[dcsr23]

This is actually the thing that annoys me the most!
the same people who condemn people calling iPhones/Androids toys continue to discount RIM's software and the capabilities of the Phones, being not smartphones because they lack a 3rd party app environment and don't have flashy UI's I don't know when flashy became a requirement for smart, I missed that memo, but RIM is easily as advanced if not more so in terms of OS integration and intelligent design, they ARE smartphones, they are far from media phones.

Hmm... so what are the capabilities of RIMs phones beyond security, email, and Blackberry messenger. Besides those, what really sets it apart from the other 2 smartphone giants right now that could actually be a selling point to the avg consumer?

No one is discounting RIMs capabilities but themselves, and that's because they aren't offering what the changing smartphone landscape is asking for. Flashy never became a requirement, but we all know aesthetics are a selling point for any device. If it doesn't matter, let me sell you a black and white TV, and you tell me that your happy with it when every other TV displays images in color. They both get the job done to watch your favorite show, but which one would you really rather have?

RIM does need to be looking forward, right now on the GSM side they look to be at a turning point, they couldn't change everything at once, why blow the BIG hardware on a trail phone, this phone will show off OS6, but when they release a much faster phone in the new year OS6 will have all new glory, those of us who buy the 9800 might be miffed that we got a phone with just enough hardware but the device will still be more than capable for those of us that DON'T need a multimedia device.

This is no better than Windows ME and Vista, while they were both refreshes, they were heavily hyped only to end up as failures. You don't debut half baked products, especially when you are trying to not only keep marketshare from leaving, but also grow marketshare. BBOS6 got it's 15 mins in the spotlight, and now you see a very lukewarm reception to the 9800. While the avg consumer may not pay attention to stuff like this, I'm sure someone in their circle does, and that person may not be recommending the Torch when there might be better suited alternatives. Just because you don't need a multimedia device, there seems to be 2-3 other people saying they do.

[_StephenBB81]

Hmm... so what are the capabilities of RIMs phones beyond security, email, and Blackberry messenger. Besides those, what really sets it apart from the other 2 smartphone giants right now that could actually be a selling point to the avg consumer?

Being a Smartphone doesn't require selling points to the average user, I am not arguing that they are comparable average user phones, but average users don't require smartphones, they require media devices.

Because the BB doesn't have the games, does not take away from it being a smart phone, I use games as a general term, for apps/games/flashy, There is no phone on I could pick up today and could integrate into my life as well as the BB has, it isn't fanboism, as I was Anti BB when I first got my 8330, and I do look at other platforms, namely I looked at Apple and went as far as purchasing an iPod touch so I could give it a fair for a long period of time since return in Canada is 15 days or 30min of air time..

Blackberry's Calendar notification system, is second to none
Blackberry's Short cuts commands, again second to none,
Out of the box functionality for a Non techy consumer. RIM and Apple are pretty tied here pending needs, as AG pointed out, there are many users who don't even know they can get email on their blackberry's and are using them and enjoying them. so they can't only be BBM and email phones, they make an excellent PDA without internet function, without the need to own a PC to connect it to.

They are still NOT a consumer heavy weight, but RIM is definitely in the smartphone game, and is still a heavyweight in providing a rich integrated OS for efficiency.

No one is discounting RIMs capabilities but themselves, and that's because they aren't offering what the changing smartphone landscape is asking for. Flashy never became a requirement, but we all know aesthetics are a selling point for any device. If it doesn't matter, let me sell you a black and white TV, and you tell me that your happy with it when every other TV displays images in color. They both get the job done to watch your favorite show, but which one would you really rather have?



This is no better than Windows ME and Vista, while they were both refreshes, they were heavily hyped only to end up as failures. You don't debut half baked products, especially when you are trying to not only keep marketshare from leaving, but also grow marketshare. BBOS6 got it's 15 mins in the spotlight, and now you see a very lukewarm reception to the 9800. While the avg consumer may not pay attention to stuff like this, I'm sure someone in their circle does, and that person may not be recommending the Torch when there might be better suited alternatives. Just because you don't need a multimedia device, there seems to be 2-3 other people saying they do.

Every phone doesn't have to be the same though! that is the problem, only apple can make an iPhone, why does everyone else have to?
On the Hardware side of things, which is the complaint people REALLY have with OS6 it isn't the OS as much as it is the phone it was launched on, RIM uses Marvell as it's GSM chip provider, they used the fastest Marvell chip available for the 9800, does RIM need to look at new partners for GSM devices moving forward? Yes I think they do, but people wanted OS6 to market fast, and they needed something fast, you can't rebuild a house from the ground up, as quickly as you can remodel it and give it some curb appeal, the 9800 is the Curb appeal.

as for the Look of the phone, I'm of the opinion that the RIM phones have far more style then those of the competitors, I don't find the hardware attractive on the touch screens at all compared to my RIM offerings, they have pretty OS's but RIM has learned something in the way of making an attractive device, the problem is everyone has, or has had one, so they don't stick out like they once did.


I should turn it to you.

Define to me what makes a smartphone, and how those features are "smart features" and how the OS's provide them, NOT how 3rd parties provide them for the OS.

[VIDGMER]

RIM should joins them (Nokia & Intel) in using Meego, the OS could have a real chance to become a strong 3rd place behind Android and iOS. Meego is also much more exciting from a developer point of view because, just like for WebOS, you can write html/js/css apps for it. However, Meego wasn’t destined for enterprise use, But was actually designed for the consumer market. as well Meego is open source.

[grahamf]

RIM should joins them (Nokia & Intel) in using Meego, the OS could have a real chance to become a strong 3rd place behind Android and iOS. Meego is also much more exciting from a developer point of view because, just like for WebOS, you can write html/js/css apps for it. However, Meego wasn�t destined for enterprise use, But was actually designed for the consumer market. as well Meego is open source.

Sounds like a good idea, but counter to RIM's focus on security.

[CanuckBB]

RIM should joins them (Nokia & Intel) in using Meego, the OS could have a real chance to become a strong 3rd place behind Android and iOS. Meego is also much more exciting from a developer point of view because, just like for WebOS, you can write html/js/css apps for it. However, Meego wasn�t destined for enterprise use, But was actually designed for the consumer market. as well Meego is open source.

But RIM's primary market is the enterprise. Consumer is secondary.

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

But RIM's primary market is the enterprise. Consumer is secondary.

Then they will fail

Enterprise was fine when it was the only market for smartphones...

[belfastdispatcher]

If enterprise would embrace Android, wouldn't they be sharing everything with Google? I'm pretty sure they wouldn't be happy knowing that everything they do, Google has a copy of it, most likely on a server in a different country. Is it true you can't turn google maps off on Androids?

Android is growing too fast for it's own good. Why would anybody buy 4G Androids in countries with barely any 3G and just a few mb contracts? The higher spec they go the more they shrink their market.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[CanuckBB]

Then they will fail

Enterprise was fine when it was the only market for smartphones...

No, they won't. COnsumer is secondary, but not forgotten. But why would RIM switch to an OS that was developped for the consumer, and alienate the Enterprise? It makes no sense.

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

No reason that a device can not appeal to consumers and fill the needs of the Enterprise market...

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

If enterprise would embrace Android, wouldn't they be sharing everything with Google? I'm pretty sure they wouldn't be happy knowing that everything they do, Google has a copy of it, most likely on a server in a different country. Is it true you can't turn google maps off on Androids?

If you wrap your phone in tin foil then Google can not access you "info"...

Android is growing too fast for it's own good. Why would anybody buy 4G Androids in countries with barely any 3G and just a few mb contracts? The higher spec they go the more they shrink their market.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

Not sure why you think higher specs would shrink their market... for the most part ANDROID is known for packing a lot in their high-end devices. Or for being the first to add new more powerful features like 4G. That is one of the reasons that their market "share" has grown and continues to grow so quickly. It is call being INNOVATIVE... something RIM has lost.

[belfastdispatcher]

If you wrap your phone in tin foil then Google can not access you "info"...



Not sure why you think higher specs would shrink their market... for the most part ANDROID is known for packing a lot in their high-end devices. Or for being the first to add new more powerful features like 4G. That is one of the reasons that their market "share" has grown and continues to grow so quickly. It is call being INNOVATIVE... something RIM has lost.

Lol, unless I'm in Belfast or a few other major towns, I only get gprs, why exactly would I want a 4G phone. Pretty soon all Android phones will have 4G. You see where I'm going with this. Why would anybody buy a 4g phone that will be overtaken in just a few moths by a new one if all you can get is 3g or gprs? At the same time an Android without 4G will not be good enough either. It's a paradox, I know.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

Lol, unless I'm in Belfast or a few other major towns, I only get gprs, why exactly would I want a 4G phone. Pretty soon all Android phones will have 4G. You see where I'm going with this. Why would anybody buy a 4g phone that will be overtaken in just a few moths by a new one if all you can get is 3g or gprs? At the same time an Android without 4G will not be good enough either. It's a paradox, I know.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

It's not just Android that will be making 4G phones in the future... next iPhone will certainly be a 4G, and the STORM4 (was the STORM3) next year is suppose to be 4G (or LTE). So 4G will be pretty common next year, even though many location even here in the US will not see 4G coverage until 2012 - but these newer phones will work with the current 3G networks. And I sure there will be a number of none 4G device available through next year or longer.

Not sure why an Android without 4G would "not be good enough" or any different than a iPhone or BB without 4G.