what's the difference between a regular phone and a smart phone?

[MAF]

I'd like to know what's the difference between a regular phone and a smart phone.

[Michael]

Depends on who you ask.

Prior to Java becoming a normal part of most phones, I considered the ability to add new software to be a key part of being a smartphone.

In general, the term is useless. What was considered a "smartphone" a year ago will be considered a "phone" next year.

What I like to think of as a smartphone is what many would call perhaps a communicator. 9500, P900, MPx, etc. To me, to really set a device apart from the general rank and file you need to be able to run a wide assortment of applications, sync up with a desktop computer, and you need to have a real method of input. T9 doesn't cut it. Touch screen or a keyboard of some sort, in my opinion.

The 6820 has a keyboard and can have apps installed in it, but it still wouldn't qualify as a Smartphone, if you asked me, even though it fits my definition.

Like I said, the term is pretty much worthless.

[commedecargons]

Well, in my opinion when the term smart phone was first introduced, it was supposed to be something of a one-stop media station. Camera, MP3 player, Organiser Functions, Internet Connectivity; i guess Microsoft came out with the term 'Smart Phone'.

But by then it was much of a 'Hardware' game, more convergence; smarter. Now, i would say that Smartphones r of those which runs open OS like Symbian, Palm, Pocket PC, Windows Mobile, Linux n some other propietory softwares. A Nokia 6820 which can add java apps is a no no to me.

And those heavy duty ones; i would call them communicators too which includes many forms of connectivity n was otherwise, mostly smarter than smartphones. Alot of them even supports fax sending n receiving.

So for the time being, at least in my opinion:
Smartphones:
Nokia 7650, 3650, 3660, 6600
Sendo X, Siemens SX1
Moto MPX200, O2 Xphones, Orange SPV etc

Communicators:
Nokia 9110, 9210, 9500
P800, P900, O2XDAII

wel, just like wat michael said, it's kinda useless to try to group them.:D

[gangstar]

Hey! You missed the N-Gage!!!

[TheZodiac]

I personally qualift I smartphone through the ability of the operating system it runs on.

Symbian
Linux (midori, etc..)
MS Mobile
Danger (hiptop os)
Wisdom (acompli)

[Bluey]

Weren't Ericsson the first to use the word in anger, when describing their R380? Originally it had very little to do with media, least of all cameras, and more to do with organiser functionality and internet connectivity. Nowadays it's still used in P900 literature, so obviously Microsoft don't have any exclusive rights to the term.

Although I'd agree that java has confused things a bit, I think the difference with a Smartphone is that the operating system itself is open, so pretty much anything can be added and integrated into the device at base level. Java never quite achieves this, in the same way that Java apps on the PC never really compete with native Windows software. So for me, a Smartphone would always be running an open and well supported OS designed primarily for phones, such as Symbian, Palm, or MS (with the emphasis on Symbian :))

EDIT - thought I'd post a link to an old article I just found on the development of the R380s, just in case anyone else was interested - http://www.ericsson.com/about/publications/review/2001_01/files/2001015.pdf - as Ericsson's first smartphone, and the first phone running any form of Symbian (afaik), it turned out to be a bit of a trendsetter really.