http://kbench.com/news/?no=26388&pr=3&cc=60

Samsung SPH-V5400 (Korea Telecom)

1.5GB HDD
2.2-inch QVGA LCD
1-megapixel digital camera
MP3
e-Book
FM radio

Price: US$700

LG plans to release 7-megapixel camera phone sometime in the first half of 2005. Samsung will probably jump to 8 to 10 megapixel.

Samsung was faster again. Many people are already using this 7-megapixel camera phone, Samsung SCH-V770. 640*480 30fps video as well. MMCmicro externally, 256MB card included, 100MB internal memory...

http://moim.cetizen.com/sch-v770

http://review.cetizen.com/sch-v770

3072*2304 picture

Cost is near US$1,000 and supply isn't meeting demand yet.

Damn that's alot of money for a phone even with all the features it has.

Right, South Korean domestic market is very well protected for companies like LG and Samsung (which is why Sony and other Japanese companies couldn't ever have any sizable marketshare in the closest country from Japan.)

Plus, S770 is the only and first 7-megapixel camera phone in the world. Most 5-megapixel camera phones now cost around US$500 and one can get a used (but nearly new) 5-megapixel phone for under US$400. 1-megapixel to 3-megapixel phones by now are ubiquitous and cost nearly nothing also because the camera units for those are very cheap.

Samsung's mobile phone business is much larger and more profitable than Samsung's ODD business so Samsung neglects ODDs and concentrates on mobile phones.

Anyway, the price is not very important to those who want to buy them. Whether it's US$200 or US$1,000, some people will buy them. Some marketing people will even say they can sell more units by pricing at US$1,000 instead of US$500.

Kind of like when the president of Evian (bottled water from France) was asked why they don't lower their prices to compete with the influx of cheaper brands ... his reply was that he didn't want to "cheapen the product".

As Kenshin alludes to, people will pay for technology to a certain degree. After that, it's all perceived value. It's funny how they can sell more phones by pricing them at $1,000 (at launch or early product life cycle of course) vs $500.

I would imagine the bulk of the expenses at Coca-Cola isn't for their packaging materials or ingredients. It's marketing. They're selling carbonated sugar water in an aluminum can. Amazing how marketing manipulates us on a daily basis.

To Mods: sorry for getting OT ...

Coca-cola makes a lot of profits every year (from Fortune 500.) There are also a lot of South Korean consumers that buy Evian bottles for like US$2 per liter. Most times, I drink tap water, boiled of course.

I saw that HDD-based camera phone displayed at a phone store a few days ago. Also the new LG 5-megapixel phone that can record 640*480 30fps video. The store asked for about US$650 including tax. Another LG phone has 256MB internal memory. It may not be that far away to see a mobile phone with 4GB or 16GB internal (not rotating) memory.

What's the point in releasing a phone with a HDD below the maximum size of a memory card?
//Danne

i bet this phone dont get here (US) for another 3yrs, very nice btw, although bloated with features... I remember when a phone was a phone, a place to store and keep numbers, and simply talk on.

I wish one thing that would improve is battery life, this seems to be the downfall in all electronic devices, ranging from phones, to mp3 players, to laptops.

I think battery life is the worst lived technology, and doesn't improve to meet public expectation.

Seems kind of useless to me. I mean... it's a phone. Most devices I have seen that offer multiple functions (phone, cam, mp3 player etc) can't do most of their tasks really excellent. For as long as that is the case, I consider devices like these as a total waste...