Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: iPhone v. BlackBerry  (Read 14766 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline TrevTopic starter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2003
  • Posts: 1550
  • Country: 00
    • Show all replies
iPhone v. BlackBerry
« on: August 05, 2009, 07:32:57 PM »
The office just replaced my aging cell phone and pager combination with a BlackBerry 8830 World Edition. It's much restricted by our IT department (and rightly so), but apart from the useful alert filtering, it's obviously inferior to the iPhone. The keyboard is a bit easier to use, although typing non-alpha keys with one hand is impossible. The web browser is grounded firmly in the last century, and the map feature is useless unless you already know where you are, where you're going, and how to get there. Plus, the warm, friendly screen-based buttons become a lot less friendly when you realize there's no touch screen. Stupid trackball thingy. Unfortunately, our firm doesn't support the latest BlackBerry models.
 

Offline TrevTopic starter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2003
  • Posts: 1550
  • Country: 00
    • Show all replies
Re: iPhone v. BlackBerry
« Reply #1 on: August 05, 2009, 11:51:55 PM »
I agree that the iPhone isn't the best "phone," particularly with AT&T. I've also noticed quite a bit of keyboard latency since the 3.0 upgrade on my 3G, and I can no longer kill misbehaving (or memory hungry) but responsive applications by holding the button for 6+ seconds.

One more blast against the BlackBerry: It's designed for right-handed people. I'm left-handed, so none of the modifier and digit keys are conveniently positioned, and it's a little painful to dial. (I'm tall. I have long fingers.)
 

Offline TrevTopic starter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2003
  • Posts: 1550
  • Country: 00
    • Show all replies
Re: iPhone v. BlackBerry
« Reply #2 on: August 06, 2009, 02:59:08 AM »
@csixty4

No, only authorized applications. I'm in IT as well, and I suppose I could ask the relevant administrators for a few extra features, but I really just need it for email and calendar access.

@persia

If only we could easily choose new carriers in the US. Phone services here are quite a racket.
 

Offline TrevTopic starter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2003
  • Posts: 1550
  • Country: 00
    • Show all replies
Re: iPhone v. BlackBerry
« Reply #3 on: August 06, 2009, 07:34:13 AM »
I hate to knock my iPhone again, but I get amazing battery life out if my Nintendo DSi. The iPhone doesn't even last a day on standby....
 

Offline TrevTopic starter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2003
  • Posts: 1550
  • Country: 00
    • Show all replies
Re: iPhone v. BlackBerry
« Reply #4 on: August 08, 2009, 02:43:13 AM »
Quote from: AmigaHeretic;518409
So maybe that is one of several reasons the original poster's company went with Blackberry.


Like most companies, they went with the BlackBerry because it's a de facto standard in corporate messaging environments. In industries with strict controls--finance, medicine, etc.--manageability and security trump everything else. (Nothing's perfect, of course, but....)

Apple markets itself as anti-corporate (in the cool, hip sense) and doesn't do much to make their gear play well in enterprise environments.

Regarding batteries, I'm sure Apple understands exactly how their choice of battery impacts their bottom line, up to and including loss of reputation due to failures. They're not amateurs.
« Last Edit: August 08, 2009, 02:46:11 AM by Trev »
 

Offline TrevTopic starter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2003
  • Posts: 1550
  • Country: 00
    • Show all replies
Re: iPhone v. BlackBerry
« Reply #5 on: August 11, 2009, 12:00:29 AM »
Quote from: kickstart;518775
Yes, they forget all ppc users using osx too but if m$ make it is bad, if apple make it is "different", i dont understand its the same, no?


It is, but read the discussions on the gcc mailing list re: plug-ins and how to force GPL compliance. Their solution was to implement a DRM-like copyright enforcement mechanism and deliberately obfuscate the code responsible for loading plug-ins, despite possible conflicts with GPLv3. So, everyone does it, even those that claim to support open software.

That said, I don't see any problem with Apple and Microsoft using their own platforms as host environments. They sell proprietary software, after all. The gcc people, on the other hand, need to take a hard look at themselves in the mirror and decide whether or not they really believe in the concept of free software.