Holiday Gift Guide »

Look Ma, Chinese can make thin phones too!

Categories: Devices
By: , IntoMobile
Monday, July 2nd, 2007 at 5:28 AM

You’ve read that right – Chinese handset manufacturers can make thin phones. The one we’re presenting you today clearly confirms that — this device (we’re still not aware of its name) is only 7.8 mm thick. One of the Samsung’s thinnest handsets, X828, measures at 6.9 mm, meaning that the Chinese phone is only 0.9 mm thicker (the two devices are compared on a photo bellow). Too bad it mimics Sony Ericsson Walkman phones in many ways. As an original device, it would be awesome! Still, bravo to Chinese for acquiring the right technology for producing this device.

Chinese thin cellphone

More photos after the break.

Chinese thin cellphone - pic 1

Chinese thin cellphone - pic 2

Chinese thin cellphone - pic 3

[Via: Just Another Mobile Phone Blog]

About The Author

Dusan Belic

Dusan has been using smartphones since their introduction and is now following the latest trends in the industry. The "convergence" is what he's most excited about, and writing about it is the next logical thing to do. He thinks that using a smartphone is what everyone who cares about their time should do. In addition to his interests in mobile phones, Dusan also loves to experiment with the latest web and mobile 2.0 services. The idea of accessing and managing your information from any device no matter where you are simply amazes him. Whether it's an online to-do list, note taking service or a video sharing social network, he's there to try it out. He admits though, he's still searching for the ultimate web-based organizational tool, which "sings" perfectly with the mobile PIM application. Dusan used to run SymbianWatch.com which later became part of IntoMobile. He lives in Serbia, South-East Europe, from where he edits the site on a daily basis.

  • Why do I need to tell?

    Samsung’s thinnest mobile device to date is its U100 at 5.9mm not the old x820series.
    Please correct it.

  • dusanb

    Corrected. Thanks for the info!