Slashdot Mirror
Unmaking Motorola's Q
conq writes "BusinessWeek has a breakdown of Motorola's Q Phone, looking at the cost of each of its components. From the article:
'It costs Motorola about $158 to build the phone. That includes components and assembly but excludes other expenses such as marketing, distribution, and licensing fees to Microsoft, which makes the phone's Windows Mobile operating system.' By comparaison, the BlackBerry 8700, only costs $123 according to the article. The difference between the two, the BlackBerry 'doesn't play video or music, and unlike the Q, it doesn't have a camera.'"
RIM Blackberry is the only phone available in the US that offers a fraction of the communications functionality Europeans take for granted. Even then, Blackberry is just a promise given the Reseller Plan's which throttle what little useful functionality is in the device to add-on services.
Camera, MP3, video objectify the space into lust-have consumerism which drives a cultish demand producing absolutely no redeeming downpayment on the future.
You know, that whole "free market" thingy...
It is a free market. But the customers are the carriers, not the consumers that end up using the phones. If the US had a mobile phone market where you could use the same handset with any provider perhaps you would start seeing phones offered to please the end-user. As it is, what they're selling and you're buying is a provider phone plan; the phone is just the necessary piece of gear to use the plan.
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
While we're at it, let's also stop trying to force all these PCs to do so much. All I really need my PC for is word processing, the user interface for getting into the word processor is terrible, the UI cluttered with all these extra programs and settings. Don't even get me started on how much all of these features drive up the hardware costs. What I want is a machine that just puts words onto paper! When will they get this through their heads?
[/sarcasm]
Am I the only one who hates carrying 5 computers in my pocket because each one refuses to share its processor cycles with another application?
Is it expensive now? Yes.
Will it come down in price? Yes.
Can an interface be both flexible and efficient? Yes.
Can the current designs be greatly improved? Yes.
...is that the Blackberry WORKS! Those Q's are nice to look at but terrible to use. We bought 6 at work when they first came out, 4 have been returned in favor of the Blackberry. The Blackberry does less, but it's reliable. Here's the mini-review I give to everyone at work who asks about them:
The Good:
-The screen is nice, bright, easy to read indoors, and a nice size in general.
-The general form factor. I like thin devices and the Q is that, it doesn't seem to have unneeded bulk.
-The network. Some like it, some hate it, but few will argue that Verizon's EVDO network is fast where you can get it. Allows for streaming a Slingbox nicely.
The Bad:
-Most of the problems can in some way be related back to Windows Mobile SMARTPHONE Edition. Had they gone with the full PocketPC software (and required touchscreen) the interface would be less awkward to move around in and you could do simple things like, oh I don't know, switch back to that task in the background?
-The keyboard...sucks. Most similar devices (mostly referring to Blackberries, Palm Treo's, and a couple others) have standardized portions of the key layout. For instance the backspace key is next to the L key so it's easy to get to since you typo a lot on small keyboards. On the Q it's a flat button, unlike the letters, up near the D-Pad and easy to miss (actually had someone ask me where it was after they had been using it for a week). The Enter key is where the backspace key should be (you can imagine what problems THAT causes), the only shift key is on the right side of the keyboard near the bottom (unlike the others). And in general the keyboard just doesn't have a good "feel" to it.
-The scroll-wheel, they should have left it off completely. The Smartphone interface wasn't designed for it. I believe they only put it on their to lure the Blackberry users, which is fine if it actually behaved like the Blackberry's, but it doesn't. You can't use it as the primary navigation tool like the Blackberry (you can only scroll vertically), and it is slow to respond to any input. Even the little bump they put around it to supposedly protect it from accidental activation hinders its usefulness.
-Stability, or lack there-of, may relate back to the Windows Smartphone OS, but we have other Smartphones that are MUCH, MUCH more stable. The Q will get hung up on the simplest tasks. If it's not freezing completely, it has dropped the network and won't reconnect until you reboot.
-No push-mail. They didn't ship the Q with the AKU2 service pack so it can't use Exchange Mobility push mail. That would be fine, because we have a Goodlink server, but Goodlink doesn't run well on the device due to the Smartphone interface. For one thing, we require a password, but on Smartphones Goodlink limits passwords to just numbers which require the use of the ALT key on the Q.
-It just seems slow. Nothing on the device seems to launch, run or close fast. In fact I often find myself setting it down while waiting for it to do something.
-Battery life...painful. My Blackberry will usually last about 4 days if only used for e-mail, 2-3 if using the cell phone. Motorola Q: 13 hours, which is coincidentally the exact amount of time one user's relationship with the device lasted.
-Charging. It has a mini-USB plug so you should be able to charge it anywhere, right? Wrong. If you want to charge it from a computer you have to have the POS ActiveSync software installed. If you want to charge it from the wall, you'd better have brought your Motorola USB charger because 70% of the mini-USB chargers I have tried won't work. Some will power the device but not charge the battery and some won't even register. It's not the amount of power either. I have one that provides up to 1100mA while the Motorola one provides 800mA, but it won't work. I haven't figured out why yet.
Cheap build quality. While we haven't damaged any, they just don't feel very durable. I've dropped, tossed, kicked and stepped on my Blackberry. I dare not set the Q down on a table hard, it feels l
Am I alone in not being attracted by all these bells and whistles phones have these days? I want a phone to be a phone - I already have a digital camera to take pictures, and a music player to play music. Why try to cram all these features into a mobile phone, which just complicates the user interface and adds cost?
No, you're not alone but you're relativly marginal in low margin segment.
Compare with computers or cars that only really basic features, like a computer with no frills at all or low end asian econo-box cars. They don't sell that well since they don't cost THAT much less. With a low-end product you need to sell a lot to recoupe your investment since per item return is low along with the fact that it's easier for other companies to jump on the bandwagon should it start rolling. And then you would have every Tom, Dick and Harry eating at the table you set.
And them, of course cellphone operators only offer subsidizes phones that are likely to increase the use of their services. I guess the way to go for people like you is cash cards and buy your own basic phone. You're just not profitable as a group to, in the eyes of the operators, to justify a subsidizes phone.
We tried the Q at my office and discovered many of the same things. We tried running the MNotes client on it and the UI was terrible to use for that. Luckily, our Verizon rep let us trade it back in on a Treo 700w, which is much, much nicer to use, although it is much more expensive.
I had (lost it at the dump) audiovox smart phone with Windows Mobile. I also carry a Blackberry on a rotating basis for support at work.
My Audiovox phone had a about 2 days before it needed a recharge, doing pretty much nothing (the screen was in sleep-mode). The Blackberry goes a week (and it's constantly downloading email from our Nagios server, and replying to acknowledge issues, etc), all with the screen on.
The Blackberry did everything with a scroll-wheel that was also a button. The windows-mobile needed a stylus to scroll, etc.
For me, the Blackberry won hands down: the screen was nice, the performance was great, and the keyboard is very usable with a bit of practice. And this is a 2 year old model, that has been dropped in the toilet (and survived) and is dropped probably once a week.
Rim had done an amazing job.
In the Netherlands, any phone you buy with a plan may be sim-locked, but after a year the provider is obligated to remove the lock. And hell, my MDA Vario was unlocked about 3 hours after I got it, and this was because I got it at work.
This idea of mobile carriers providing tech-support for phones is just nutzoid, as is the idea of carrier-monopoly on a phone type. Carriers focus on services, and other stores can focus on selling phones (with or without subscription).
This is actually easy. Pick a home screen layout that has the most-recently-used applications displayed across the top. So to switch from IE to media player, I hit HOME, right on D-pad (more than once if it wasn't the last app used), then the action button.
:) Of course i'm in love with it.
In most apps this isn't necessary, as the BACK button brigns you to the last app you were using before the current one. But Pocket IE has fucked that up and it tries to load the previous web page instead.
So, I find this EASIER than PocketPC. There you have to hit START, then scroll down to the MRU which is in the middle of the menu. Or you can use a third party app to do so.
BTW I do use coporate email (we have Exchange at work) and I have it set to pull every 10 minutes. I agree that not having AKU2 sucks - how can Motorola sell a brand new messaging device (suypposedly a Blackberry killer) without it? Someone messed up badly. Although I find a lot of your review to be nitpicky (I prefer the Smartphone controls a LOT to the PocketPC controls, since I hate using a stupid stylus - IT'S A PHONE) but of course that's probably due to you being familiar with Blackberry and PocketPC. I switched from PocketPC to Smartphone a year ago (Audiovox SMT5600) and I don't regret it (which surprised me).
That said, I don't think you'll be really happy until the push email solution is out and you've gotten both yourself and your users more used to the Smartphone. I also think it's garbage that I can't read doc attachments, or powerpoints which I get all the time.
It's definitely fine for me the way it is, but it took me a while to learn the way it works - there are LOTs of little tricks about how you can use the Back button, Home key, # and * keys, even the power button differently if you hold them down that make the device a real pleasure to use. For example, hit the green call button when you turn the phone on - BAM I'm looking at the last few calls I made and who called me, just one more click to return the call or to see what time they called. Or I can press right on the D-pad to switch to their home number/txt/email to contact them in a different place. Puts the Call History on every phone I've ever used to shame.
Plus the phone is a sexy beast
Has anyone ever used this thing longer than it takes to write some shallow review?
I have. I do mobile device development. I think, and *all* of my coworkers will agree with me, the Q sucks.
First off, the buttons are too small if you have fingers larger than a four year old's. The BlackBerry 8700 is pretty good, and the Palm with it's raised bubbly buttons, provide great control and feedback.
Second, they just did *stupid* stuff to the interface. Stuff that makes me think the thing is under-powered. For example, if you have a long list of items, the Q will paginate the list instead of making one long list. That is obnoxious with a capital O. It just constantly breaks down elements into small chunks, adding unnecessary clicks and scrolls.
The core problem, IMHO, is that Windows Mobile is not designed to work without a touch screen. However, in their attempts to make a BlackBerry-like clone, they've forced the OS to operate without a point-and-click interface. And they failed miserably.