though there isn’t a proper definition for a smartphone. a general perception says that a smartphone is a smartphone if it can do a major part of what a pc (or a palmtop) does for u.

but if it lacks a standard os upon which third party application run, it cant b called a smartphone. series 40 phones run on java tech., apps developed on which dont have that much freedom over the system…

I’ve been in the industry for 8 years and have never heard that definition of a smartphone before. Perhaps I need to read AllAboutSymbian more often

My point is that there is no consistent definition of the term and therefore it is useless. Proposing another definition doesn’t change that, unless everyone agrees to adopt it.

Thanks for the comment.

It’s very simple actually.

A smartphone (such as S60) can run many pieces of third party software all at once, and you can switch between them whenever you want, just like on a PC.

A non-smart phone (such as Series 40) can’t do this, it can only run one third party app at a time.

Of course that might not fit your definition of “smart”, but that’s technically what the name “smartphone” means.

But I agree “smartphone” is a very vague and deceptive term, a much better name would be “multitasking phone”. The problem is it’s just not as catchy as “smartphone”.

And actually… Nokia HAS already dropped the term smartphone for models aimed at the mainstream market. The 5700 smartphone I wrote about in the article is never advertised as a smartphone, it’s always referred to as a “music phone” or simply “phone”. Very few Nokia smartphones actually have the word “smartphone” anywhere in the publicity or tech specs any more.

As I said in the article, if smartphone makers can sort out the problem of battery life (which is by far the biggest weakness of modern smartphones), it seems very likely that smartphones will finally merge completely with normal phones, and everyone will own a multi-tasking gadget just called a “phone”.