Samsung's M110 "Solid" phone is rugged, boring

Samsung's M110 "Solid" phone is apparently making its way to the UK soon, bringing with it a ruggedized exterior sure to resist even the most violent attacks (or scratching, at least). Aside from the tough exterior the device, it's actually a fantastically boring GSM phone, featuring EDGE / GPRS data, a 240 x 320 screen, Bluetooth, a VGA camera, FM tuner... and MMS! The Korean electronics-maker claims this phone is the "first ultra durable handset," which is wildly inaccurate, though the device can apparently withstand shocks, water, and hanging out with Tara Reid for a night. Price is expected to hover somewhere near the £59.99 mark (or about $119), and will be available in the UK on the O2 network soon.

[Nina Myers @ Feb 7th 2008 6:12PM]

Found a review here, author seems disappointed, "brainless soldier": http://mobilearsenal.com/review/samsung_m110_brainless_soldier/introduction.html

[Carlos @ Feb 13th 2008 6:17PM]

I think most people are missing the point on this one, im a gas engineer and plumber in the UK and ive gone through 3 phones in as many months, and when it's your main busness number (running a small company) you rely on it for your income, all these fancy phones are great for after work or the weekend but truth be told I dont wanna browse the net on my work phone:
a: It costs too F**King much as it is
b: what am i gonna look at (don't say porn)

All a tradsmans phone needs to do is;
a: take calls
b: make calls
c: some sort of SMS arrangement
d: bluetooth for the headset

A good battery life helps and if I don't have to take it to the local mobile phone dealer every month to get it replaced or cleaned then hallelujah!

I couldnt give a toss if it can't wirelessly connect to my toilet at home and flush it, or if the camera (that i wouldnt use) can only capture 8 pixels or if it didnt look pretty. The torch is a nice feature!

All in all if you polish your nails or adjust your tie in the morning, dont buy this phone, but if your headed to work in a van, it's a god send!

[Boca @ Feb 22nd 2008 9:13AM]

The spec is incorrect. Real screen resolution is 128x128.

[paragraph @ Jan 4th 2008 11:53AM]

Is this allready available in the US?

I woud love a phone like this. I was going to go in for a Motorolla Nextel (the big one), but this is much smaller.

Anything is better than my current phone (that has a busted everything i might add).

I think it's definitly worth the money, it's a no frills phone that can take a beating, what more do you want?

[derX @ Jan 5th 2008 1:10PM]

Err, if you're looking for a phone with longevity, a Samsung is not your best bet, despite what they advertise. If you don't want to get a Motorola Nextel phone, then go to Nokia. I've owned many phones and I am pretty careful with them, too, and the only phone that's ever sustained physical damage was a Samsung I owned (p777)--it was dropped on a wooden floor and the screen cracked. My Nokia n80 has been good as have the Nokia 3200 which I had forever (it was my second phone), the latter worked so well, I gifted it to my not-so-gentle uncle and haven't had a complaint about it yet.

--------


I say no to this little Samsung GSM bricklet.

[Nick @ Jan 4th 2008 11:59AM]

Meh, my old school Nokia 3xxx took a tumble down two flights of concrete stairs and landed in a puddle in the rain. Not only was there not a scratch on it, but the person I was speaking to on the other end was still there and wondering what the hell had caused all that noise.

THAT was an ultra durable phone.

[Andrew @ Jan 4th 2008 12:07PM]

One of my friends plucked a Nokia 6255 out of the snow (as in, it wasn't his and had been dropped by someone else, it was literally covered except for a bit of blue sticking out), and had it activated on his account. The thing looked terrible, but I gotta admit that was a nice phone.

Another friend had his Nokia (One of those old gray bricks with the wing shaped buttons, you know the ones) tied to the bumper of his car by a string attached to its antenna. It was dragged there for about 4 miles, and recovered in full working orders (albeit scratched).

[T-Bone @ Jan 4th 2008 1:49PM]

My old Nokia slid off the pizza box I was carrying, bounced on the concrete stairs, and in slow motion went over the edge to the concrete 10 feet below. Parts went everywhere. Fortunately, the parts were just the battery, battery cover, and sim card. The phone itself got a crack in the plastic over the screen and a scratched corner and worked like a champ once I put the battery back in. I was really impressed.

[Wolfticket @ Jan 4th 2008 4:02PM]

It's a well known fact that 3310s cannot be killed by conventional weapons.

[BatteryAcid @ Jan 4th 2008 4:54PM]

My dads is a mason. His Nextel Motorola i305 was dropped 3 stories, run over by a 1 ton truck, lost in a wheel barrel of cement, and dropped in a bucket of dirty water. It was a monster. The contacts on the charging port eventually wore out, and it was retired. A few friends have had Nokia phones. All of them loved them. One of my friends mom lost hers in the snow during winter and when she recovered it in the spring it still worked. You guys have some amazing stories.

[Adrian Williams @ Jan 4th 2008 12:00PM]

A cellphone used to make calls impossible

[Andrew @ Jan 4th 2008 12:09PM]

Do you know my grandma? You sound just like her when she sees us "kids" texting.

[slumlord @ Jan 4th 2008 12:16PM]

shouldnt all phones be ultra durable. this is a device that half the planet use daily, everywhere and in every imaginable way. for this to be a feature borders on insult.

[murray @ Jan 4th 2008 1:12PM]

I completely agree. Phones are the sort of device that are likely to be dropped on pavement multiple times throughout their life. They should be able to take that in their stride.

[Jeff @ Jan 4th 2008 12:17PM]

The hilarious thing is my first Sprint PCS phone in 1997 or 98 was a Samsung that looked *exactly* like this.

Back to the future, I guess.

[tamoghno @ Jan 4th 2008 12:22PM]

just wondering , is the screen really QVGA ? that LCD is damn small.
& oh yeah ,anyone remember the 5140 ?

[RyanK @ Jan 4th 2008 12:37PM]

The screen isn't small, the phone is a foot long.

[LesbianHam @ Jan 4th 2008 12:48PM]

@tamoghno

was gonna say the exact same thing...

[Paul Brown @ Jan 4th 2008 1:11PM]

Can you say ugly early candy bar 1990's design?

[PDubNYC @ Jan 4th 2008 12:51PM]

Let's just hope that Naomi Campbell doesn't get her hands on one of these, or God help her assistant....

[pyeman @ Jan 4th 2008 1:05PM]

lets hope it's more durable than the samsung d900. Just got through my third one of those, due to screen cracking problems! At least it meant that i got an iPhone, rather than an iPod touch for Christmas!

I bought out the old Nokia 3210 to tide me over in between purchases, still working after all these years. They don't make 'em like they used to!

[murray @ Jan 4th 2008 1:09PM]

I wonder why they would celebrate the VGA camera by printing "VGA" in big letters beside the lens. It's 2008. They should be embarrassed about their 0.3 megapixel camera.

[insertAlias @ Jan 4th 2008 2:43PM]

There are a few of us that don't particularly want or need a 5 megapixel camera in our phones. I wouldn't turn it down, but i wouldn't pay a dime extra for it if I had the option.

[murray @ Jan 4th 2008 2:55PM]

I don't dispute that, but it doesn't change the fact that it's odd to celebrate a spec that is the absolute minimum available.

[tek @ Jan 4th 2008 1:28PM]

Everyone who is complaining about this phone... nobody is making you buy it.
There is a need for durable, no-frills cell phones. Do you know how many friends I have that just don't give a crap about having tiny,crappy web browsing on their phone? You know why? because they don't want to pay $300 every time they have a drunken night out or a clumsy moment and their phone ends up on the pavement. Nokia should take a cue from this, they used to make durable cell phones - before the cell became a fashion icon....
After all, we all don't buy Ferraris and avoid speed bumps, so why should we buy (even uglier) Sony Ericssons and worry about them coming in to contact with a hard surface?

I say bring on the cheap, functional durable cell phones!

[T-Bone @ Jan 4th 2008 1:54PM]

I'm sorry, what? If I bought a Ferrari, I'd damn well avoid speed bumps. I'd baby the hell out of it until I hit the open road.

My friends don't baby their cellphones, ever. They don't cry when their phones break. Shit happens, but don't stress about it when it is just a cellphone that everyone else has.

[tadghostal @ Jan 4th 2008 1:30PM]

Ha! Look at story, then the comments, then read:

http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/01/predictions-for-2008/comments/9612968/

Damn, I'm guud.

[crescentdavid @ Jan 4th 2008 9:58PM]

Personally, I like the idea of tiny, crappy internet browsing. It's just an addictive thing ... my surroundings aren't interesting enough nor am I acute enough to see the interest in them. So I distract myself with third rate video and songs I've heard hundreds of times.

In related news ... texting is one of those generational, "I must always be connected things." Telegraph was faster than pony express, telephones took off and oh, my, god, you could just say things instead of writing them down. Then you could speed dial. Then there was voice activated dialing which ended up not being cutting edge. Two fingers smearing a touch screen was cutting edge. Painfully inputting predictive text was cutting edge. Mostly, what was cutting edge was a non-stop interaction between screen and eye ... the absolute need to be in touch with anyone, all the time. Justified by the IMHO texting and the "hey, I'm almost to the Crestview exit" conversations, people are never alone, never quiet, never reflective.

Of course ... this comes to you via my machine, surrounded by other machines networked together, scanners, mp3 players, hell, even a nano, all lying in wait ... all silently screaming "use me, use me." And for one, brief, shining moment, I'm in charge.
//end rant.