12-30-11 12:04 AM
33 12
tools
  1. xandermac's Avatar
    Your argument makes sense but let ask you your opinion on this. Why, in the new bb7 devices, did rim decide to use smaller batteries that give worse usage than the previous devices?


    Sent from my iPhone4s using Tapatalk
    kevinnugent likes this.
    12-28-11 08:04 AM
  2. Economist101's Avatar
    So here we are at the close of 2011 and RIM's battery life claim is being questioned. Why is this so hard to believe?
    It's probably because the claim came just 2 months after RIM was claiming an early (Q1 - Q2) 2012 release, with no indication that the chip vendor is delayed at all. At this point, it's silly for RIM to make any timing announcements that they can't meet, so if they weren't positive on the early 2012 release they probably should have simply announced "2012," especially for a device that doesn't have a chip yet. Again, it's not as though any of these OEMs just found out that LTE is a battery killer.

    With Android dual-core LTE battery issues and the dual-core iPhone 4S battery concerns is it so far fetched that RIM wants to get it right? AndroidCentral actually refereed to LTE as a battery vampire.
    You're going to have to explain where the "let's get it right" spirit was when they released the Storm and the PlayBook. At this point this argument is akin to saying Apple prioritizes antenna design over all other considerations; unless you're going to prove that the iPhone 4 was not an Apple product, you're pretty much sunk.

    Also, I'm not sure you want to start quoting AndroidCentral; not a good precedent on these forums.

    http://www.androidcentral.com/tags/c...style_mobile=0
    12-28-11 10:12 AM
  3. GingerSnapsBack's Avatar
    Your argument makes sense but let ask you your opinion on this. Why, in the new bb7 devices, did rim decide to use smaller batteries that give worse usage than the previous devices?

    Sent from my iPhone4s using Tapatalk
    To make the phone smaller if I had to guess.

    I agree. Late August to early/mid September. Anything after that and I think the anticipation and hype for the next iPhone will be pretty big and might overshadow the BB10 lineup
    Might? I don't think there is anything RIM could do to get out from under Apple's shadow, especially if Apple announces the iPhone5 around the same time BBX comes out. No one will care. It'll be Apple mania like it was until the 4s was released.
    12-28-11 10:38 AM
  4. xandermac's Avatar
    To make the phone smaller if I had to guess.
    Yep. I'd personally trade thinness for battery life any day of the week.




    Sent from my iPhone4s using Tapatalk
    12-28-11 10:58 AM
  5. the_sleuth's Avatar
    My personal opinion: There are three contributors to the delay.
    1) The summer reorg and layoffs caused everything to be pushed out 3 to 5 months. Hence PB OS 2.0 launching in Feb. and not Oct.
    2) new LTE chips for also iPhone 5, Apple probably crowded out everyone since it is the single largest purchaser of smartphone components. The big gorilla, in the room, eats first.
    3) PIN / BB ID to BBM conundrum, use of QNX is causing major revision of BES for security purposes causing more delays.

    Just my armchair analysis.

    If RIM can't compete with the competition on battery life with current hardware, then there's something wrong with BB10.

    If they can equal the competition but are delaying the release of BB10 devices because they want even better battery life - then they're making a monstrous mistake. They'll lose more customers from the delay than they would gain by releasing late with better battery life.

    It's obvious the problem is BB10... and I'm sure it's more than battery efficiency, there are other issues at play here. I'm not buying their excuses.
    12-29-11 11:24 PM
  6. kraski's Avatar
    I agree. Late August to early/mid September. Anything after that and I think the anticipation and hype for the next iPhone will be pretty big and might overshadow the BB10 lineup
    I agree with what you're saying, but...

    If RIM has the BB10 feature set pretty much down, part of their ad budget ought to go toward creating anticipation for the new devices. If the BB10 devices have anything compelling, the public needs to be clued in before they rush out to buy the iPhone5.
    12-29-11 11:54 PM
  7. app_Developer's Avatar
    I agree with what you're saying, but...

    If RIM has the BB10 feature set pretty much down, part of their ad budget ought to go toward creating anticipation for the new devices. If the BB10 devices have anything compelling, the public needs to be clued in before they rush out to buy the iPhone5.
    Yeah, but if they are going to do any "pre-advertising", they better be 100%, absolutely certain that they can ship the thing on time with the advertised features.
    Moonbase0ne likes this.
    12-29-11 11:59 PM
  8. kraski's Avatar
    It's probably because the claim came just 2 months after RIM was claiming an early (Q1 - Q2) 2012 release, with no indication that the chip vendor is delayed at all. At this point, it's silly for RIM to make any timing announcements that they can't meet, so if they weren't positive on the early 2012 release they probably should have simply announced "2012," especially for a device that doesn't have a chip yet. Again, it's not as though any of these OEMs just found out that LTE is a battery killer.
    Back in the day, I used to purchase mil spec chips. And I can tell you there are all kinds of reasons why production shipments get pushed back, even for the most standard of chips. Whole production runs can blow out because some material didn't work right and new material needed to be ordered. Materials weren't available. The whole chip run went well and looked good till it hit QC. Your competition got their order in sooner. Your competition paid more than you could afford to for the same chips, just to blow you out of the water. Shall I continue?
    12-30-11 12:04 AM
33 12
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD