[twelvezero8]

my problem is there is a bias towards android and iphone. its completely apparent in the review. i remember when the g2 the successor to the g1(first android phone) was released. to everyones surprise it had a 800 mhz processor. i dont remember any reviewer using that as a reason to not get a phone. so the 9900 ships with 1.2 mhz processor and still some people make it a reason to not get the phone as it is not dual core. if this phone was running android 2.3 or something it would be a must buy phone for any user.

[Rickroller]

my problem is there is a bias towards android and iphone. its completely apparent in the review. i remember when the g2 the successor to the g1(first android phone) was released. to everyones surprise it had a 800 mhz processor. i dont remember any reviewer using that as a reason to not get a phone. so the 9900 ships with 1.2 mhz processor and still some people make it a reason to not get the phone as it is not dual core. if this phone was running android 2.3 or something it would be a must buy phone for any user.

The G2 shipped with a 800MHz "Scorpion" processor..which was actually a much better performer than the 1GHz "Snapdragon" shipped in the original. This would be why reviewers weren't Debbie Downers on it. The only processor which was better at the time was on the Galaxy S.

If this phone was running Android..the only people who it would appeal to are former BB users now on Android looking for that BB keyboard. I can assure you..most people who like androids enjoy the larger screen real estate..

While I'm not going to say that 1.2Ghz isn't good or up to par for the phone..but I think that the point that most people who complain about it is that RIM is still behind in hardware. Even if/when they do release Dual Core phones..Androids will be running Quad Cores' (rumoured to be early 2012). And please don't start with "who needs 4 cores?!". The better the processors..the better the apps will be.

[TechAlberta]

So RIM is basically awesome at all the stuff that is hard to do and sucks at things that are quick fixes. I have a Torch and an iPhone. I wish people would stop raving about Apple's App Store. Go download the top 10 apps. 9 of them are pointless. 95% of apps I try I never use again. The fact is even most consumers will only really use perhaps 5 or 6 utilities. In the meantime I have wasted $89 bucks on a Navigon App that doesn't work at all. Oh and thanks for the 4000 "use your smartphone as a mirror" apps too.

[chaseh140]

It's great in all the areas that blackberry excels in, but unfortunately its still a blackberry?............I dont get it

[howarmat]

It's great in all the areas that blackberry excels in, but unfortunately its still a blackberry?............I dont get it

That is just it. To him its still just a BB and it doesn't bring enough of the android and iOS experience over yet. RIM still needs to enhance the user experience enough to capture the consumer audience. Granted his experience is not the same as everyone else though. Core business users dont care about the consumer side of it so this is exactly what they need and more.

[Neely2005]

He says "It�s the first time metal has made an appearance instead of plastic, and it�s the first time I can remember a BlackBerry not feeling hollow, but feeling like a solid high-end product."

So am I imagining the Metal Trim on my Bold 9700?

[360]

its coated plastic on the 9700 which he is talking about.

[Crucial_Xtreme]

He says "It�s the first time metal has made an appearance instead of plastic, and it�s the first time I can remember a BlackBerry not feeling hollow, but feeling like a solid high-end product."

So am I imagining the Metal Trim on my Bold 9700?

Indeed you are. Not sure what metal "trim" you're speaking of. The "metal" frets between the keys aren't really metal. And indeed this is the first time RIM is using truly high end components on their devices. The stainless steel is beautiful )

[twelvezero8]

Androids will be running Quad Cores' (rumoured to be early 2012). And please don't start with "who needs 4 cores?!". The better the processors..the better the apps will be.[/QUOTE]

and thats the problem with the world today. thats like saying the more horses a car has the better a car. not everyone needs a sportscar to do what they need to do.

[siausin]

Why do we need a quo cores smartphone in 2012? I think a better battery technology is more important than wasted horsepower, or a camera with optical zoom..

[twelvezero8]

Why do we need a quo cores smartphone in 2012? I think a better battery technology is more important than wasted horsepower, or a camera with optical zoom..

you are a smart person... but guess what? that isnt going to benefit htc, google and the whole android platform. they are in it for the money. they understand the american buyers are dumb enough to drool over a more powerful processor. we as cusomers allow this stuff to happen.

[dcsr23]

I thought BGR review was good. Basically if you are a die hard fan buy it to complete your collection, but if you are trying to make it your next phone for 2 years pass it up, because QNX is the blackberry of the future and most blackberries aren't upgradeable to the next OS.

[siausin]

you are a smart person... but guess what? that isnt going to benefit htc, google and the whole android platform. they are in it for the money. they understand the american buyers are dumb enough to drool over a more powerful processor. we as cusomers allow this stuff to happen.

the rush to up smartphone camera megapixels is also dumb in my opinion..my old curve 8900 3.2MP AF camera takes as good or better picture than bold 9700, and better than many android 5MP, 8MP smartphone AF camera..but I guess if RIM stays at 3.2MP they will be bashed to **** by tech media..the rush for faster processor and higher pixel count camera is such a waste of resources on a smartphone..I prefer to have longer stamina battery and better screen.




Sent from my BlackBerry 9800 using Tapatalk

[Crucial_Xtreme]

the rush to up smartphone camera megapixels is also dumb in my opinion..my old curve 8900 3.2MP AF camera takes as good or better picture than bold 9700, and better than many android 5MP, 8MP smartphone AF camera..but I guess if RIM stays at 3.2MP they will be bashed to **** by tech media..the rush for faster processor and higher pixel count camera is such a waste of resources on a smartphone..I prefer to have longer stamina battery and better screen.




Sent from my BlackBerry 9800 using Tapatalk

I agree battery life is important. But the iPhone 4 has much better battery life than people around here want to give it credit for. For instance, both models(GSM/CDMA) get 2+ hours better battery life than does BlackBerry. And it has an auto focus camera, larger display, etc etc. Yet people rave about BlackBerry & dog the i4. My point is RIM could've put in auto focus & still kept it thin. They knew this yet decided to go the other way.

Images courtesy of AnandTech

[Kansas City Mack]

I agree battery life is important. But the iPhone 4 has much better battery life than people around here want to give it credit for. For instance, both models(GSM/CDMA) get 2+ hours better battery life than does BlackBerry. And it has an auto focus camera, larger display, etc etc. Yet people rave about BlackBerry & dog the i4. My point is RIM could've put in auto focus & still kept it thin. They knew this yet decided to go the other way.

Images courtesy of AnandTech

Wow. You would never know that hanging around in here! Nice charts.

[grover5]

I think iphone has gotten it right. The iphone 4 was a huge leap in my opinion and the battery life is really good. I still feel my 9700 was better than the 3gs but that is another discussion.

I don't know if HTC, Samsung, Moto and the other manufacturers that use Android will be able to escape the massive spec upgrade cycle. I think they need to continually try to one up each other in their attempts to differentiate their products. They have different skins but I don't think that is enough. In my opinion, they are stuck on this track until a few drop out of the race due to loss of profit. Moto might be the first.

[anon3396357]

Why do we need a quo cores smartphone in 2012? I think a better battery technology is more important than wasted horsepower, or a camera with optical zoom..

Hardware will drive software development. While people may say the OS may not be optimized yet for quad cores, you can be sure they'll be more energy efficient than a single core CPU doing the same job if the OS or app is written to use 4 cores. Still, I appreciate Android phones pushing on the hardware front. I'll say this again, it will drive software development.

[anon3396357]

I agree battery life is important. But the iPhone 4 has much better battery life than people around here want to give it credit for. For instance, both models(GSM/CDMA) get 2+ hours better battery life than does BlackBerry. And it has an auto focus camera, larger display, etc etc. Yet people rave about BlackBerry & dog the i4. My point is RIM could've put in auto focus & still kept it thin. They knew this yet decided to go the other way.

Images courtesy of AnandTech

I whole-heartedly agree with this post.

[Kansas City Mack]

Hardware will drive software development. While people may say the OS may not be optimized yet for quad cores, you can be sure they'll be more energy efficient than a single core CPU doing the same job if the OS or app is written to use 4 cores. Still, I appreciate Android phones pushing on the hardware front. I'll say this again, it will drive software development.

Good point. Although I hate it when logic and rational though get in the way of a good argument!

[murnende]

There's more to battery life than web browsing, and it's interesting that more iPhone models than BlackBerry models were tested. I'm not sure that the Torch 9800 necessarily qualifies as 'teh blackberriez!' all by itself.

Statistics can be spun to say pretty much anything, if you're careful enough how you construct your tests.