[edchauss]

I responded to a couple of posts on here and in so doing checked out the websites for a few different carriers and noticed that everyone I have checked so far sells the 8800 series phones for more than the Pearl and Curve? Can anyone tell me why that is? Is it just that the Pearl and Curve are in higher demand and they can afford to do it? Seems strange to me as the Pearl and Curve are more feature rich.

[Duvi]

It has GPS and WiFi. The Curve, nor the Pearl have this feature. The 8820 that is.


Duvi

[jm2hill]

the 8800 series is supposed to be there business series lose the camera and smaller phone for a faster processor and better layout keyboard

to some people they see the curve and pearl more feature rich to me I see the 8800 beating both of them
(most people will probably disagree though)

[edchauss]

It has GPS and WiFi. The Curve, nor the Pearl have this feature. The 8820 that is.


Duvi

I'm aware of that but none of the 8800 series phones have cameras or video recording capability. And since you can get a Pearl or a Curve with either GPS and a camera/video recorder or WiFi and a camera/video recorder then doesn't it make sense the costs would be the same? I just don't see why that phone would be more expensive unless their marketing it as a strictly business phone and figuring it's demand would be lower therefore they're pricing it higher. I know it has significantly greater battery life and that should cost something more but think it would be a trade off to the other features it doesn't offer.

[jm2hill]

to you yes the other features are necessary and fun

to someone else (me) they are a waste of time
I will pay extra for a better keyboard faster phone and longer battery life
thats what I value

[edchauss]

the 8800 series is supposed to be there business series lose the camera and smaller phone for a faster processor and better layout keyboard

to some people they see the curve and pearl more feature rich to me I see the 8800 beating both of them
(most people will probably disagree though)

I'm aware it's geared toward businesses. However it really isn't that much smaller if you look at the dimensions and it's got the same screen (size and resolution) as the Curve. I don't think it has a faster processor though as just from what I saw the Curve/Pearl have 312 MHz Intel processors and I noticed the 8820 has the exact same processor while the 8830 has a different Intel processor listed at 225 MHz. Plus, it could easily be debated that it's keyboard is not layed out better than the Curve as the keys are slick and touch each other. So, that could be personal preference. I just don't see what extra features it offers that they would justify selling it for more than the Curve. Possibly the WiFi/GPS combination that Jayden mentioned but I think that is a cost trade off when adding a camera/video recorder. Plus, I see that it has lower media card capacity as well. As an engineer that worked for several years in manufacturing (Motorola) I'm having a tough time understanding why they are charging more for it. The only thing I can come up with is fewer people want it and it likely costs more to make because of the reduced volume hence the higher price.

[jm2hill]

I'm aware it's geared toward businesses. However it really isn't that much smaller if you look at the dimensions and it's got the same screen (size and resolution) as the Curve. I don't think it has a faster processor though as just from what I saw the Curve/Pearl have 312 MHz Intel processors and I noticed the 8820 has the exact same processor while the 8830 has a different Intel processor listed at 225 MHz. Plus, it could easily be debated that it's keyboard is not layed out better than the Curve as the keys are slick and touch each other. So, that could be personal preference. I just don't see what extra features it offers that they would justify selling it for more than the Curve. Possibly the WiFi/GPS combination that Jayden mentioned but I think that is a cost trade off when adding a camera/video recorder. Plus, I see that it has lower media card capacity as well. As an engineer that worked for several years in manufacturing (Motorola) I'm having a tough time understanding why they are charging more for it. The only thing I can come up with is fewer people want it and it likely costs more to make because of the reduced volume hence the higher price.

while your statement is true everything is a personal choice.
memory card capabilities are done by OS so whatever OS its on decides how much space it can hold
after handling the curve and the 8800 I believe that it is a much quicker phone.
the keyboard is debatable true however I am the fan of no spacing on the keys and the 8800 offers that
gps and wifi are a plus too but I see them as non-needed features

to me a camera is basically useless it just sucks up battery life and is a waste on a phone

as you said however it is personal preference and really for some businesses they are still handing out 7200s

[edchauss]

to you yes the other features are necessary and fun

to someone else (me) they are a waste of time
I will pay extra for a better keyboard faster phone and longer battery life
thats what I value

I understand that. It's all personal preference and how you'll use the product. I'm not arguing that it's a bad device at all. A friend of mine just picked one up for personal use and he loves it and I thought it was pretty cool. I just don't understand why carriers are charging more for it. As I said I don't see a feature it offers that is far greater from a cost standpoint. I have an advanced engineering degree and worked for 10 years in manufacturing in roles from production mgt, mfg engineer, and product development at Motorola and don't see how they are justifying the extra costs. From my experience the differing features being offered would nearly balance themselves out cost wise. So, the only logical reason I can see for carriers charging more for it is demand. When you have economies of scale you can share mfg lines, share parts, get volume discounts from suppliers, etc. and perhaps that is the reason why the Pearl/Curve cost less.

[jm2hill]

I understand that. It's all personal preference and how you'll use the product. I'm not arguing that it's a bad device at all. A friend of mine just picked one up for personal use and he loves it and I thought it was pretty cool. I just don't understand why carriers are charging more for it. As I said I don't see a feature it offers that is far greater from a cost standpoint. I have an advanced engineering degree and worked for 10 years in manufacturing in roles from production mgt, mfg engineer, and product development at Motorola and don't see how they are justifying the extra costs. From my experience the differing features being offered would nearly balance themselves out cost wise. So, the only logical reason I can see for carriers charging more for it is demand. When you have economies of scale you can share mfg lines, share parts, get volume discounts from suppliers, etc. and perhaps that is the reason why the Pearl/Curve cost less.

I think it will be the same between the bold and javelin
bold business
javelin consumer

spec wise the same/javelin has got some better specs while bolds got 3g
price wise bold more expensive

I just believe it is who they are marketing too

[BuddyL]

The bottom line is you're absolutely correct. Don't get me wrong, I got the 8820 4 months ago and love it, but I don't understand why I paid $350 for this while a curve goes for under a $100.

I understand that this is the business phone but I don't know why its memory has, I think, 20% less memory than a curve. I know that the curve is the commercial phone, that's why it has a camera and media. So I agree with you, why does the phone that has more cost less?

Maybe its the fact that business will pay more for a phone like this. I bought it for myself so its a personal phone but I use it for business. As stated the only feature on it is the wi-fi and its use to me doesn't justify the costs.

So again, why does it costs more? Because that's what people will pay for it. That's what I did. I wouldn't of spent $450 but was willing to spend $350. That's why it costs more. The curve wouldn't sell at $250 so its priced lower.

However, if you could figure out why this is priced higher and have a better explanation I would be glad to hear it. Unfortunately I'm still out $350 but would do it again in a heartbeat.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[edchauss]

I think it will be the same between the bold and javelin
bold business
javelin consumer

spec wise the same/javelin has got some better specs while bolds got 3g
price wise bold more expensive

I just believe it is who they are marketing too

There's probably a lot of truth in the marketing issue too. Many times technology offered for businesses (especially large corporations) is not that great of a deal. I often wonder if that is just because it's felt that large companies have the capital so they gouge them just because of it. That and the beaureacracy that doesn't exactly follow these costs like it's their own nickels and dimes. At any rate it's a shame for the small business owner that wants a smart phone for business use and doesn't care about having a camera/video recorder or the ability to carry around thousands of pics of their kids, friends, and pets or thousands of their fave tunes. They probably head to a wireless carrier and see the Pearl/Sprint for $50-$100 less and figure well I'll go with the cheaper device.

Just curious but why do you see the Bold as more for business use? I haven't read a great deal on it but from what I have it seems like both it and the 8900 Curve (Javelin) are both geared toward the consumer market. Personally, I really like that 8900 Curve. After reading two of Kevin's reviews on it I salivated a little.

[edchauss]

The bottom line is you're absolutely correct. Don't get me wrong, I got the 8820 4 months ago and love it, but I don't understand why I paid $350 for this while a curve goes for under a $100.

I understand that this is the business phone but I don't know why its memory has, I think, 20% less memory than a curve. I know that the curve is the commercial phone, that's why it has a camera and media. So I agree with you, why does the phone that has more cost less?

Maybe its the fact that business will pay more for a phone like this. I bought it for myself so its a personal phone but I use it for business. As stated the only feature on it is the wi-fi and its use to me doesn't justify the costs.

So again, why does it costs more? Because that's what people will pay for it. That's what I did. I wouldn't of spent $450 but was willing to spend $350. That's why it costs more. The curve wouldn't sell at $250 so its priced lower.

However, if you could figure out why this is priced higher and have a better explanation I would be glad to hear it. Unfortunately I'm still out $350 but would do it again in a heartbeat.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

Your exactly the reason I started this thread. The 8800 series seems like a great no nonsense phone for business users be they small or big time corporate America that don't want features like a camera/video recorder or a tiny form factor. After writing this post it occurred to me that it's likely the demand issue. Since the demand for the Pearl/Curve are far greater they can use economies of scale to produce it cheaper and thus sell it for less. I'm curious though what margins RIM makes on these devices and what margins the carriers get as well.

[saristeg]

I have the 8820 and no other BB had wifi and gps that in my case are must. Nowadays there is the Bold and the Javelin and thins have changed. The memory seem to be the same astthe curve at least in the case of ATT and Tmobile releases. It handles the same memory cards also. I do not see any other difference. Ok it doesn't have a camera.

Simon

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[BuddyL]

Actually, the memory is less than a curve. I think that has surprised me most. I guess since this phone is not for downloading apps and taking pictures memory wasn't a big priority. It is to me and I that is the one thing about the 8820 I would change.

I'm also glad that I could contribute to this thread. I'm probably the only person that would rather have his 8820 than get a Bold or any of the other upcoming new phones.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com