1. phonejunky's Avatar
    There is only one single reason why I will not be adopting a blackberry 9800 to accompany my iPhone 4 and that's the lag on the device. I mean it seems RIM through some nice features into their new masterpiece. The whole drop down menu's, the favorites and other various screens. It's a good step forward but the lag on the browser will surely urk my nerves, and I'm kind of sure the more you download on this phone the whole device will begin to lag like I've experienced with past Blackberry's I, and I repeat I have owned.

    It definitely looks like an ok improvement by RIM though and I'm sure will bring in some new customers with the marketing they seem to be putting in for it.
    08-04-10 09:01 PM
  2. weblou's Avatar
    I think you are judging the device too fast. Let's not forget that there was over 20 apps running on that thing. You should never judge a device performance at a trade show nor in a store because you never know what is running in the background.
    But like you I won't be getting it. I strongly believe that IPhone is the best touch in the market. It's just too smooth.
    I will keep my 9700 and my ip4. I think it's a great combo

    **edit** after seeing the new video posted I see what your saying about the browser. Still looks much better then the browser it has now lol.
    All in all I'm impressed with what BB did with OS6.
    Last edited by TheBBman; 08-04-10 at 10:38 PM.
    08-04-10 10:08 PM
  3. stuaw11's Avatar
    Its definitely an imporovement but its still not up to Android or iphone level. Some of that may be the hardware, its hard to tell right now. But supposedly the 9800 is only a 624mhz processor and 512mb of RAM, so its not much more muscle than previous BB's in the Bold series but a much more resource-hungry OS. I think it was a bad move to not beef up the hardware more with the new OS, but maybe phones in the near future will be.

    I know they said itll run on the 9700 and 3 or 4 other older phones, but I have a feeling itll be pretty painful for most users because the hardware just cant handle it with less RAM even if its the same processor.

    I think the real test isnt will BB users upgrade to it, because fanboys of every platform will always upgrade. The true test is hold it next to the iphone 4 and say the Droid X/Evo and will people choose the 9800 over the latter 2, and at first glance its hard to say yes just based on the 9800, not future devices.

    Ive never been a fan of smartphone vertical sliders going all the way back to the Audiovox 6600/Blue Angel (yes showing my age). They just dont feel balanced and everything has to be 2 handed when the keyboard is extended because of the balance. And the sliders have just never been all that good, even in slide slider smartphones.
    Last edited by stuaw11; 08-04-10 at 11:11 PM.
    08-04-10 11:07 PM
  4. weblou's Avatar
    I agree on the most part with stuaw11. I never was a big fan of slider phones ether But I do believe that it will do good. It has a lot of attracting points for the consumers and it seems AT&T is really backing this one up. Will it do as good as the iPhone? I don't think so. But what I like is the direction BB is taking. Hopefully we see more powerfull models in the future. Maybe a storm 3?
    It's nice to see rim stepping up and trying something new.
    I say it will be a foundation for future devices to come from them
    08-04-10 11:21 PM
  5. phonejunky's Avatar
    I think you are judging the device too fast. Let's not forget that there was over 20 apps running on that thing. You should never judge a device performance at a trade show nor in a store because you never know what is running in the background.
    But like you I won't be getting it. I strongly believe that IPhone is the best touch in the market. It's just too smooth.
    I will keep my 9700 and my ip4. I think it's a great combo

    **edit** after seeing the new video posted I see what your saying about the browser. Still looks much better then the browser it has now lol.
    All in all I'm impressed with what BB did with OS6.
    Well thats what i said though. I said that the device was laggy and maybe because it was a show model, BUT I also highligted that i won't be getting it if it also suffers from the lag issue that many Blackberry's i have owned previously suffered from. After downloading about 4 to 5 apps my Blackberry's would always lag some. That kind of annoys me about Blackberry. After you download so many apps you can slow your Blackberry down to a crawl, now all may not suffer from this but i did.
    08-04-10 11:42 PM
  6. chuckh0308's Avatar
    I wouldn't get it either. I think it looks pretty and all, but as has been the case with RIM for the past several years, it's still using ancient internals that meet the absolute minimum requirements for the OS. Even this diehard BB user is getting fed up!
    08-05-10 01:33 AM
  7. Roo Zilla's Avatar
    But supposedly the 9800 is only a 624mhz processor and 512mb of RAM, so its not much more muscle than previous BB's in the Bold series but a much more resource-hungry OS. I think it was a bad move to not beef up the hardware more with the new OS, but maybe phones in the near future will be.
    It's worse than that. Let's compare it to the A4 SoC in the iPhone 4, assuming it's clocked around 800Mhz. The XScale CPU in the 9800 is probably less than half as powerful. With no GPU, the package is probably closer to 1/3 the processing power of the A4 package. I'm am a little disappointed at RIM, not because they chose a weak CPU, that's fine because I'm sure they had their reasons. I'm disappointed because they could have chosen another CPU+GPU combo that could have provided better performance while at the same time increasing battery life. Because ARM CPUs are mostly backwards compatible, there would have been minimal altering of the base OS code too. Basically, RIM used cheap components to save a couple bucks and it shows.
    Last edited by Roo Zilla; 08-05-10 at 02:11 AM.
    08-05-10 02:07 AM
  8. Roo Zilla's Avatar
    I wouldn't get it either. I think it looks pretty and all, but as has been the case with RIM for the past several years, it's still using ancient internals that meet the absolute minimum requirements for the OS. Even this diehard BB user is getting fed up!
    The CPU in the 9800 is a generation older than the CPU in the ORIGINAL iPhone. It's just disappointing. They had a chance to do something really good. The new OS looked really promising with a new browser and some very nice features. Then reality hit and it was like getting socks for Christmas when you were a kid.
    08-05-10 02:10 AM
  9. Roo Zilla's Avatar
    Hopefully we see more powerfull models in the future. Maybe a storm 3?
    I think the new Storm has a better chance of being a power device. Since the Storm is a CDMA device, they have to buy their SoC from Qualcomm instead of Marvell. Qualcomm's SoC for previous Storms have been based on A11 cores instead of XScale, which is a generation newer. Qualcomm might force them to upgrade to Cortex-A8 cores, which would put them on more or less even footing with the newer devices out on the market.
    08-05-10 02:16 AM
  10. Moonbase0ne's Avatar
    I just don't get why they would use outdated tech and a 2 year old screen for their "flagship" device.
    08-05-10 10:30 AM
  11. xxxxpradaxxxx's Avatar
    Screw the lag.

    The screen resolution and lack of internal memory is enough to dissuade me.

    And those two things I CAN judge before using.

    After using my DROID, and N1, there is no way I can go out and BUY something so low gen.

    It's like willingly buying a VHS player when Blu Ray is the new standard, when they BOTH cost the same price.
    08-05-10 11:23 AM
  12. avt123's Avatar
    I just don't get why they would use outdated tech and a 2 year old screen for their "flagship" device.
    Because it is RIM. RIM, just like the majority of their users have the mentality of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". And thats why you have them using the same hardware EVERY single time. They do not learn. Honestly, I hope RIM bombs with this device so they wake the **** up. They need to enter reality, because they are stuck in 2008.

    The screen is a damn joke. I can't even take the device seriously when they can't even get a screen right. And no GPU? GFG.
    08-05-10 01:23 PM
  13. Roo Zilla's Avatar
    Because it is RIM. RIM, just like the majority of their users have the mentality of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". And thats why you have them using the same hardware EVERY single time. They do not learn. Honestly, I hope RIM bombs with this device so they wake the **** up. They need to enter reality, because they are stuck in 2008.

    The screen is a damn joke. I can't even take the device seriously when they can't even get a screen right. And no GPU? GFG.
    I honestly think both were money saving moves. There are some who give the "better battery life" explanation, but it doesn't hold water. They could have easily used a more modern combination that would have gotten them both, more power and longer battery life. The cost difference would have most likely been about $5. The A4 chip in an i4 costs less than $11 as a point of reference.

    I think for the same reason, they didn't put in a better screen. On most new phones, the screen is the most expensive component. The retina display costs almost $30 each. Using a lower resolution screen makes it easier on them in a few ways if they can get away with it. First, it saves them significantly in cost of the display. Second, because the display doesn't need to move as many pixels, they can get away with using a slower processor and bag the GPU. Third, they don't need a larger battery to power the high res display and the more powerful CPU it would require.

    I obviously don't have any evidence of this, but this seems typical of RIM lately. The phones comes with a 4GB SD card. They could have included a much larger one for a few bucks more. I believe RIM had a certain gross profit margin in mind when they designed the device, and they're probably doing everything they can to squeeze every penny out of it. It's basically impossible for them to charge more than an iPhone, so they're taking profit by decreasing cost.

    Think about this for a moment too. If OS6 hadn't been introduced with the device, what would this device be? Basically same as all other BBs with a slide out keyboard that they're giving away for free with contract.
    08-05-10 01:48 PM
  14. pilsbury's Avatar
    Dont get me wrong here, Ive had close to 25 berries over the last five years and they have served me well. I was ready for something different, hoping the i4 would live up to the press reports-and i was not disappointed! This i4 is the best device Ive owned to date. I was anticipating RIM hitting one out of the park with OS6 on these new devices, but after reading several reviews, namely the one on Engadget, it seems that RIM merely tweaked OS5 a bit. My 8900, 9000 and 9700 were rock solid devices, but the same old thing in different packaging is getting stale. I do hope RIM steps it up.
    08-05-10 03:23 PM
  15. avt123's Avatar
    I honestly think both were money saving moves. There are some who give the "better battery life" explanation, but it doesn't hold water. They could have easily used a more modern combination that would have gotten them both, more power and longer battery life. The cost difference would have most likely been about $5. The A4 chip in an i4 costs less than $11 as a point of reference.

    I think for the same reason, they didn't put in a better screen. On most new phones, the screen is the most expensive component. The retina display costs almost $30 each. Using a lower resolution screen makes it easier on them in a few ways if they can get away with it. First, it saves them significantly in cost of the display. Second, because the display doesn't need to move as many pixels, they can get away with using a slower processor and bag the GPU. Third, they don't need a larger battery to power the high res display and the more powerful CPU it would require.

    I obviously don't have any evidence of this, but this seems typical of RIM lately. The phones comes with a 4GB SD card. They could have included a much larger one for a few bucks more. I believe RIM had a certain gross profit margin in mind when they designed the device, and they're probably doing everything they can to squeeze every penny out of it. It's basically impossible for them to charge more than an iPhone, so they're taking profit by decreasing cost.

    Think about this for a moment too. If OS6 hadn't been introduced with the device, what would this device be? Basically same as all other BBs with a slide out keyboard that they're giving away for free with contract.
    Cheap is no good. Skimp out your customers on specs, but it still costs the same as the competition on a two year contract? Screw that.
    08-05-10 04:07 PM
  16. kenwolf's Avatar
    I agree with Pilsbury, I struggled for a long time with BB had a 9000, and switched to the iphone 4 when it came out. Yes there was a learning curve, but it's the best smartphone I've ever had. I too was concerned about the 9800, but I glad I changed
    08-05-10 04:28 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD