1. chuckkdaduck's Avatar
    with the release of the new curve and new bold, they kinda went down in specs and add a few specs that the other bb7 devices didnt have. That said they should have a standard when making their phones. After they released the 9900, 9810, and 9860, the new curve and bold should have seen better specs.

    They should never go below these specs:
    A minimum of 1GHZ processor
    Single Core Processor
    5MP Camera
    720HD Recording
    Autofocus
    Liquid Graphics
    NFC compatibility
    Wifi hotspot
    UMA calling
    and etc..

    THAT should be standard on every phone and start developing better from there. They seem to be all over the place with specs. Add this here, take this out there. like WTF. Like the curve with a 800mhz phone?! come on RIM. You dont see other platforms going down in specs but instead adding new ones to their phone and just dropping the prices of their older phones. Thats how they target the lower income people and still have the best phone out there in the market. They should follow this strategy rather than trying to aim at the lower income consumers by making lower phone specs, when they can do that by releasing the new curve and bold with better specs than the other bb7 devices and just dropping the prices of the older released bb7 phones.

    all in all RIM is like a blind frog leapfrogging back and forth. Set your prices like what apple does and have a damn STANDARD!

    DISCUSS!
    Chrisy likes this.
    11-18-11 12:55 PM
  2. Chrisy's Avatar
    Nothing to discuss, I agree. I would like Mobile HotSpot and a front facing camera.
    11-18-11 12:59 PM
  3. mithrazor's Avatar
    RIM makes a wide variety of phones. High range, mid-range, and low-range.

    High range is the Bold 9900 which is their flag ship. Along with the full touch torch, and slide torch. The 9790 is their mid range phone. People that get that phone would just need it for work. Actually I don't even think that phones meant for US. Meant for developing countries.

    Their low end phones are the curve line. The Curve with the qwerty came out. Which has the same specs as the full touch curve. And they came out a month apart.

    You just need to understand the business, development, and strategy aspects of this.
    11-18-11 01:03 PM
  4. Danf's Avatar
    I think your sense of direction is kaput. The previous generation of Bolds had a 624Mhz processor, the New Bold 9900 has 1.2 Ghz processor. The previous generation curve had a 600mhz processor (some say 589mhz some say 624mhz) the new generation of curves have 800 Mhz processor.

    How is that going down in specs?
    11-18-11 01:36 PM
  5. chuckkdaduck's Avatar
    I believe apple seems to have a better strategy with this than RIM does. you could also say apple has a high-range, mid-range, and low-range of the iphone.

    High range would be the 4s, mid-range would be the 4, and low-range the 3gs. Each of their target market from the higher end to the lower end consumers. RIM is releasing phones with a 1.2GH, 720HD recording phone then a few months later a 800MHZ, no HD recording phone. They should have just made the same specs as the other bb7 devices and could still quickly aim to any of their target market. Like I think the new curve or bold is selling for 129 w/ a 3yr contract, where as the 9900 or 9860 is selling for the same price or at a lower price. I would believe for many consumers they would prefer the 9900 or 9860 over the new phones because it will be cheaper and have better specs. Why would anyone want a lower end phone that might be more expensive with lower specs? if the new curve or bold had the same specs with the other bb7 devices, i would be pretty sure consumers would have a greater selection of phones to choose from.
    11-18-11 02:01 PM
  6. chuckkdaduck's Avatar
    I think your sense of direction is kaput. The previous generation of Bolds had a 624Mhz processor, the New Bold 9900 has 1.2 Ghz processor. The previous generation curve had a 600mhz processor (some say 589mhz some say 624mhz) the new generation of curves have 800 Mhz processor.

    How is that going down in specs?
    i meant from the 3 first bb7 devices to the new curve and bold. They have lower specs and to me is not worth grabbing. I'd rather grab one of the other bb7 devices.
    11-18-11 02:04 PM
  7. Danf's Avatar
    I believe apple seems to have a better strategy with this than RIM does. you could also say apple has a high-range, mid-range, and low-range of the iphone.

    High range would be the 4s, mid-range would be the 4, and low-range the 3gs. Each of their target market from the higher end to the lower end consumers. RIM is releasing phones with a 1.2GH, 720HD recording phone then a few months later a 800MHZ, no HD recording phone. They should have just made the same specs as the other bb7 devices and could still quickly aim to any of their target market. Like I think the new curve or bold is selling for 129 w/ a 3yr contract, where as the 9900 or 9860 is selling for the same price or at a lower price. I would believe for many consumers they would prefer the 9900 or 9860 over the new phones because it will be cheaper and have better specs. Why would anyone want a lower end phone that might be more expensive with lower specs? if the new curve or bold had the same specs with the other bb7 devices, i would be pretty sure consumers would have a greater selection of phones to choose from.
    Don't judge sales strategy strictly according to the messed up sales practices in your own country. Since you mentioned 3 year contracts I am guessing it's Canada.

    Here in the US a 9900\9930 Bold goes for 149.00-199.00 with two year contract. The new curves go for 79.00 with a two year contract. that is a significant price difference. Not everyone has the case to pay for the more expensive bolds, particularly when they may be buying more than one phone. I have 6 phones on my account upgrading to the Bold 9930 would cost about 1,200.00. upgrading to the new curve is only 480.00
    11-18-11 03:01 PM
  8. Pete6#WP's Avatar
    Whilst I agree with the OP, the truth is that carriers actually want low cost phones. Carriers hate phones. What carriers want is to sell you minutes of calls and megabytes of data. For them, the handset is just a means to an end.

    If a phone costs a lot of money (h-spec) then it make the entry proce higher and then the poor, poor carriers will not sell as much of their prime products.

    If the carriers can sell a cheap smartphone that carries out all of the nice expensove high end functions at minimal cost is just what they need. It helps that they only need to subsidise these phones to the minimal level.

    Obviously if you want more and better functions then they will happily take your money and hand you a better phone.
    11-18-11 03:20 PM
  9. Danf's Avatar
    Android explosive growth is not because of expensive high end android phones it is because of cheap low end phones that are Smartphones but sell for 49.00 or are even free with a contract.
    11-18-11 03:38 PM
  10. Pete6#WP's Avatar
    Android explosive growth is not because of expensive high end android phones it is because of cheap low end phones that are Smartphones but sell for 49.00 or are even free with a contract.
    That is precisely my point. The cheaper the phone and the more it does, the happier the carrier.

    Carriers hate phones.
    11-18-11 03:41 PM
  11. sam_b77's Avatar
    OP,
    I dont get the obsession with processor speed. How is an Android running on 1.2 ghz dual core less than an Android running on 1.5 ghz dual core.
    The spec race is basically bragging rights by manufacturers who have nothing else to differentiate themselves from the other competitors.
    A BB9900 runs perfectly fine on the 1.2 ghz single core. Why drop in a dual core to reduce battery life?
    As for the 800 mhz curve, thats for people who dont want to spend much and still have a smartphone. If you want a 1 ghz device, then RIM is offering you three...take your pick.
    But why do you want them to stop the 800 mhz devices simply because you want bragging rights.
    As for Hotspot, you are correct. RIM can't get that one out fast enough.
    The camera on the 9900 gives 720p recording and its very very good. For a mobile device it is perfect.
    As for AF camera, there is one argument for no AF EDOF camera like the 9900. As it is EDOF, it can take very good and crisp pics very quickly, which is handy in a mobile phone as taking pics fast is an advantage. If I wanted to take pro pics, I really wouldnt depend on a pinhole lens of a mobile phone camera.
    The EDOF camera on the 9900 is very fast.Here's a pic I took of the Indian F1. The cars were doing 300 kmph+ and yet the camera took the pics of the car.
    Attachment 97253
    And here's another one which I took while driving and looking at the road, and there was no jitter etc. The EDOF camera was fast enough to take care of jitter at this speed.
    Attachment 97255
    The more I use the 9900 camera, the more I appreciate it being an EDOF camera instead of an AF camera. It just takes quick and no fuss pics which are crystal clear.
    11-18-11 04:33 PM
  12. Chrisy's Avatar
    I used the 9900 camera today while I was waiting around at the AT&T store. I thought it looked great! Granted, I only viewed the photos on the 9900 screen and my Android screen, but I don't see the issue with it. I love the no lag capture!
    11-18-11 04:48 PM
  13. _StephenBB81's Avatar
    I disagree completely with "set standards"

    RIM needs to produce competitive products for their Key Markets.

    the 9790, is a Asian device, thus it's specs relate a pricepoint and form factor need
    the new curves, are both Pricepoint global devices, they need to be low cost for off contract phones, and free on contract phones, so putting the specs in them to achieve these price points is what they should focus on,

    Other specs should be dependent on market demand, putting something in a phone because of a standard set of specs is wasting money. They still sell Cameraless devices into Enterprise.
    11-18-11 04:50 PM
  14. _StephenBB81's Avatar
    I used the 9900 camera today while I was waiting around at the AT&T store. I thought it looked great! Granted, I only viewed the photos on the 9900 screen and my Android screen, but I don't see the issue with it. I love the no lag capture!
    I really notice the difference trying to take close up "less than 24" images of things like damaged products, or markings, or business cards, the 9800 gave better images than the 9900 does.
    11-18-11 04:51 PM
  15. qingyuank's Avatar
    one thing i can never understand is why they reduced the capacity of the battery even though it was obvious the 9900 would use more power. they probably thought no one values long battery life, reflecting the absolute disconnection to their user base
    11-18-11 06:07 PM
  16. _StephenBB81's Avatar
    one thing i can never understand is why they reduced the capacity of the battery even though it was obvious the 9900 would use more power. they probably thought no one values long battery life, reflecting the absolute disconnection to their user base
    Size constraints all the way IMO, they had a target size and thickness of the device and that is what they went after, I would have taken a 2mm thicker device for that much more battery, but I've had this discussion with other people, and the form factor including it's slender profile are what attracted them, 2mm thicker in the back would have been a negative point.
    11-18-11 06:30 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD