iphone telephone

Haha.. nice!

Casey Chen   04.27.10

Certainly lovely allusions to the classic combined desk-set, but none of these is a rotary set at all.

And the Freeland Studios website itself is a design disaster. The entrance involves bloated Flash, which is more likely than not to choke the browser, with no internal bypass. (One can, however, use a Google site search to get past it.)

Daniel   04.27.10

hasn't Hulger already done the same thing?

nothing new   04.27.10

Really, waste time and resources for this? Why? Who is this for? Someone really expects this to be used?

charles   04.27.10

@nothing new -- Hulger does not provide a cradle for the cellphone, nor otherwise replicate the base of a desk-set. They (and others) produce hand-sets that are like those of old subscriber sets, but use a head-set jack, and Hulger produces a cradle for these hand-sets (which cradle does not look like an old desk-set base). Further, Hulger's reference to these earlier hand-sets suggests an ignorance of the respectable efforts that went into the designs of those old hand-sets.

@charles -- Freeland explicitly said that he designed these items for fun. I'd say that fun is a sufficient reason for them.

Daniel   04.27.10

I totally love it. Would get an iphone just so I could have one of these in my home.

The old meets the new in the sexiest way possible.

My two thumps are up for this designer.

Ebun Feludu   04.27.10

I love it... retro meet present in a sexy way... beats having the iPhone directly to your ears and keeping the harmful waves away .

bizoune   04.27.10

@daniel -- The form of the cradle/base was arrived at from the constraints imposed by the functioning parts of the analog telephone of the time. The reference/copy of the classic Dreyfuss works, but in my opinion is hollow - unlike this base, which appears to use a liter of resin needlessly.

Henry D.   04.28.10

@daniel - you're view is not obviously impartial. I'd also say that you are Ebun Feludu and bizoune!

Anyway Hulger's phone set the precedent, others can merely follow.

nothing new   04.28.10

@Henry -- I don't know whether the black cradle is hollow or not, and the appearance of the transparent phone would be different (and IMO, not as appealing) if it were not solid. Further, the WEC 302 and SC 1243 were in fact heavy.

@nothing new -- Your theory about my identity is wishful thinking; multiple people are going to like this design, rather than there just being one shill out there. (And I'd be a poor shill, given that I've said that the designer's website is very poorly designed.) And Hulger did not set much-if-any precedent here. Others were already taking original hand-sets and putting head-set electronics in them; and, again, Hulger didn't and doesn't produce a cradle designed to look like a classic desk-set base.

Daniel   04.28.10

Those models were certainly heavy - but also weren't solid resin. And in my opinion, the clear and semi-clear are tacky and cheap looking - the opposite of the feel of the real WE 302. But I own a working version from the 40s, so I might not be so objective.

Henry D.   04.28.10

Wow Daniel I didn't realise that the combined desk set design was so close to your heart. Peoples comments are merely observations and personal interpretations.... no need to get your knickers in a twist.

I'm not a shill either, but I prefer the Hulger designs over these as they add a new dimension and design aesthetic, rather than simply reinventing the wheel. Also they use alot less material than these models in their manufacture.

nothing new   04.28.10

@Henry D -- Certainly the classic sets aren't solid resin, but I don't see a straightforward alternate way to increase the weight of the transparent or translucent cradles that wouldn't worsen their appearances. And, whether they are tacky or not, I believe that they would look worse if hollow.

(In the case a Sony land-line hand-set with an opaque shell, I've seen metal weights used to good effect, and that could be done with the black cradle.)

FWLIW, I have multiple working WEC 302s and SC 1243s (which I actually prefer), and no desire for an iPhone. (I use a different unit for mobile service.) I'd use a Dock-n-Talk if I wanted the look-and-feel of a classic phone when using cell service.

Daniel   04.28.10

@nothing new -- Your accusation of sock-puppetry was too ineffectual to get my knickers in any knot. And I've said nothing about where the combined subscriber set lies with respect to my heart.

No one has challenged your right to prefer the Hulger designs. Rather, the objections have been to your missing the essential difference between these Freeland designs and the Hulger products, to your mistaken assertion that the Hulger design set a meaningful precedent, and to your claim that I'm Ebun Feludu and bizoune.

Daniel   04.28.10

@Daniel - I'm surprised you like this design as a connoisseur of classic rotary phones. I see this Freeland studios project as weak because the reference is heavy handed and lacks any content aside from "This is an (archetypal) phone." Yes, the Iphone and 302 are both telecommunication devices. To me, using the entire form of the 302 verbatim doesn't add enough. It's a concept I think has potential, but this seems to me like low-hanging fruit that should have been left unpicked and in the sketchbook.

Henry D.   04.29.10

@Henry D -- Well, I cannot object to your having high standards. And perhaps I would demand more of the design if I took the iPhone itself more seriously.

Daniel   04.29.10

@Daniel - Ha! (to the iphone comment). It is hard to argue that it isn't one of the archetypal cell phones up to this point (Star-Tac or the classic Nokia brick come to mind), or that the interface and interaction are brilliant. I prefer the Android philosophy though, myself.

As designer cliche as it is - why not use bluetooth in this application. You could have the appeal of a traditional handset and not be constrained by a cord to a small radius. The cord would only be desirable if the idea was to confine phone conversation to a given space. Exploration of handset and cradle forms with so few constraints could inspire some really interesting and new designs. Not so much commercially viable, but still could be interesting nonetheless.

Also, I just went to the Freeland studios website, and this project makes a lot more sense in context.

Henry D.   04.30.10

Ummmm, has anyone looked at the previous entry, devoted to books- remember books? They are still the same- a front cover, back cover, paper inside- filled with someone's ideas. It's the storage ideas that are innovative, and if you ever had your parents read to you as a child, you'd see that this is something that touches all of us. Personally, I just plug my cell in and leave it on the floor under my side table. While I realize new technology is thrilling (yawn) from time 2 time, there's something to be said for reading a goddamn book, and I am shocked that this kind of response seems to be about the wrong article..

pasha   05.01.10

You are right pasha, it's impossible to be interested in multiple things, such as books _and_ technology. *sarcasm

Some of the book storage ideas are different, but I don't know I would call them innovative. Doesn't innovation have to add value? A monster rolling book wheel doesn't add any value for me.

Ironically, it is technology that is finally causing the idea of the book to change, after having been relatively static for so long. I still prefer to read out of a book, but maybe someday that will change.

ps. Let's please ban the word innovation while we're at it - it's a buzzword that has lost all meaning.

Henry D.   05.01.10

Henry D. Let's ban the word Designer whilst we're at it.

Dr. Design   05.03.10