"Smallest" seems to refer to frontal area only. My Nokia measures some 10.5 x 4.3 x 1.1cm (thick) for a volume of 49.6 cu cm. That means even less pocket-strain than the Elegance at 57.3 cu cm. OK, my Nokia is nearly half as heavy again, but the "size" claim here looks somewhat dubious I'd say.
Register
Title Is "smallest mobile" too big a claim?
"Smallest" seems to refer to frontal area only. My Nokia measures some 10.5 x 4.3 x 1.1cm (thick) for a volume of 49.6 cu cm. That means even less pocket-strain than the Elegance at 57.3 cu cm. OK, my Nokia is nearly half as heavy again, but the "size" claim here looks somewhat dubious I'd say.