[belfastdispatcher]

What truth? The truth is Android manufacturers use up to date hardware when they release a device. If they compete by pushing the specs game, that is fine. When I go to buy a new Android device this year, I know the device I am getting has hardware that is relevant in 2011. If I were to go and buy a BB this year, it will look like 2008 all over again.

Also, Android manufacturers are adding 4G not because they have nothing left to compete with. The majority of Android devices from here on out will be 4G. It is becoming the standard (in the US). While RIM wants to remain king in the 2G world and cater to them and forget about everyone else, Android manufacturers will cater to EVERYONE. They have 2G, 3G and 4G covered while RIM has 2G and 3G. I'll take more newer options over refreshes any day.

RIM will be using dual core soon as well. They will just be behind to introduce it like usual. Let's just hope they don't use the same dual core processor for 2 years like they did with the one in the Bold line.

Firstly, I was joking
Secondly, you kinda hit the nail in the head, you'll not be able to buy an Android without 4G soon and with 1% 4G coverage at the moment(that's a guess by the way ) makes Android have futuristic hardware not up to date. And why have a future proof Android when there's a new ones coming out every 3 months? No matter what you do your brand new shiny Android will be old news in 3-6 months.
Problem is many people that upgraded to, let's say Evo 4G might never get to try it on a 4G signal, especially in more rural areas or small towns. How would you sell one to somebody like that, buy this new shiny Evo4G just in case you might have 4G coverage in 2 years?

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[TheScionicMan]

Shhh, quit trying to talk them out of 4G. We need early adopters to pay for the rollout until there's enough coverage to make it worthwhile for everyone...

[belfastdispatcher]

Shhh, quit trying to talk them out of 4G. We need early adopters to pay for the rollout until there's enough coverage to make it worthwhile for everyone...

Ha ha, good point, I was an early 3G adapter so I've done my bit

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[avt123]

Firstly, I was joking
Secondly, you kinda hit the nail in the head, you'll not be able to buy an Android without 4G soon and with 1% 4G coverage at the moment(that's a guess by the way ) makes Android have futuristic hardware not up to date. And why have a future proof Android when there's a new ones coming out every 3 months? No matter what you do your brand new shiny Android will be old news in 3-6 months.

Old news but still compatible with future tech. What is wrong with that? So what if you can't use LTE right when you buy the device. You know that within the next 2 years before you upgrade, you will have the option to use it if available. Why buy a 3G device, and then 1 year down the road LTE is in full force where you live? I'd rather have the tech and not be able to use it then not have it and wait till I can upgrade again.

Also, the majority of the hardware will still be relevant and usable in the future. The same can't be said for the 9650 once it gets phased out for QNX devices and app development becomes worse than it already is for BB OS.

Problem is many people that upgraded to, let's say Evo 4G might never get to try it on a 4G signal, especially in more rural areas or small towns. How would you sell one to somebody like that, buy this new shiny Evo4G just in case you might have 4G coverage in 2 years?

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

Yes. And the fact that the hardware in the device is RELEVANT. It is not just about the 4G radio. These devices are coming out with all around top notch hardware. They just happen to have 4G as well.

[the_sandman_454]

Firstly, I was joking
Secondly, you kinda hit the nail in the head, you'll not be able to buy an Android without 4G soon and with 1% 4G coverage at the moment(that's a guess by the way ) makes Android have futuristic hardware not up to date. And why have a future proof Android when there's a new ones coming out every 3 months? No matter what you do your brand new shiny Android will be old news in 3-6 months.
Problem is many people that upgraded to, let's say Evo 4G might never get to try it on a 4G signal, especially in more rural areas or small towns. How would you sell one to somebody like that, buy this new shiny Evo4G just in case you might have 4G coverage in 2 years?

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

New devices on the market is never a bad thing. Push technology right to the bleeding edge and keep pushing it. Consumers win when that happens.

The 4g device argument is ridiculous. The bottom line is there is virtually no way RIM will release a new non 4g phone on Verizon in the US at this point.

I (and likely many others) suspect (or perhaps hope) the 4g phone will also have QNX and some halfway current hardware. BB freaks everywhere who haven't made the leap to Android or iPhone will be all over that and couldn't give a poo less that they're not in a 4g area. Why? Because RIM hasn't had a device featuring current technology in uh... quite a long time. Even folks who can't use 4g will probably rush to get one just due to a decent OS and decent specs for a change.

[dutchtender]

the question how well can RImm clone other technologies. they blazed a trail with push email and messaging. but now they have to copy ios and android. how good are they at that? so far we have seen squat.

[belfastdispatcher]

I remember 3-4 years ago the promises about 3G, they never came true, carriers are nowhere near 50% 3G coverage, it's gonna take the same again to have usable 4G. Until then save your money or be that early adopters.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[the_sandman_454]

I remember 3-4 years ago the promises about 3G, they never came true, carriers are nowhere near 50% 3G coverage, it's gonna take the same again to have usable 4G. Until then save your money or be that early adopters.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

Unless you're sick of using 2007-2008 technology in 2011, then you'll need to buy the new LTE device RIM eventually releases just to have something with hopefully newer technology and a better OS.

There's actually pretty decent 3g coverage here in the US, at least on the Verizon network. I'm sure this isn't the case everywhere though.

[howarmat]

that might be true over there but not here really....it will advance at quite a quick pace i think. 3G coverage is available virtually everywhere if you have the right network

[belfastdispatcher]

Unless you're sick of using 2007-2008 technology in 2011, then you'll need to buy the new LTE device RIM eventually releases just to have something with hopefully newer technology and a better OS.

There's actually pretty decent 3g coverage here in the US, at least on the Verizon network. I'm sure this isn't the case everywhere though.

I believe cdma 3G on Verizon is more widespread but unlike gsm 3G, it doesn't allow simultaneous data and calls. It's a trade off that kinda defeats the purpose of 3G in my opinion. I'll not hold my breath for 4G, in 2 years that EVO 4G will be too old and wear and tear will call for a new one anyway.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[breakmedown]

As an AT&T customer in a rural part of the country, I don't even have 3G yet (though rumor has it that's changing in the next month).

My brother was debating buying a new phone on a contract and didn't want to. He wanted to wait till LTE, but ultimately he decided that's a waste of time. Signed a one year contract, and went on with his life.

LTE will be great. But like many others have said, it will be pretty sparse even at the end of 2011. So doing all this ranting and raving about how you're upset because RIM isn't putting out an LTE device when the Android LTE devices won't have the power or technology to even use a fraction of the power of LTE is worthless. What good does it do to have an LTE phone if it's processor and other parts can't really handle much more than the 3G speeds we have now? (An exception to this is Verizon, who has a slow 3G network, therefore being the limiting factor).

It's kinda like complaining that your phone isn't WiFi N capable when it can't even handle the 54Mbps of G.

[iN8ter]

I guess I don't understand... How fast do you need your phone to be? 3G is perfectly fast, ****, I use 2G the majority of the time. I don't understand that surfing the web a second or two faster is supposed to be better. In this day and age, patience is a virtue. My area just got 3G, I doubt if RIM came out with a 4G device I'd even be able to use it.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

Use something other than a blackberry. Other phones do more.

Also, those perfectly fine 3G speeds you have are only perfect due to the HSPA+ upgrades AT&T did on their networks. HSPA+ is backwards compatible and the upgrade actually increased he network speeds for 3G devices as well.

In a good reception area AT&T/T-Mobile on a 3G phone is about twice as fast as Sprint/Verizon 3G and in some areas up to 3x faster. I get almost 4mbps down and almost 2mbps up on T-Mobile's 3G network on a 3G phone. An HSPA+ device with a decent radio can double that.

For people who tether to a laptop, it matters. For the Playbook, at least one HSPA+ or LTE device should have been available to take advantage of the faster network speeds, considering they want it to be as close to a desktop experience as possible.

For people who stream media (i.e. Netflix, Hulu, long YouTube videos, etc.) it's very nice. These phones can achieve speeds above those of some Home Cable or DSL connections, even.

[iN8ter]

Yes but how many users doing exactly that can a cell tower support at 4G speeds before calls fail and connections are interrupted? That's my worry. Also battery life, going from 2g to 3g battery life is cut by half on most handsets, if it's the same going to 4G would it really be worth it on a mobile? The more I think about it 4G must've been designed with mobile broadband in mind not mobile phone use.

The Dual Core processors in the new phones cut power consumption down by ~20% or more.

And the Moto phone on AT&T has a 1930 mAh battery. That's ~29% bigger than the 1500 mAh batteries in most high end smartphones these days...

Sorry, but I don't expect battery life to be a problem in a decent high end 4G smartphone. It's no one's fault if you buy a phone with crappy battery life. 13/29 days is more than enough time to see the phone is built/configured terribly and should be swapped out for something else.

It's like buying an HD7 with a 4.3" screen and a 1230 mAh battery and complaining to T-Mobile/HTC that the phone has terrible battery life... "Duh?"

What happened to people making informed decisions. They just want things to magically be perfect.

If you want to stay unplugged for days stay with your blackberry on 2G half the time (cause what use is 3G on such a device) and be happy?

[Ferretling]

So, I just did a speed test over at performance.toast.net using my laptop connected to Comcast and my Blackberry Style using Sprint's 3G network. Also please note I am in the basement. Now, using the GoDaddy server and the BlueAngels picture, I loaded 4,390,787 bytes in 7.461 seconds from Go Daddy server with Comcast on my computer. Using my Style, I loaded 4,390,787 bytes in 18.085 seconds from Go Daddy server. So that's 4708 Kb/sec vs. 1942 Kb/sec. So, a cable internet home connection is 2.4 times faster than a wireless 3G BlackBerry. (GoDaddy's server is slow compared to others on the page, but I wanted to compare apples to apples.)

I honestly don't think performance on that is so bad, considering I was pitting my phone against broadband connections.

Is it the fastest browser out there? No. Does it have the most apps? No. But if the phone does what you want and need it to do, what do you need a ton of apps for?

In the USA, the first 4G (branded, at least; I don't want to get into the "Is 4G really 4G debate) phones just came out in June. Sprint still has major markets that it has only just rolled out WiMAX to, or has yet to roll it out. Even in major markets, 4G is not available in all places. (Chicago got 4G launched in November 2009, and there are still places in the Chicago metro area that do not have 4G sufficient for a cell phone. LTE has even less coverage.

Verizon hasn't any 4G phones yet, though it's supposed to announce some at CES. The iPhone hasn't come out with 4G yet. So far, Samsung and HTC each have one 4G phone released in the US, but Sprint, which has had 4G phones for 6 months, will only be getting its 3rd 4G phone on the 9th January (by HTC). Motorola doesn't expect to release its first 4G phones until 2nd quarter of 2011. So, if you consider that the US launching of 4G began in late 2008 (Baltimore, WiMAX), NONE of the phone manufacturers have been quick to adopt in for US-release phones. Add to the mix the debate of LTE vs WiMAX, plus potential upgrades to both before full rollout. We don't even know if older phones will be compatible with upgraded 4G networks, which might be what you end up with by the time 4G launches in your area. So you might have bought a phone and possibly paid premium charges for a 4G phone that you can't even use to access 4G.

Let's add to that the fact that RIM makes phones that are generally praised for their call quality, which is still very important to a lot of people. I haven't heard the best in regards to voice quality for HTC or the Samsung Android phones.

Could RIM get a bit more cutting-edge? Sure it could. But that doesn't mean that it doesn't put out damn good phones that work really well and compete really well out in the wild, if not on paper.

Are they for everyone? No. But neither is the iPhone. Neither is Android. Neither is 4G.

The turtle did end up beating the hare in the end, after all.

[belfastdispatcher]

There you go, problem solved, 4G PlayBook on the way

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[moiselles]

Use something other than a blackberry. Other phones do more.

I have used other phones and I still love my BlackBerry. To each their own. I'm in no way unhappy with BlackBerry and reccommend it to friends and family.

I just don't get why someone can't wait til the end of 2011 for a PHONE. My husband is deployed for 4 months, I have to wait to see him. I have friends whose husbands are deployed for a YEAR and guess what... They have to wait too. Not sure why the OP can't be patient, especially over something like a phone. Either move on from BlackBerry or wait. Simple as that.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[howarmat]

I have used other phones and I still love my BlackBerry. To each their own. I'm in no way unhappy with BlackBerry and reccommend it to friends and family.

I just don't get why someone can't wait til the end of 2011 for a PHONE. My husband is deployed for 4 months, I have to wait to see him. I have friends whose husbands are deployed for a YEAR and guess what... They have to wait too. Not sure why the OP can't be patient, especially over something like a phone. Either move on from BlackBerry or wait. Simple as that.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

i have been waiting for 6 months already to see some kind of GOOD phone from RIM, why should i have to wait another year? Every other phone manufacture has their game face on now and is producing tons of great phone options.

[avt123]

I have used other phones and I still love my BlackBerry. To each their own. I'm in no way unhappy with BlackBerry and reccommend it to friends and family.

I just don't get why someone can't wait til the end of 2011 for a PHONE. My husband is deployed for 4 months, I have to wait to see him. I have friends whose husbands are deployed for a YEAR and guess what... They have to wait too. Not sure why the OP can't be patient, especially over something like a phone. Either move on from BlackBerry or wait. Simple as that.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

Wait for another year? Some people have already been waiting a few years. RIM has had 2 years already to do something, and they keep releasing the same devices with 1 or two "upgrades" with each refresh.

Waiting for a phone is completely different than waiting for your husband. You love your husband and he loves you. He is also defending your country. Your phone doesn't love you or care about you. Neither does RIM.

[gots2beme]

I have used other phones and I still love my BlackBerry. To each their own. I'm in no way unhappy with BlackBerry and reccommend it to friends and family.

I just don't get why someone can't wait til the end of 2011 for a PHONE. My husband is deployed for 4 months, I have to wait to see him. I have friends whose husbands are deployed for a YEAR and guess what... They have to wait too. Not sure why the OP can't be patient, especially over something like a phone. Either move on from BlackBerry or wait. Simple as that.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

Quoted for emphasis.

[1812dave]

It boggles my mind that some of here are perfectly contented to consider buying a phone in 2011 that ISN'T 4G. Don't you "plan ahead" at all, in your lives? When DVD players first came out, did you rush to replace an aging VHS machine with yet ANOTHER blurry-*** VHS unit? Makes no sense to me.

[belfastdispatcher]

It boggles my mind that some of here are perfectly contented to consider buying a phone in 2011 that ISN'T 4G. Don't you "plan ahead" at all, in your lives? When DVD players first came out, did you rush to replace an aging VHS machine with yet ANOTHER blurry-*** VHS unit? Makes no sense to me.

Didn't you hate it when a year after you payed hundreds of dollars if not more for the first DVD player and only had a few movies available to watch, you could buy way smaller ones at every corner for �20 and movies galore for a lot cheaper?

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[1812dave]

Didn't you hate it when a year after you payed hundreds of dollars if not more for the first DVD player and only had a few movies available to watch, you could buy way smaller ones at every corner for �20 and movies galore for a lot cheaper?

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

No. I didn't buy them until their prices met my requirements. I was the same way with CD's--I refused to buy any CD's (this is inthe first few years after CD was introduced) that cost over $13. All one has to do is maintain a bit of disciple.

[Thuoudo]

It boggles my mind that some of here are perfectly contented to consider buying a phone in 2011 that ISN'T 4G. Don't you "plan ahead" at all, in your lives? When DVD players first came out, did you rush to replace an aging VHS machine with yet ANOTHER blurry-*** VHS unit? Makes no sense to me.

No. I didn't buy them until their prices met my requirements. I was the same way with CD's--I refused to buy any CD's (this is inthe first few years after CD was introduced) that cost over $13. All one has to do is maintain a bit of disciple.

When your cassette/record player failed, did you replace it with another or go CD when a player was $1000+ and "Dark Side of the Moon" hadn't been digitized yet? Or did you go music-less till CD gear prices came down? Irony...

Just a general observation about the whole 4G situation...to me, the argument diametrically opposes itself, creating a "logic loop" if you will.

"Why not buy a 4G phone now?"
"Because I don't have 4G coverage."
"But you will, eventually."
"So why don't I get a phone that only has 3G for now?"
"Because you can get a 4G phone now when 4G comes later."
"If 4G is 2 (or so) years away, are you proposing that I should use the same phone now, in 2 years?"
"You can still use it on 3G..."
"But when 4G rolls around, it will be 2 years old."
"4G phones are future-proof. 4G IS the future."
"And the hardware will be 2 years old by the time I get 4G coverage."
"You're using 2-year old RIM tech now!"
"And I'll be using 2-year old 4G tech by the time I get 4G if I buy a 4G phone now..."

And on and on...

Smell what I'm stepping in, good folks of CB?

[1812dave]

When your cassette/record player failed, did you replace it with another or go CD when a player was $1000+ and "Dark Side of the Moon" hadn't been digitized yet? Or did you go music-less till CD gear prices came down? Irony...

Just a general observation about the whole 4G situation...to me, the argument diametrically opposes itself, creating a "logic loop" if you will.

"Why not buy a 4G phone now?"
"Because I don't have 4G coverage."
"But you will, eventually."
"So why don't I get a phone that only has 3G for now?"
"Because you can get a 4G phone now when 4G comes later."
"If 4G is 2 (or so) years away, are you proposing that I should use the same phone now, in 2 years?"
"You can still use it on 3G..."
"But when 4G rolls around, it will be 2 years old."
"4G phones are future-proof. 4G IS the future."
"And the hardware will be 2 years old by the time I get 4G coverage."
"You're using 2-year old RIM tech now!"
"And I'll be using 2-year old 4G tech by the time I get 4G if I buy a 4G phone now..."

And on and on...

Smell what I'm stepping in, good folks of CB?

My "record player" didn't fail. I have a Linn Sondek... got it just before the sound quality of CD players improved, which occurred when the 2nd and 3rd gen units hit the market. I prolly should have saved my $2k+ and applied it to some newer technology! (then again, being a self-indulgent audiophile, I also sprung for a Nakamichi Dragon) Yes, I'm spoiled. Both the Dragon and the LD still work well but of course they don't see much action nowadays.

[the_sandman_454]

When your cassette/record player failed, did you replace it with another or go CD when a player was $1000+ and "Dark Side of the Moon" hadn't been digitized yet? Or did you go music-less till CD gear prices came down? Irony...

Just a general observation about the whole 4G situation...to me, the argument diametrically opposes itself, creating a "logic loop" if you will.

"Why not buy a 4G phone now?"
"Because I don't have 4G coverage."
"But you will, eventually."
"So why don't I get a phone that only has 3G for now?"
"Because you can get a 4G phone now when 4G comes later."
"If 4G is 2 (or so) years away, are you proposing that I should use the same phone now, in 2 years?"
"You can still use it on 3G..."
"But when 4G rolls around, it will be 2 years old."
"4G phones are future-proof. 4G IS the future."
"And the hardware will be 2 years old by the time I get 4G coverage."
"You're using 2-year old RIM tech now!"
"And I'll be using 2-year old 4G tech by the time I get 4G if I buy a 4G phone now..."

And on and on...

Smell what I'm stepping in, good folks of CB?

4g isn't the big deal. The big deal is are they really going to release something new before they roll out a 4g device? The 4g isn't the relevant part, the new device is.