wow..!!! only 299 USD? bring it on...
Oh man that thing is UGLY. These days people (especially non-techy people) are buying phones based on looks/aesthetics/sex appeal. No one will buy this if its that butt-ugly, no matter how good the specs. And because of such poor battery, those that were thinking of buying it wont.
Definetly needs 4000mah battery to became supersmartphone
SE ideos 12 mp cam with zoom =1000 mah and kodak phone camera 16 mp cam with zoom=1020 mah battery whyyyyyyy is there less li-ons in the world? or manufacturers r dumb wtf.....
seems like the kind of phone you would regret buying I would never get one, however n8 is also a terrible phone even though it has a decent camera, Galaxy S2 is a good phone with a pretty good camera that's why I own one.
must phone companys like htc samsung lg they make cellphones that can take photos , but Kodak is making a camera that can make phone calls....not alot of people will buy this unless foer those that are taking pictures more than making phone calls
unworthy rip offs . It ain't no phone and its looks ugly with an insufficient battery charge. What kind of deal is this ???
I am in as well ,,dont care about thickness never have but needs a bigger battery definetly..Folk want these thin fones all the time with puny batterys and hard to grip devices,,especially holding it as camera you need the thickness..
Except for the touch screen (which isn't great either) it looks like a candybar phone from 1998..
I agree with the other poster who said Kodak should cut their losses and bow out of the market, perhaps licencing their patented technology instead of manufacturing.
The front aint the best lookin but if it acts like a propa digital camera then im in, remember if it aint a propa xenon flash just like the n8 or the viewty then it will also be a poor camera for night. Its all about the lightin when it comes to any camera.
Who on Earth would buy this, this piece of... i don't know hodw to call it????????????
It would have been cool if the phone side was a bit more modern, like some led buttons and a better looking screen and the back in old school camera. A bit of old and new(er). The main downsides are the battery, 720p, thick body to small screen. I wouldn't buy it. Don't need to explain why.
it's not a phone
If this has better image quality than a Galaxy S2, I'm in. As long as I can leave the point'n'shoot at home, I don't care about slow graphics, no 1080p, slow response, whatever. If it can make phone calls and have excelent image quality, that's it.
well i surely would love to buy this phone when it has two of my most favorite brands. Polaroid (Older favorite) Kodak (Pretty decent). And also When i already own a phone which is around 16mm thick 18mm would still be fine. want to know when i can procure this beast.
Looks really shit quality.
ugliest looking device ever!
last ditch effort to stay afloat.... maybe best for Kodak to sell its patents and fade away with what little dignity they have left... in imho.
http://www.gsmarena.com/huawei_unveils_worlds_thinnest_android_smartphone__ascend_p1_s-news-3637.php If the P1 can house a 1800 mAh battery then this handset would need something approaching 2000 mAh, especially if they're going to be selling it on the merit of it's optical zoom camera feature...