

• Reply
• 2007-10-24 10:29
• BwWV

• Steve
• Report

Is this review for real? It can't be recommended because of the price? What about those who get it free on a contract?

It seems bizarre to praise the phones features throughout 5 pages of the review (obviously not the camera part) yet give such a strange conclusion at the end of the review. GSMArena didn't not recommend the 8800 or 8600 because of its price, so why start now? Baffling.

• Reply
• 2007-10-24 10:25
• BwWV

• Original_Jamaican
• Report

The Nokia 6300 is a much better phone in my opinion. The 6300 Looks nicer, very much the same features (and better features in some cases) and can accommodate more memory than the 6500.

• Reply
• 2007-10-24 03:23
• kaJ7

• SeF
• Report

Camera performance is expected to be mediocre just like W880, however there is one phone that can take pictures even alot better than the current 9.4mm phones, that's the Samsung F300. and that real disappointment was that both 6300 and 6500 classics do not have camera button on the right side while SE W880 could even have it :(

another criticism would be the fact that it doesn't use the standard non-os browsers used in samsung and SE phones: the NetFront 3.4 rendering pages with opera was good but mediocre compared to the netfront used in K850 and U700 one.

to sum it up, this was intended to be the cheaper version of the 8600 luna targeting slim fashion market :(

• Reply
• 2007-10-24 02:10
• whBs

• hargs48
• Report

1st here,seems like a great mid-level phone running S40...

• Reply
• 2007-10-23 19:12
• NaD}