Oh dear. Why did Sprint get mixed up with the BlackBerry PlayBook? Are telcos not able to evaluate a manufacturer's product anymore? The telcos have become so dependent on a manufacturer's "latest and greatest" for contracts and preventing churn they stopped looking and what it is exactly the telco would be pushing.
Blackberry will still have the advantage that the hardware that they produce is perfectly suited to a two phone user.
You imply that most people will prefer a hardware keyboard for their corporate phone. Because outside of a hardware keyboard I don't see any hardware advantage a BB has over any high-end Android phone or the iPhone 4.
You imply that most people will prefer a hardware keyboard for their corporate phone. Because outside of a hardware keyboard I don't see any hardware advantage a BB has over any high-end Android phone or the iPhone 4.
Not necessarily prefer (though many probably do), but a keyboard and smaller screen is a lot cheaper to build. RIM has an ASP below that of HTC, but their profit/phone is far higher. A phone with a keyboard can be significantly smaller than a touchscreen slate, because you can more reliably control small physical keys than small virtual keys.
Well that is true according to the supreme court. However, the real issue is who thinks that is a good idea. A person with more money then the US government (e.g. Apple) really can screw the rest of us people over.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dbtinc
Under the law, corporations ARE 'people' with most of the same rights as humans. As for RIM - the end is in site.
but a keyboard and smaller screen is a lot cheaper to build. RIM has an ASP below that of HTC, but their profit/phone is far higher.
This guy disagrees, yes RIM has an lower ASP than HTC but RIM's profits/phone are actually smaller than HTC's:
Quote:
A phone with a keyboard can be significantly smaller than a touchscreen slate, because you can more reliably control small physical keys than small virtual keys.
Maybe it can be significantly smaller but the current Blackberries are not smaller than the iPhone 4.
Blackberry Bold 9700: 109 x 60 x 14 mm
Blackberry Bold 9900: 115 x 66 x 10.5 mm
iPhone 4: 115 x 59 x 9 mm
Yes, the 9700 was 5% shorter than the iPhone 4 but also 50% thicker.
Not necessarily prefer (though many probably do), but a keyboard and smaller screen is a lot cheaper to build. RIM has an ASP below that of HTC, but their profit/phone is far higher. A phone with a keyboard can be significantly smaller than a touchscreen slate, because you can more reliably control small physical keys than small virtual keys.
That would be an interesting design exercise. I don't see how eliminating the keyboard and associated cables and electronics is going to make the phone smaller.
Your argument that it allows you to make a smaller phone is meaningless - since phone size these days is largely determined by the viewing area, not the size of the virtual keys.
In reality, most phones with keypads have a larger volume than similar phones without keys. Look at the Blackberry examples above.
I can't speak for other cities, but in Vancouver the local newspaper provides a map of free wifi access and it is quite comprehensive. Maybe you just didn't look "hard enough" ?
This guy disagrees, yes RIM has an lower ASP than HTC but RIM's profits/phone are actually smaller than HTC's:
Ok - it's kinda technical but if you look at the solid grey bar it's longer than the solid green bar. That means that RIM's profit per handset is higher than HTC's. Also when reading a watch the short hand is for hours and the long hand for minutes. I'm not sure what would annoy Horace Dediu more, the fact that you posted his chart without attribution or the fact that you spectacularly misread it.
Your argument that it allows you to make a smaller phone is meaningless - since phone size these days is largely determined by the viewing area, not the size of the virtual keys.
Sorry I guess I mis-spoke, I mean a keyboard allows for a smaller screen, less glass, considerably less expense.
Blackberries as a rule have extremely long battery life, because they're able to dedicate more weight to battery than touchscreen - and have limited functionality - by smartphone standards.
If you have to carry two phones you want the corp-phone to have the minimum hassle possibly.
Ok - it's kinda technical but if you look at the solid grey bar it's longer than the solid green bar. That means that RIM's profit per handset is higher than HTC's. Also when reading a watch the short hand is for hours and the long hand for minutes. I'm not sure what would annoy Horace Dediu more, the fact that you posted his chart without attribution or the fact that you spectacularly misread it.
Sorry, too much focus on the Apple numbers where profits and costs seems almost equal probably led to this mental lapse. Still the difference in profits/phone is pretty small between the two and RIM's profits/phone are certainly not "far higher" as you claimed.
Attribution was in the link URL and the image itself contains the attribution at the top. What is the difference to a footnote with the attribution and a top-note inside the graph? If this were anything commercial, I would certainly make the attribution more obvious (but my forum post does not provide me with any financial benefit).
It's about time that other companies realised that Apple made the tablet famous and desirable, therefore they had more time developing it. About time RIM realised this, embraced the fact that they'll never beat Apple at their own game and release a tablet called the "also ran".
You've either bought an iPad or you didn't buy an iPad. These non iPad tablets came with several different names, none of them will be remembered in 12 months time. The only thing that will beat the iPad is the next iPad.
It seems that all of Canada's major airports do offer wifi. Strange that so few offer it in the U.S... being that it has become a real necessity. It's like not finding a pay phone in the 50s.
I think you missed the operative word: "free".
All US airports offer WiFi. Some of them have multiple different hotspots appearing.
Its a shame really, out of all the tablets competing with the iPad the playbook is by far the best. I wouldn't mind gaving one, to be perfectly honest. After playing with one in a shop I was impressed.
Does anyone know what the sales are like over here in europe? BB Phones are crazy popular over here in the UK (I see more of them in the wild than any other phone).
Its a shame really, out of all the tablets competing with the iPad the playbook is by far the best. I wouldn't mind gaving one, to be perfectly honest. After playing with one in a shop I was impressed.
Does anyone know what the sales are like over here in europe? BB Phones are crazy popular over here in the UK (I see more of them in the wild than any other phone).
Blackberries are popular amongst UK consumers because they're cheap and offer a free messaging system. The playbook is not cheap and doesn't even offer email, except when tethered to a blackberry phone.
Blackberries are popular amongst UK consumers because they're cheap and offer a free messaging system. The playbook is not cheap and doesn't even offer email, except when tethered to a blackberry phone.
You're right about the cheap part. I was in my local telco and BBs have at least halved in price since the launch. Not a good sign.
But I get your point about it being a de facto 2nd phone for work. Cheap, secure messaging, but lousy screen, physical keys for oldies and messaging addicts... Overall at the end of the day you just use it for work and wouldn't want to waste too much other time with it.
Still, I think RIM is in deep trouble. BBs are selling for way too cheap.
Comments
Oh dear. Why did Sprint get mixed up with the BlackBerry PlayBook? Are telcos not able to evaluate a manufacturer's product anymore? The telcos have become so dependent on a manufacturer's "latest and greatest" for contracts and preventing churn they stopped looking and what it is exactly the telco would be pushing.
Desperation?
Blackberry will still have the advantage that the hardware that they produce is perfectly suited to a two phone user.
You imply that most people will prefer a hardware keyboard for their corporate phone. Because outside of a hardware keyboard I don't see any hardware advantage a BB has over any high-end Android phone or the iPhone 4.
You imply that most people will prefer a hardware keyboard for their corporate phone. Because outside of a hardware keyboard I don't see any hardware advantage a BB has over any high-end Android phone or the iPhone 4.
Not necessarily prefer (though many probably do), but a keyboard and smaller screen is a lot cheaper to build. RIM has an ASP below that of HTC, but their profit/phone is far higher. A phone with a keyboard can be significantly smaller than a touchscreen slate, because you can more reliably control small physical keys than small virtual keys.
Under the law, corporations ARE 'people' with most of the same rights as humans. As for RIM - the end is in site.
but a keyboard and smaller screen is a lot cheaper to build. RIM has an ASP below that of HTC, but their profit/phone is far higher.
This guy disagrees, yes RIM has an lower ASP than HTC but RIM's profits/phone are actually smaller than HTC's:
A phone with a keyboard can be significantly smaller than a touchscreen slate, because you can more reliably control small physical keys than small virtual keys.
Maybe it can be significantly smaller but the current Blackberries are not smaller than the iPhone 4.
Blackberry Bold 9700: 109 x 60 x 14 mm
Blackberry Bold 9900: 115 x 66 x 10.5 mm
iPhone 4: 115 x 59 x 9 mm
Yes, the 9700 was 5% shorter than the iPhone 4 but also 50% thicker.
Not necessarily prefer (though many probably do), but a keyboard and smaller screen is a lot cheaper to build. RIM has an ASP below that of HTC, but their profit/phone is far higher. A phone with a keyboard can be significantly smaller than a touchscreen slate, because you can more reliably control small physical keys than small virtual keys.
That would be an interesting design exercise. I don't see how eliminating the keyboard and associated cables and electronics is going to make the phone smaller.
Your argument that it allows you to make a smaller phone is meaningless - since phone size these days is largely determined by the viewing area, not the size of the virtual keys.
In reality, most phones with keypads have a larger volume than similar phones without keys. Look at the Blackberry examples above.
I can't speak for other cities, but in Vancouver the local newspaper provides a map of free wifi access and it is quite comprehensive. Maybe you just didn't look "hard enough" ?
http://www.theprovince.com/maps/wifi.html
Hell... even Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan provides free wifi (since 2007) throughout its entire downtown core and for 8 blocks up its main strip.
http://www.gov.sk.ca/news?newsId=025...6-daa163cf636f
This guy disagrees, yes RIM has an lower ASP than HTC but RIM's profits/phone are actually smaller than HTC's:
Ok - it's kinda technical but if you look at the solid grey bar it's longer than the solid green bar. That means that RIM's profit per handset is higher than HTC's. Also when reading a watch the short hand is for hours and the long hand for minutes. I'm not sure what would annoy Horace Dediu more, the fact that you posted his chart without attribution or the fact that you spectacularly misread it.
Your argument that it allows you to make a smaller phone is meaningless - since phone size these days is largely determined by the viewing area, not the size of the virtual keys.
Sorry I guess I mis-spoke, I mean a keyboard allows for a smaller screen, less glass, considerably less expense.
Blackberries as a rule have extremely long battery life, because they're able to dedicate more weight to battery than touchscreen - and have limited functionality - by smartphone standards.
If you have to carry two phones you want the corp-phone to have the minimum hassle possibly.
Ok - it's kinda technical but if you look at the solid grey bar it's longer than the solid green bar. That means that RIM's profit per handset is higher than HTC's. Also when reading a watch the short hand is for hours and the long hand for minutes. I'm not sure what would annoy Horace Dediu more, the fact that you posted his chart without attribution or the fact that you spectacularly misread it.
Sorry, too much focus on the Apple numbers where profits and costs seems almost equal probably led to this mental lapse. Still the difference in profits/phone is pretty small between the two and RIM's profits/phone are certainly not "far higher" as you claimed.
Attribution was in the link URL and the image itself contains the attribution at the top. What is the difference to a footnote with the attribution and a top-note inside the graph? If this were anything commercial, I would certainly make the attribution more obvious (but my forum post does not provide me with any financial benefit).
You've either bought an iPad or you didn't buy an iPad. These non iPad tablets came with several different names, none of them will be remembered in 12 months time. The only thing that will beat the iPad is the next iPad.
It seems that all of Canada's major airports do offer wifi. Strange that so few offer it in the U.S... being that it has become a real necessity. It's like not finding a pay phone in the 50s.
I think you missed the operative word: "free".
All US airports offer WiFi. Some of them have multiple different hotspots appearing.
But most are not free.
Thompson
I think you missed the operative word: "free".
All US airports offer WiFi. Some of them have multiple different hotspots appearing.
But most are not free.
Thompson
Not free?!
Bummer...
Does anyone know what the sales are like over here in europe? BB Phones are crazy popular over here in the UK (I see more of them in the wild than any other phone).
Its a shame really, out of all the tablets competing with the iPad the playbook is by far the best. I wouldn't mind gaving one, to be perfectly honest. After playing with one in a shop I was impressed.
Does anyone know what the sales are like over here in europe? BB Phones are crazy popular over here in the UK (I see more of them in the wild than any other phone).
The Playbook is not playing in the UK
O2 turned it down http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/16/o...th-end-to-end/
The Guardian panned it http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology...laybook-review
The Telegraph mostly panned it http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technolog...et-review.html
Blackberries are popular amongst UK consumers because they're cheap and offer a free messaging system. The playbook is not cheap and doesn't even offer email, except when tethered to a blackberry phone.
Blackberries are popular amongst UK consumers because they're cheap and offer a free messaging system. The playbook is not cheap and doesn't even offer email, except when tethered to a blackberry phone.
You're right about the cheap part. I was in my local telco and BBs have at least halved in price since the launch. Not a good sign.
But I get your point about it being a de facto 2nd phone for work. Cheap, secure messaging, but lousy screen, physical keys for oldies and messaging addicts... Overall at the end of the day you just use it for work and wouldn't want to waste too much other time with it.
Still, I think RIM is in deep trouble. BBs are selling for way too cheap.