Commodore Business Machines live again !

[Duce]

That's perhaps the most hideous looking smart phone I've seen in years.

And I say that as someone who owned a Blackberry Storm, lol.

[Duce]

If people are hell bent on showing their "Commodore patriotism", save yourself the trouble and just get one of the new Moto phones with "Commodore" engraved on the back case cover.  The new Moto G and Moto X are terrific phones and the lower end model is not only cheaper, but about 2x the phone this hokey "Commodore" phone is.  Remember, this phone these guys are trying to flog you is just a rebadged Chinese phone that you can find online for half the price, but hey, if you want to pay 2x for a low end phone for a Commodore screened on logo (that's optimistic, I wouldn't be surprised if it's actually a decal/sticker anyways), she's a free market world.


A Moto phone with Commodore engraved on the back is about as legit as this C= phone is, it seems, lol.

http://tinypic.com/r/10hreqv/8

[Duce]

No, it's not exciting, or even vaguely relevant, even.  It is just another low end Android phone with a decal or screened logo on it.  But...

In a hobby where a lot of people would buy a used roll of bathroom tissue in the name of "supporting Commodore" if it had the Boingball printed on it, it is pretty important to mention potential cash-grabs, esp. when it involves legal issues in regards to licensing.  We've had "noble companies" grave robbing the marque for years now, so this isn't anything we haven't seen before.  That hasn't kept people from opening their wallets for overpriced, underpowered and questionably licensed stuff before, though.

It's a cheap Android phone - available for a hundred bucks on Alibaba.  With a C= logo on it that apparently the sellers never bothered properly licensing.

There was a fair number of people here even on A.org willing to throw $400 at this phone in some vain attempt at retro chicness, or otherwise honoring the memory of a once great company, or simply reliving some of their youth spent with the real C= machines.  Whatever the reason, it's pretty important to know that this is just another scam cash grab.

It's a free market.  If overpaying for a low end phone to a company that seemingly never did the proper legalwork in regards to trademark licensing gets you off, buy the phone.  I'd honestly be curious to see how happy people are with it, because the hardware itself under the "real" name (Orgtec WaPhone) gets paltry reviews at best.  I doubt a screened on Chickenlips logs will change that much

Me, I'll stick with my new LG G4.  My boingball wallpaper and Amiga emulators give me all the Amiga "fix" I need on it, and such things didn't cost me a thin dime past what I paid for the phone ($200 on 2 yr contract, $45 a month contract costs, unlimited text/voice, 10 GB data).

[Duce]

I'm not stopping anyone from buying one, Paulie.  I've been called a D*ck, and far worse, today alone.    My apologies if I am coming off as patronizing to anyone sincerely interested in a "badged" device like this.  It's a free market, and all that.

What gets me mostly is news sites like Wired and their original article on this device that read like ad material.  Wired should be ashamed of the initial article they wrote on this.  A noobie copy intern would have wrote a better researched article.

No one bothered to dig into the fact it *is* a rebadged China phone at 2x+ the price.  It's easy to identify what the device actually is, a WaPhone.  No one at Wired bothered to check the legality of the license this new company has.  No one at Wired bothered to take into account that these guys had already reportedly screwed over a quite well known designer over what was quite frankly (the C64 phone mock up), an abortion of a design.  The whole article was linkbait solely written to get all the C= aficionados all worked up and thinking Commodore was back, ready to save the marque and brand and restore the grand hope of The Faithfuls.  One of which I am.  it was easier for Wired to take the lowbrow clickbait route, and Wired usually isn't too bad in that regard.  A bit of a let down is all, and I say that as someone who has subscribed to the print version of the magazine since the first issue 20+ years ago.  A subscription I won't be renewing.

It's a low spec phone.  If you are after a low to low/mid range at best - specc'ed Android phone, you can get one for $70 off contract that has similar specs from any US carrier.  S4's and S5's are even going for free these days with a contract on my own carrier, and despite the age, far better devices.  These C= phones are what I'd consider "burner phone" specs for $400.

Just do your homework and look past the write up on Wired, is all I suggest.  if the device suits your needs and is something you feel you want to support, the $400 cost or nothing I say is going to stop anyone.  But I do believe in truth in advertising, and it's my own opinion the device and company as a whole is just another one of the cash-grabs we're unfortunately so accustomed to in this scene.

I just don't like seeing anyone taken for a ride due to fond memories of their computing youth over what's really just a $400 screened on (decal maybe?) logo when you can buy a far better device for half the price, and in fact, you can buy the same phone sans Chickenlips logo for $100.

Anyone that does get one, please do post a review.  Do your homework on MediaTek chips before buying, though.  I say that as someone who's currently using a MediaTek chipped phone (Alcatel, mind you, not an Orgtec) as a paperweight.