[eabbq10]

Interested to hear your views on this... is it the battery? The processor? The screen size? The camera?

CB10 on my Passport

[cycle_wala]

Interested to hear your views on this... is it the battery? The processor? The screen size? The camera?

CB10 on my Passport

The screen ppi. It's lower than the Q10.

Posted via my White.Leopard

[Qaddafi]

It doesn't mean that the BlackBerry Q10 will look better.


Posted via CB10

[slagman5]

Definitely the CPU/GPU, and that's not two things because the GPU is built into the CPU chip in these mobile devices...

?Posted without the aid of AutoCorrect with my physical keyboard via CB10

[Vladimirs]

Bigger battery.
I wait for a brave phone producer who will try to make something similar to Nokia 6310 - 1 working week load without recharging.
This would become a bomb, a best seller.

[rambo47]

Availability. I want it NOW through Verizon.

[LVampa]

Removable battery

Posted via CB10

[SunofAusar]

I have 2...
1) removable battery
2) better camera (more MP)

Posted via CB10

[Plazmic Flame]

If the rumored specs are true, the one thing that I would change is the battery size. Everyone that I know that had the 9900 all complained about the battery life. As we know the battery in that thing was very small but was still a favorite device for many. While the classic will have a bigger battery then its predecessors it still would've been nice to see it have a battery at the size of the passport or bigger.

A secondary thing that is more of a pipe dream would be to see a taller screen. Just so that we could've had one app for a device like the Z 10 and also for the classic. I think this will be solved though with the upcoming Visa/Victoria device.

Regardless, I will still be getting a BlackBerry classic.

[Impartial]

One thing for me is the size. Maintain the 3.5inch screen, but make the bezel to a minimum acceptable size, thus making the overall size slightly smaller. This will make it easier to hold with 1 hand and fell better in pockets.

Posted via CB10

[Pluto is a planet]

Release date

Posted via CB10

[slagman5]

I have 2...
1) removable battery
2) better camera (more MP)

Posted via CB10

Wait, so do you want a better camera or simply more MP? Because one doesn't necessarily mean the other...

[MarsupilamiX]

Price. The specs are what they are, but the price is ridiculous.

[slagman5]

Bigger battery.
I wait for a brave phone producer who will try to make something similar to Nokia 6310 - 1 working week load without recharging.
This would become a bomb, a best seller.

Not sure if that would be possible with smartphone specs. Older phones with decent battery sizes lasted because they simply used very little power...

[mfurman]

If the price were to be $250, I would not expect any more and would buy it immediately. If it costs $450, it should have at least much better SoC (similar to the Passport). If not, a better camera (iPhone 6+ class).

[dale-c]

I too wish for a better CPU/GPU
Z30 specs at the least.

A 2.0 Dual core would be ideal.

If it has to be slow, then a lowet pricetag such as $350 would be great so I could buy one and then be prepared to buy another in a year when they release an updated one.


Posted via CB10

[Bluenoser63]

Removable battery

Posted via CB10

Why do you want a removable battery when a sealed battery should last you two days +? My Z30 lasts two + days between charges. Not a big deal anymore.

[Bluenoser63]

I too wish for a better CPU/GPU
Z30 specs at the least.

A 2.0 Dual core would be ideal.

If it has to be slow, then a lowet pricetag such as $350 would be great so I could buy one and then be prepared to buy another in a year when they release an updated one.

Posted via CB10

Who says it will be slow? The Q10 isn't slow/

[Bluenoser63]

Price. The specs are what they are, but the price is ridiculous.

Upfront price doesn't matter to business, it is TCO that is important. Look at all costs associated to a device. Example. Rolling out BES12, it takes more time to setup a iPhone/Android vs a Blackberry 10. Already it takes about $50-$100 more in IT time to enroll a non-BB10 device. So add that cost to other devices. You have to stop harping on upfront costs which is only a portion of TCO. Do the math.

[slagman5]

Who says it will be slow? The Q10 isn't slow/

It can be, especially while running Android apps. Hopefully 10.3.1 optimizes this further, because sometimes it's pretty bad...

?Posted without the aid of AutoCorrect with my physical keyboard via CB10

[MarsupilamiX]

Upfront price doesn't matter to business, it is TCO that is important. Look at all costs associated to a device. Example. Rolling out BES12, it takes more time to setup a iPhone/Android vs a Blackberry 10. Already it takes about $50-$100 more in IT time to enroll a non-BB10 device. So add that cost to other devices. You have to stop harping on upfront costs which is only a portion of TCO. Do the math.

1)What's those 50-100$ more, just because it's not a BlackBerry? I am sure that you have a link for that, right?
Don't bother with a link if it's only meant for BES and no other MDM.

2) Sadly you have no idea what you are talking about.
BlackBerry was able to thrive in the enterprise because of their 200$ Curve devices, not because of their 600$ Bolds. The exact same is true for the consumer market

3) You make my point for me, as there is no reason to believe (apart from your 50-100$ you pulled out of your... And even assuming that's true, then it would still be cheaper. And don't say "bulk purchasing". BlackBerry isn't the only entity who gives discounts on bigger orders) that a 300$ Android phone would exceed a 450$ Classic in terms of total cost of ownership.

4) Therefore, the TCO might be a valid argument in an by itself. But you sadly fail to realize that the concept is completely the wrong one to make a point in this discussion.
BlackBerry has no advantage in terms of TCO.

5) You also completely ignore that the market for a phone like the Classic is basically inexistant.
It neither warrants that price because of the features, neither because of an imaginary lower TCO, nor because of specs it uses.
If we couple that, with the Classic being the textbook definition of an overpriced device, the sales won't be good.

Which brings us to
6) The probability of the Classic not being a success, is by far greater than the Classic becoming successful.
(and don't bring some useless relativistic nonsense to the discussion, like: "only BlackBerry defines what a success would represent." No BlackBerry is not free to define success however they want.)

[eznug]

A version without a camera and a battery that lasts for more than one day.

[ymb]

Quad-core 2.2

Z30STA100-3/10.2.1.3289

[Bluenoser63]

1)What's those 50-100$ more, just because it's not a BlackBerry? I am sure that you have a link for that, right?
Don't bother with a link if it's only meant for BES and no other MDM.

2) Sadly you have no idea what you are talking about.
BlackBerry was able to thrive in the enterprise because of their 200$ Curve devices, not because of their 600$ Bolds. The exact same is true for the consumer market

3) You make my point for me, as there is no reason to believe (apart from your 50-100$ you pulled out of your... And even assuming that's true, then it would still be cheaper. And don't say "bulk purchasing". BlackBerry isn't the only entity who gives discounts on bigger orders) that a 300$ Android phone would exceed a 450$ Classic in terms of total cost of ownership.

4) Therefore, the TCO might be a valid argument in an by itself. But you sadly fail to realize that the concept is completely the wrong one to make a point in this discussion.
BlackBerry has no advantage in terms of TCO.

5) You also completely ignore that the market for a phone like the Classic is basically inexistant.
It neither warrants that price because of the features, neither because of an imaginary lower TCO, nor because of specs it uses.
If we couple that, with the Classic being the textbook definition of an overpriced device, the sales won't be good.

Which brings us to
6) The probability of the Classic not being a success, is by far greater than the Classic becoming successful.
(and don't bring some useless relativistic nonsense to the discussion, like: "only BlackBerry defines what a success would represent." No BlackBerry is not free to define success however they want.)

You dream a Enterprise world, I live in it. So you can say anything you want about TCO because I have experience. When you manage an Enterprise IT department, come back to me about TCO. We spend more time replacing iPhone screens vs Blackberry ones even with protective cases, we replace more Android devices as they don't last vs Blackberry devices which last a long time. We spend more time trying to get Android and iPhones to work within our IT infrastructure than Blackberry devices. Any cost saving you have with Android are gone in short time. And Blackberry devices are cheaper (even the most expensive than iPhones with the same storage).

So..

iPhones are more expensive than Blackberry's. So you cannot recommend a iPhone over any Blackberry by your reasoning.

Cheaper Android devices have a higher TCO as it is more costly to secure them in an Enterprise environment. So given your love of price only, then you want Enterprises to purchase Androids, even though any cost savings up front will be lost over time.

When you get a job as an IT manager in an Enterprise and have to deal with devices, come back and talk to us. As you said to someone else in another post, you have no right to talk about things you don't have experience with. Please listen to your own advice.

[thurask]

Since nothing will make me buy this, I'd take the altruistic route and add a Sprint version.

Posted via CB10