BlackBerry Forums Support Community               

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 11-01-2007, 11:48 AM   #1 (permalink)
Talking BlackBerry Encyclopedia
 
LarryH's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Studio City, CA
Model: 8310
PIN: N/A
Carrier: ATT
Posts: 209
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default 8300 vs New Motorola Q9H (Global)

Please Login to Remove!

On another board, someone who claimed to be in the BB camp was wondering about how this new phone compared. I know a lot of people come to these boards wondering which phone might be a better choice for them.

I posted my take on both phones and thought it might be useful to post here. I've only been in the BB camp since the 8300 came out so I have much more experience in the Windows Mobile world. The old adage, as I suggested in my post, applies: YMMV. These are simply my takes on the phones.
___________________________________

Previously, I had never been in the BB camp. I've had WM (and before that, Palm) phones for many years. In that camp, most recently I'd been using a Verizon Q. Loved it.

But I strayed into the BB camp when the Curve (8300) came out on AT&T. I now have a Q9 in my hands and I must say, I'm vacillating between the two. IMO, there's no doubt that the Q9 can be "tricked out," modified, customized and added onto much more than the BB. And, in that tricked out condition, my Q9 is a "sexier" phone than the Curve by far.

On the Q9, I have 100's of home screens, providing numerous functions available to me. Certain aspects of Outlook sync are better with WM than with BB (and I'm on BES which is BB's best sync.) Photos attached to contacts sync much better with WM than with the BB. I have problems with all-day, recurring events (like birthdays) triggering alarms on my BB although standard, timed appointment reminders always work.

If you want to "play" with your phone, tinker with it, the Q9 is tops.

HOWEVER... Do I really use my photo caller id? In truth, no. I have custom ringtones set which let me know who's calling long before I look at the screen. And though I'm not happy about it, the birthday reminders fire off on my desktop PC enabling me to remember to buy gifts and keep the few friends I have.

As I sat with my Q9 the other night I realized that, for many functions, the ones I use most -- email, texting, making phone calls -- there's a lot to love about the BB. One keypress brings me right to my email. No keypress is needed to bring up my contact list when I'm filling in the TO: field on emails and texts. One keypress puts me into a reply form, etc. etc. I found myself clicking and "scrolling" in the Q9 (as I had on the Q) a lot more than on the BB. Two or three clicks and/or scrolls for every one on the BB.

Opera on the Q9 appears pretty slick though I have to be a few blocks from my house to pull in 3G and really appreciate it. And if I want 3G the BB is a no-go. They don't make any US 3G phones... yet.

One of my biggest pet peeves is that, when traveling to Canada with my Verizon Q, I couldn't dial from my contact list or voice dial (which is how I almost always dial) because Canada requires a 1 before the area code. None of my contact entries use that format (and I sure ain't gonna go edit them all.) So every time I made a call, I had to look at the number in my contact list and manually enter it, prefixing the 1. Now that's annoying! Unless I'm missing something, that hasn't changed in the Q9, albeit it's with AT&T, not Verizon like my previous Q. If this is the case, it's very disappointing. It seems so simple to provide a setting where you could tell the phone to prefix a number. The BB has "smart dialing" and couldn't care less about the darn 1 and will adjust to each location's specific dialing requirements. Sweet.

The BB has an add-on program so that if I miss a call (or email or text or whatever) the phone can be set to flash its LED (in a particular color depending on just what you missed) and make a sound. I never knew how valuable this was until I had it. There's no effective way to do that on the Q9 without picking up the phone and checking the screen. (The Q9m has a half-hearted version -- "missed email alert.") The only add-ins I know of for the Q (Phone Alarm and Don't Forget) either don't work at all or are troublesome.

I really miss the left shift (caps) key on the Q9. I like the BB's ability to create "shortcuts" for words so can simply type "ive" and the BB will make it "I've," etc. The Curve has spell checking, etc.

So, in the end, it's going to have a lot to do -- as it always does -- with features, functions and just plain old personal taste. The avid surfer might love Opera on the Q (better than Opera mini on the BB, etc.) The "geek" in me adores the Q9 but when I'm just out and about, for texting and emailing and navigating the phone, not thinking about how "cool" the Q9 is (and it is cool) the BB is the champ in my camp.

Hope some of this helps.
__________________
Drinks with Larry and Lauren (A Podcast)
http://www.drinkswithlarryandlauren.com
Offline  
Old 11-01-2007, 02:43 PM   #2 (permalink)
Thumbs Must Hurt
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Model: 8300
Carrier: AT&T
Posts: 187
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

how anyone lives with WM is beyond me. It's not an operating system meant for a phone (and yes, I owned a WM Phone). The bottom line for me is that my BB is a business tool for me to get my job done. The BB allows me to do this much more efficiently than anything I have seen. If this was just a toy it might be more appealing but BB wins hands down. The curve just rocks.

You can complain about lack of 3G but unless you are tethering whats the point. "browsing" on a mobile is ridiculous. maybe in the future we will have devices that make this feasible but i honestly dont know why someone would want to. You can get game scores, look up phone numbers, get maps very easily. This is all I need or want.

Eric
Offline  
Old 11-01-2007, 05:13 PM   #3 (permalink)
Talking BlackBerry Encyclopedia
 
LarryH's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Studio City, CA
Model: 8310
PIN: N/A
Carrier: ATT
Posts: 209
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Eric -- pretty much agree with you on all points. Though I wouldn't recommend WM to a person who just wants and easy, straight-forward tool, in its latest incarnations I never found it very problematical. Of course, I read forums, hack registries, etc. For me, recently, it's been steady and reliable. Not for the person who doesn't want to spend a good deal of time with their software, however.
__________________
Drinks with Larry and Lauren (A Podcast)
http://www.drinkswithlarryandlauren.com
Offline  
Old 11-12-2007, 08:52 PM   #4 (permalink)
CrackBerry Addict
 
davistld01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Springfield, MO.
Model: None
Carrier: Verizon Wireless
Posts: 842
Post Thanks: 2
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

Thanks for the comparison review. I have been on the fence between the two devices...and just can't get past the WM platform of the Q9h. It doesn't seem all that far removed from the WM5 on the old Samsung Blackjack I owned a while back...or the Treo 750 I owned for a nanosecond either. I never felt comfy with the Windows system then...and doubt I would now, although I must admit that the qwerty keypad on the Moto beats the one on the BlackBerry 8310 by quite a measure IMHO. It's roomier and the keys are much larger...making typing quicker and easier.

But, after messing with both the Q9h and the BB 8310 today at my local AT&T store...I am leaning heavily towards the BlackBerry again as my next mobile device. I kick myself each time I think about trading my 8300 for the iPhone...and the dissatisfaction I have felt with each phone since. I am not by any measure a techie...and the simplicity and effectiveness of the BlackBerry appeals hugely to me. Quite frankly...it just gets the job done, and gets it done reliably and without fanfare.

Thanks for making my decision easier!!
Offline  
Old 11-12-2007, 10:38 PM   #5 (permalink)
No longer Registered.
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NJ
Model: WP7
OS: The Best
Carrier: AT&T
Posts: 1,930
Post Thanks: 6
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Default

Its 2 strikes for the Q9. First it Motorola. Motorola has of late been cranking out garbage for hardware. Sure it looks good, but its nothing but problems. 2nd, it runs Win Mobile, which in my opinion is horrible. Like everything MS, it tries to be everything for everyone and doesn't do any of it well. It popularity is based solely on the fact that it is really the only phone OS out there. BB OS, Palm OS and Apple's OS are proprietary to their platforms and Symbian has never taken off in the states. By the way look for MS dominance to wain with the introduction of the google phone OS. They have a demo of it on Engadget and it looks pretty good for being so early in its development.
Do yourself a favor and get the BB, you will be much happier.
Offline  
Old 11-13-2007, 01:51 AM   #6 (permalink)
CrackBerry Addict
 
numetheus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Mesa, AZ
Model: 9000
PIN: 20FA40E8
Carrier: AT&T
Posts: 551
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ArgonNJ View Post
Its 2 strikes for the Q9. First it Motorola. Motorola has of late been cranking out garbage for hardware. Sure it looks good, but its nothing but problems. 2nd, it runs Win Mobile, which in my opinion is horrible. Like everything MS, it tries to be everything for everyone and doesn't do any of it well. It popularity is based solely on the fact that it is really the only phone OS out there. BB OS, Palm OS and Apple's OS are proprietary to their platforms and Symbian has never taken off in the states. By the way look for MS dominance to wain with the introduction of the google phone OS. They have a demo of it on Engadget and it looks pretty good for being so early in its development.
Do yourself a favor and get the BB, you will be much happier.
There is no Google phone OS or gphone. This was confirmed by a Google rep. The only thing Google is working on for mobile devices is the Android software stack. It is NOT an operating system, it is a software stack only. There was a video with the google rep demoing some cool apps for Android, INCLUDING screenshots of a possible UI for a phone OS. But point is, there IS NO GOOGLE OS FOR MOBILE PHONES. Just Android.
__________________
Numetheus
The crazy Filipino!!

http://www.facebook.com/numetheus
PIN: 20FA40E8
Offline  
Old 11-13-2007, 02:35 AM   #7 (permalink)
Talking BlackBerry Encyclopedia
 
eZainny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Brisbane, Australia.
Model: 8300
PIN: N/A
Carrier: Optus
Posts: 340
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by numetheus View Post
There is no Google phone OS or gphone. This was confirmed by a Google rep. The only thing Google is working on for mobile devices is the Android software stack. It is NOT an operating system, it is a software stack only. There was a video with the google rep demoing some cool apps for Android, INCLUDING screenshots of a possible UI for a phone OS. But point is, there IS NO GOOGLE OS FOR MOBILE PHONES. Just Android.
You are wrong:

"The Android platform is a software stack for mobile devices including an operating system, middleware and key applications."

Source: Documentation - Android
__________________
View HTML email today with the Best Selling BlackBerry application: BBSmart Email Viewer
Offline  
Old 11-13-2007, 02:47 AM   #8 (permalink)
CrackBerry Addict
 
numetheus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Mesa, AZ
Model: 9000
PIN: 20FA40E8
Carrier: AT&T
Posts: 551
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eZainny View Post
You are wrong:

"The Android platform is a software stack for mobile devices including an operating system, middleware and key applications."

Source: Documentation - Android
I am mistaken. I took it as mainly a software stack without a UI. I watched the video again and he does reference the OS. Although, there still is no gPhone. Its a software platform that can be used by anyone wanting it, so one version of the Android platform will be different from another manufacturers implementation.
__________________
Numetheus
The crazy Filipino!!

http://www.facebook.com/numetheus
PIN: 20FA40E8
Offline  
Old 11-13-2007, 02:56 AM   #9 (permalink)
Talking BlackBerry Encyclopedia
 
eZainny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Brisbane, Australia.
Model: 8300
PIN: N/A
Carrier: Optus
Posts: 340
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by numetheus View Post
I am mistaken. I took it as mainly a software stack without a UI. I watched the video again and he does reference the OS. Although, there still is no gPhone. Its a software platform that can be used by anyone wanting it, so one version of the Android platform will be different from another manufacturers implementation.
Yep. Hopefully the different implementations are all fairly consistent too so us developers don't end up getting screwed around (like Symbian OS where there are 10 incompatible versions floating around)

On one hand, I like OSs and software stacks developed by the manufacturers themselves (ala RIM) because then they can achieve tight integration with the hardware itself.

On the other hand, device manufacturers generally are great with hardware but suck at software (ala RIM).

I think if we can move Android towards being a "standard" (it will instantly appeal to most manufacturers because it's both free and open so no royalties to pay MS or Symbian) then maybe we can have the best of both worlds:
1) Powerful software, because the core foundations have been laid by Google (who do know software)
2) Manufacturers who are comfortable with the software and so can bend it to fit well with their devices.

That's my 2c anyway
__________________
View HTML email today with the Best Selling BlackBerry application: BBSmart Email Viewer
Offline  
Old 11-13-2007, 03:02 AM   #10 (permalink)
CrackBerry Addict
 
numetheus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Mesa, AZ
Model: 9000
PIN: 20FA40E8
Carrier: AT&T
Posts: 551
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eZainny View Post
Yep. Hopefully the different implementations are all fairly consistent too so us developers don't end up getting screwed around (like Symbian OS where there are 10 incompatible versions floating around)

On one hand, I like OSs and software stacks developed by the manufacturers themselves (ala RIM) because then they can achieve tight integration with the hardware itself.

On the other hand, device manufacturers generally are great with hardware but suck at software (ala RIM).

I think if we can move Android towards being a "standard" (it will instantly appeal to most manufacturers because it's both free and open so no royalties to pay MS or Symbian) then maybe we can have the best of both worlds:
1) Powerful software, because the core foundations have been laid by Google (who do know software)
2) Manufacturers who are comfortable with the software and so can bend it to fit well with their devices.

That's my 2c anyway
Well, whether or not the manufacturers decide to keep the default UI or not is something that shouldnt mean much. From what I have seen they are releasing the stack along with the SDK, which means that we will all be coding using the same toolkit, libraries and whatnot. The software we write should all work on all platforms running Android anyway, provided of course we all use the same toolkit to write our apps.

Unless of course, the developer community starts to create their own set of libraries because they don't like the ones that come with it. THEN we will start to get incompatibility problems. This is one of the biggest problems with open source (well, not necessarily open source, but the freedom to create what we want). I just hope nobody goes overboard.

As long as everyone sticks with the same framework, it will be great. I can see though, a potential for something else happening.
__________________
Numetheus
The crazy Filipino!!

http://www.facebook.com/numetheus
PIN: 20FA40E8

Last edited by numetheus : 11-13-2007 at 03:03 AM.
Offline  
Old 11-13-2007, 01:35 PM   #11 (permalink)
No longer Registered.
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NJ
Model: WP7
OS: The Best
Carrier: AT&T
Posts: 1,930
Post Thanks: 6
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by numetheus View Post
Well, whether or not the manufacturers decide to keep the default UI or not is something that shouldnt mean much. From what I have seen they are releasing the stack along with the SDK, which means that we will all be coding using the same toolkit, libraries and whatnot. The software we write should all work on all platforms running Android anyway, provided of course we all use the same toolkit to write our apps.

Unless of course, the developer community starts to create their own set of libraries because they don't like the ones that come with it. THEN we will start to get incompatibility problems. This is one of the biggest problems with open source (well, not necessarily open source, but the freedom to create what we want). I just hope nobody goes overboard.

As long as everyone sticks with the same framework, it will be great. I can see though, a potential for something else happening.
Regardless, I still see this being a better choice then Win Mobile.
Offline  
Old 11-13-2007, 01:52 PM   #12 (permalink)
CrackBerry Addict
 
numetheus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Mesa, AZ
Model: 9000
PIN: 20FA40E8
Carrier: AT&T
Posts: 551
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry8310/4.2.2 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/102)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ArgonNJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by numetheus View Post
Well, whether or not the manufacturers decide to keep the default UI or not is something that shouldnt mean much. From what I have seen they are releasing the stack along with the SDK, which means that we will all be coding using the same toolkit, libraries and whatnot. The software we write should all work on all platforms running Android anyway, provided of course we all use the same toolkit to write our apps.

Unless of course, the developer community starts to create their own set of libraries because they don't like the ones that come with it. THEN we will start to get incompatibility problems. This is one of the biggest problems with open source (well, not necessarily open source, but the freedom to create what we want). I just hope nobody goes overboard.

As long as everyone sticks with the same framework, it will be great. I can see though, a potential for something else happening.
Regardless, I still see this being a better choice then Win Mobile.
Amen there! Lol. I am excited to get my hands on the SDK.
__________________
Numetheus
The crazy Filipino!!

http://www.facebook.com/numetheus
PIN: 20FA40E8
Offline  
Closed Thread


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On





Copyright 2004-2014 BlackBerryForums.com.
The names RIM and BlackBerry are registered Trademarks of BlackBerry Inc.