If you've been loving the pictures and videos we've been bringing you of the lusciously slim
BL40 Chocolate Touch, but holding your breath since a
certain blurry photo a few weeks ago showed a rather
different Chocolate Touch, we have some bad news. According to
Phone Arena News, a Verizon "focus group" (with a questionable sense of aesthetics) decided that the BL40 was crap, and so the somewhat unfortunate looking and decidedly asymmetrical VX8575 has been blessed for domestic release as "Chocolate Touch." It looks to be standard fare featurephone stuff, with a 3.2MP camera, WVGA TFT display, and a browser that will support some subset of HTML. No word on if or when the BL40 will also be making an appearance at Verizon stores, but if we'd been pushed to the curb for something this busted we certainly wouldn't come back -- at least not without a very big bouquet accompanied by a sincere apology.
posted Sep 21st 2009 9:48AM
Verizon strikes again.
It's official; telco's have no place dictating the look of phones.
I'd blame LG more than Verizon, although both have become equally suck.
From Wikipedia:
a non sequitur can denote an abrupt, illogical, unexpected or absurd turn of plot or dialogue not normally associated with or appropriate to that preceding it. It is a type of logical fallacy.
If you were going to release LG phones as Chocolates at the same time, why not the two that LOOK THE SAME?
Told ya.
When will BL40 actually show up? Word is that when Verizon and LG figure out how to change the UI and hardware inside to VZW "standards".
somebody got played like a bitch!
Blame Engadget for being so damn fast to play the game for the very folks that underwrite this damn blog.
As a Verizon customer, I must say that they look like idiots for doing this.
As a Verizon customer, I really don't care because the Chocolate has always been an awful phone and no one I know with a Verizon contract has been happy with their Chocolate.
I've owned two chocolates in the past. The first gen chocolate I owned was utter crap and it was replaced under warranty 3 times.
I was then upgraded to the chocolate 2 and honestly it was a pretty damn good phone. I can't speak to the latest chocolate, but the gen 2 chocolate was tough as nails and was super small and compact--had excellent battery life and excellent reception.
I agree, my Chocolate 2 has been excellent, 2+ years and its been rock solid. Great reception, great battery life, even a good speaker phone. My wife has the Chocolate 3 (flip) and loves it too.
I agree as a Verizon costumer I was exited and planing to get the BL40 not this piece of crap.
Verizon is officially retarded, and that focus group should be disbanded for lack of good taste!!!
Now it's time for all the clones to chime in on how ugly it is because engadget told them it's ugly.
Well that's hardly fair. It IS ugly. Engadget clones don't need to be indoctrinated to see ugly.
But it IS ugly! Are we looking at the same device here? It is boring to look at as well. At least compared to the other design.
I wouldn't call it ugly. It's attractive enough, just kind of generic looking. The problem is that, aesthetically, it doesn't compare to the BL40. For all I know this could be a better phone, though it won't be anymore once Verizon puts their crapware on it.
The phone as a whole is fairly typical, if not alright looking. I think they overdid the chrome look. My objection is more with the moronic-looking buttons.
Damm that thing is ugly.
Verizon, were you trying to turn people off with this phone? This is the ugliest Chocolate I've ever seen. You should of called it Charcoal instead.
Damn that's ugly o.o'...
FUGLY....
we need iPhone Killer not this crap!
You can't have it, because Apple patented everything that makes the iPhone the iPhone. Unless the competitor licensed these features from Apple, it would be illegal to even try. And, if they DID license it, the cost of licensing would out-price the competitor, thus making the iPhone cheaper.
So, once again, you're screwed. Patents strike again.
AHHAHAHAHAHA
TY, big V, for never ceasing to remind me why I switched to T-mobile.
Because you like crappy coverage but neet-o phones?
@ray: location location location. Where i live, T-mobile's service here is no worse than it is on Verizon, US Cellular has more coverage and customers than AT&T, and Sprint's coverage is so abysmal that you really have to search hard for someone who actually uses it. It all depends on where you live.
I'm with Tim. In New York, you're lucky if you get a bar or two with T-Mobile on Long Island.
AT&T is the slowest crap around, while Sprint is Speed Racer fast.
Verizon and Sprint are the only ones worth getting around these parts.
Would have been just "plain", instead of just ugly, if the bottom right part didn't look like it had been cut off and stuck in back.
stuck back in* fingers fail
What you guys don't realize is that it could be a Water proof phone. that would make it 10 x better than the iphone
Yeah that is unlikely to say the least. But we will wait and see.
The phone matches Verizon's logo.
Agreed.
Im Australian so i dont see the Verizon logo much so havent become accustomed to it. Every time i DO see it i think man that one ugly outdated and plain logo.
This is why the United States continues to fail. We get cool phones (way) last and not cool/ugly phones first or exclusively.
Funny, I thought it because of racist right wing religious zealots.
Who do you think are responsible for these butt-ugly phones?
its always seemed like verizon goes out of its way to get the worst phones on the market, and if there arent any bad phones available they take a good phone and cut the processor or RAM in half...
As an ex verizon customer I still don't understand their phone choices. The BL40 looked like a piece of junk, and although this looks slightly more standard, it still looks like a piece of junk. How many dumbphones, with a resistive touch screen, are they going to pass off as an alternative to the iPhone?
As many as are necessary to out-live Apple's patents.
Is Verizon the only carrier that can carry LG Chocolates?
It looks like an Edsel....
PS: Here is the phones name sake.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edsel
it looks better than the redesigned HERO thats for damn sure.
I guess you say that because you are with Verizon and not Sprint.
actually im a sprint SERO user :D
Frankly, i don't find why it is ugly, in fact, its look like a generic "iphone clone" with extra buttons.
you need to get your eyes checked then, only thing resembling the iphone is that it has a friggin screen. jeez.
but the freaking screen uses 90% of the size, why i should complain about the quite unnoticeable border?
Focus groups are such a waste of time and resources. Few things end well as a result of focus group studies.
Focus groups are a fantastic way to gain insight on a product. It's not likely that Verizon did ONE focus group study and decided not to offer the BL40. Personally I'm fine with Verizon not bringing the BL40 over because, even though its being offered affordably in europe does not mean it will offered affordably here. $150 for a phone in the UK translates to like $400 here. I'm basing this off some other touchphones that are practically given away for free in europe, yet we have to pay $400 and a data plan to get them here. The BL40 would not have worked here, and this is just a safe plan for Verizon. It's just enough to keep people who don't want to switch to AT&T and pay the extra for an iPhone, and it will likely get them to retain some younger customers who can't afford AT&T.
*BURSTS IN TO TEARS*
Noooooooooooooooo verizon you poopie heads
Well maybe the BL 40 will come back *sniff sniff* :P
ok i am done now :)
Bland, and boring. If it's going to be a dumbphone at least make it sexy. BL40 was the new hotness. This is the new not-ness.
When did they replace the EV with 3G on the signal indicator?? weird.