[analogue SPRINKLES]

I can't figure this out for the life of me. I have read at LEAST 10-15 reviews on the droid.
They are all 100% in agreement on the following.

1) The Keyboard is too thin, flimsy, hard to type on. No better than a soft keyboard
2) The screen is hard to see outside in sunlight
3) The CPU is fast the the OS still lags randomly
4) The browser isn't as good as Safari but close
5) No multitouch
6) No music, contact, video syncing with your computer.
7) The camera is 5MP but absolutely atrocious as it is laggy and blurry
8) The android OS is better but the UI is still very inconstant
9) Not as many apps as the iPhone. Not even close.
10) It is too heavy
11) The design is ok but many don't like it that much. (I hate that chin personally)
12) The battery life isn't great.
13) They directional pad is pointless.
14) Cloud syncing only. Lets hope google doesn't have a sidekick moment.
15) Tethering costs extra

The only plus' it seems to have is the higher rez screen (Which sucks in daylight) and the Google turn by turn which is "Ok" and might come to the iPhone too.

But at the end of the review they still say they recommend it and call it great? Huh what?!! It is because this is the best CDMA phone you can get?

With all these negatives and "Not as good as the iPhones" it seems to me that it shouldn't get a positive review in the end or is a high res screen that is really hard to get actual movies onto to enjoy it worth a "A" grade?

Feels like people WANT to love it and even after all these negatives they still give it their love. Or is the "We have hope in Android cuz you can customize it" attitude clouding everyone. How many normal people really want google cuz it can be "Customized" somehow and is "Open" yet somehow doesn't result in more and better apps?

What am i missing here?

[Chuckit]

It's the "Android seems like the best hope for a legitimate iPhone competitor, and Droid is the first Android phone which hasn't sucked so flagrantly that we could see it a mile away from the store" thing.

And being worse than the iPhone doesn't necessarily mean it should get a bad review. Or is only the #1 best product in a given field worthy of any good remarks?

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Ya but "No sucking" is hardly worthy of a "Highly recommend" grade.

That is like calling someone "Not ugly" but it doesn't make them sound attractive.

"Dude, she's not the ugliest one here. You totally have to do her!"

Pass.

[Chuckit]

Being slightly worse than the iPhone isn't like being "not ugly." It's more like saying somebody is "Not as hot as Kate Beckinsale" — that could still describe somebody very attractive.

Anyway, I was considering a Droid based on preliminary buzz, but I've decided against getting one now that more facts are out. iPhone still sounds like the only real option. If Android were cheaper or whatever, that would make a difference, but it's actually more expensive than a basic iPhone with (apparently) a worse experience.

[Phileas]

One drawback nobody talks about is that the Droid only has 512 MB of internal memory. Only 256 of that memory is available for applications. I currently keep just over a gig and a half of apps on my iPhone, including Navigon which weighs in at just over 1 GB.

Apparently there are ways to keep some data on the card, but it's a hack and a workaround.

[ghporter]

This is called "marketing." Motorola has a lot of people that do this task, and they use the same channels that other phone/device makers do. There is so much hype about the 'Droid because Motorola has paid a metric butt-load of cash to make it happen. They have courted tech writers, used really slick advertising (including pre-pre-release campaigns), and they have placed enough "interesting stories" about the unit to get this particular level of hype.

Once you strip hype away from anything, you find out that it's what it is, and you can make a decision about it based on the facts. The only really useful thing about advertising and hype is to bring a new product to your attention. You can be a sheep and guzzle down the hype, or you can be an adult human and think about the thing and make an informed decision. Please note that since about 1940, the sheep have been winning.

[turtle777]

LOL, the hype reminds me a little bit of the hype surrounding the Palm Pre.

Give it 2 months, and the Droid will be forgotten, like the Palm Pre is.

-t

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

Being slightly worse than the iPhone isn't like being "not ugly." It's more like saying somebody is "Not as hot as Kate Beckinsale" — that could still describe somebody very attractive.

Well no, that's likes saying she is almost as hot as Kate Beckinsale but she is a lesbian so why bother buying her a drink.

My point is all the "Advantages" over the iPhone are no better in the end so why are these things selling points?

1) The camera is 5MP - But it sucks big time.
2) The screen is higher res - But you can't see it outside or get movies on it easily to enjoy it.
3) It has a keyboard! - But it isn't worth using.
4) It is an open platform (whatever that matters) - But 1/10th the apps as the iPhone.
5) It has a fast CPU - But the OS is still slow.

I don't have a problem with something being second best. My point is after everything I mentioned doesn't it really deserve an "A" or "Highly recommended" grade? For what? What is the one thing about this device that you would want it over the #1 phone such as the iPhone.

You walk into a store to buy A SINGLE phone. You look at the iPhone but walk out with the second best? Why?

My guess this is the best option if you are on CDMA but that doesn't mean it deserves and A. If I reviewed it I would say it gets a B- but if you can't get an iPhone for whatever reason this is the best of the worst. I wouldn't write "Keyboard, camera, OS suck huge moose balls... run out and buy it!"

But ya, this reminds me of the Palm as well. All the hype but shortly after it comes out nothing really stands out about it because in the end the iPhone is better on so many points so unless you collect phones you're only going to own one.

Then again some people just have no taste. I mean the BB Storm which got nothing but bad reviews and press sold a million units in a few months. Some people just want to be different for no reason.

Once the iPhone is on CDMA or Verison goes GSM the competition is going to have an even harder time selling their crap.

[Captain Obvious]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

You walk into a store to buy A SINGLE phone. You look at the iPhone but walk out with the second best? Why?

Because AT&T is the 3rd best network in the country behind Verizon and Tmobile?

As much as some people may love the iPhone it is still on a shitty carrier. That is a deal breaker for me. It may excel on various levels over some of its competitors but that doesn't compensate for AT&T being weak nationwide. Plus the voice quality on iPhones isn't spectacular.

I am not going out to get a Droid but I hope it does well.
If it is a successful Motorola is likely to also make a GSM version and fix whatever problems people may have with this first generation. It has flaws but its a good starting off point. Apple is trying to go for a one size fits all model with the iPhone but that's not going to appeal to everyone. I have stayed with WM6 because the alternatives suck right now and in terms of form factors the phones running it have had some options. Android is maturing and this is just one of the steps towards it becoming the standard in smartphones. Apple has a headstart but now there is at least something else that looks promising.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Captain Obvious 

Because AT&T is the 3rd best network in the country behind Verizon and Tmobile?

Seriously, T-Mobile is NOT better than AT&T.

-t

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by Captain Obvious 

Because AT&T is the 3rd best network in the country behind Verizon and Tmobile?

Personally I would NEVER call a CDMA network with no simcards better than GSM but to each his own.

[Captain Obvious]

Here and on the Eastern seaboard it is.
AT&T has been vastly more unreliable in Chicago and around the Lake Michigan area since it merged with Cingular. And the coverage outside cities on the East coast with AT&T is terrible. Those account for where I spend most of my time.

Consumer Reports Cellphone Service Survey 2008 Published: Verizon Number One - At&t - Gizmodo

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

Personally I would NEVER call a CDMA network with no simcards better than GSM but to each his own.

That's because you are being a tech nerd.
I don't really care that the technology is superior when the application of said tech yields poor results in day to day life.

[osiris]

I'll pass judgment until I've had one in my hands and had the chance to play with it a bit. The hype might be perceived as a warning sign - like a movie that appears to be mind blowing thanks to a mega advertising campaign, but is really just mediocre. We'll see...

[The Godfather]

As a VZ customer I can say this: never under-estimate Verizon ability and motivation to cripple the phones they sell to you.
I'll wait for the reviews that include actual use in the Verizon network, and extra fees for services that we take for granted.

[Salty]

I'm amazed Motorola still has money to pay for hype. I imagine a lot of it is coming from Verizon and Google because Motorola is constantly teetering on the edge of running out of business.

It looks like a nice phone, but the fact is Motorola can't make good hardware. I regularly see RAZRs, KRZRs, etc come back with issues. We never sold any Moto Qs but the ones we did sell came back with issues. Motorola just doesn't make a good phone anymore. The Droid hopefully has better quality control but even then.

I'm all for competition and all, but really Motorola and Nokia are both companies that need to die so the market can move on.

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by Salty 

I'm amazed Motorola still has money to pay for hype. I imagine a lot of it is coming from Verizon and Google because Motorola is constantly teetering on the edge of running out of business.

It looks like a nice phone, but the fact is Motorola can't make good hardware. I regularly see RAZRs, KRZRs, etc come back with issues. We never sold any Moto Qs but the ones we did sell came back with issues. Motorola just doesn't make a good phone anymore. The Droid hopefully has better quality control but even then.

I'm all for competition and all, but really Motorola and Nokia are both companies that need to die so the market can move on.

Motorola is THE premier manufacturer of commercial-grade communication equipment. They make the best, most reliable, most flexible 2-way radio equipment there is, bar none. Their sound reproduction quality (independent of the network's signal quality, of course) is typically the benchmark others strive to approach. Oh, and they also pioneered the cellular network concept in the very early 1980s. Moto is not going away, and they don't need to "die so the market can move on." They are a strong company that has the resources to try new things and if those new things fail, learn from the experience.

Nokia, on the other hand, is a one-trick-pony and while they did at one time have the majority of the cell phone market in their pocket, the have lost relevance-and direction. Note that Erikson, which was once a major player, had to join forces with Sony in order to stay around; I loved my Erikson phone, but Erikson was also pretty single-product oriented (at least here in the US), and that was a major problem for them.

[BadKosh]

Didn't Aniken Skywalker make the prototype?

[Phileas]

Originally Posted by ghporter 

They make the best, most reliable, most flexible 2-way radio equipment there is, bar none.

So much so that on movie set around the world you'll hear "Motorolas off" rather than "radios off" when a scene is just about to the be shot. Like the Hoover in the UK, the brand name has become synonymous with the product.

Having said that, I've owned three Motorola phones and hated every single one of it. Hated the build quality, hated the OS.

[angelmb]

You look at the iPhone but walk out with the second best? Why?

Not to mention that actually "second best" means this:

best ……………………………………… second best …… third best

instead of this:

best …… second best …… third best

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by ghporter 

Motorola is THE premier manufacturer of commercial-grade communication equipment. They make the best, most reliable, most flexible 2-way radio equipment there is, bar none.

Like what? The RAZR, ROCKR?

You see many people complaining about the reliability and "non flexibility" of their iPhones (when it isn't AT&T's fault)?

I have never been impressed by motorola. The RAZR was the crappiest thing ever, I mean it didn't even have a silent button you had to hit the volume down 10 times to put it in mute. The OS was also the worst thing out there for a non-smartphone. Even worse they ran with the RAZR for years as it was their flagship and they totally cheapened the name but coming out with it in every pink shade under the sun and offering it for $0 with a contract.

Please let us know what product exactly from Motorola impressed you so much to hold them in such an indisputable high regard.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

Like what? The RAZR, ROCKR?

He said commercial-grade communications equipment.

He did NOT talk about Moto cell phones.

-t

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

4) It is an open platform (whatever that matters) - But 1/10th the apps as the iPhone.

Ah, but 9/10 of the apps available for the iPhone are crap.

quantity != quality

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

Ah, but 9/10 of the apps available for the iPhone are crap.

quantity != quality

And you think that 100% of Android apps will be awesome ?

-t

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

Ah, but 9/10 of the apps available for the iPhone are crap.

quantity != quality

Ok so you are saying the remaining 10,000 out of 100,000 iphone apps are quality then? Good to know.

What percentage of the only 10,000 google apps are quality? 1000? Can you point us to some?

That still leaves us at 10,000 "Quality" iphone apps vs 1000 "Quality" Google apps.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

He said commercial-grade communications equipment.

He did NOT talk about Moto cell phones.

-t

What does commercial Grade have to do with this discussion? We are talking about consumer Smartphones.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

What does commercial Grade have to do with this discussion? We are talking about consumer Smartphones.

I think he objected to the notion that ALL Moto equipment is of poor quality.

-t

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

I think he objected to the notion that ALL Moto equipment is of poor quality.

-t

Well if these high quality commercial-grade products don't filter down to consumer what's the point.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

Well if these high quality commercial-grade products don't filter down to consumer what's the point.

Cell phones and communications equipment are two different Moto Business Units.

They don't share anything anymore these days.

-t

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

Like what? The RAZR, ROCKR?

You see many people complaining about the reliability and "non flexibility" of their iPhones (when it isn't AT&T's fault)?

I have never been impressed by motorola. The RAZR was the crappiest thing ever, I mean it didn't even have a silent button you had to hit the volume down 10 times to put it in mute. The OS was also the worst thing out there for a non-smartphone. Even worse they ran with the RAZR for years as it was their flagship and they totally cheapened the name but coming out with it in every pink shade under the sun and offering it for $0 with a contract.

Please let us know what product exactly from Motorola impressed you so much to hold them in such an indisputable high regard.

I loved my RAZRs. The OS was awfully clunky, but the phone did what I wanted and then some. And they sounded great too. (I used that clunky OS to assign a button so I could go directly to ring volume, thus making it a two button thing to silence the phone.)

But if cell phones (especially in the last 10 years) are all of your experience with Motorola, you really don't have any experience with Motorola. Let's talk abut the HT and MT series handheld 2-way radios, and their companion vehicle mounted radios. Rock solid performance, great sound, great battery life, easy to use, easy to maintain, and even rugged enough to put up with every idiot you handed one to carrying the thing by its antenna or hanging the microphone over the car's rear view mirror. I can't tell you how many of these I was able to make work after really dedicated abusers were done with them. I even resurrected one that the guy dumped in the toilet, then keyed while it was full of water-the front case melted and a good bit of the guts suffered because of that, but I made it work again.

Motorola started out making the original car radio, and as I said, they are the premier maker of professional 2-way radio equipment. Phones are one business unit, that's all.

[Captain Obvious]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

What does commercial Grade have to do with this discussion? We are talking about consumer Smartphones.

Actually, you were talking about introductory line phones like RAZRs and ROCKRs. The Q9 line was a pretty versatile phone and still has a following. It was far better than most of the other offerings from Kyocera, Sony, Nokia, Samsung, etc.

I just don't get why you have such a hard on for the iPhone.
Its a nice phone but it has its limitations.
Its only recently become a player in the business consumer market and unless Apple offers more models and can be sold on various carriers it will be behind Blackberry ad Nokia in this country.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by Captain Obvious 

That's because you are being a tech nerd.
I don't really care that the technology is superior when the application of said tech yields poor results in day to day life.

I'm not so sure the connivence of SIM cards to swap phones or worldwide use is being that big of a nerd. Seems like everyday things that anyone would want.

Said technology has served lots of people very well for 10 years.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by Captain Obvious 

I just don't get why you have such a hard on for the iPhone.
Its a nice phone but it has its limitations.
Its only recently become a player in the business consumer market and unless Apple offers more models and can be sold on various carriers it will be behind Blackberry ad Nokia in this country.

Well I (along with the entire industry that is copying it) and the millions of customers are "Hard" for the iPhone for one good reason... it is the best thing on the market. Is it perfect? No, NOTHING in the world is. Ya it has a few limitations all that most can live with. Will most of the issues be solved soon with hardware or software? you bet. Is there anything else on the market better for most people? Nope.

Apple doesn't want 100% of the market with iPhones with keyboards, no keyboards, CDMA, GSM, Bigger, smaller, keyboard, no keyboard. That is a friggin mess and creates the same bad business model they had back in the 90's that put them in so much trouble with desktop computers.

Let Nokia or whoever have the cheap dumbphone market. Let Blackberry keep the stuffy business man market that their IT Department is comfortable with and the shitty little keyboards they think are so much better.

Apple said they wanted 1% of the market, they got way more than they ask for.

Nokia and sony with all this wonderful selection of phones for just about anyone on any network are losing money and marketshare by the ton. Apple doesn't want to sell a 8 million more phones and go broke and cheapen their brand.

You wanna know why sony is doing so badly?
Video: Sony Ericsson Xperia Pureness - unboxing and demo

That is an embarrassment for the company and anyone who would own it, especially for $800.
Everything about the phone is a dumbphone from 6 years ago, but see through.

Nokia's smartphones are a joke too. They have had poor battery life for 10 years, still do. Samsung, LG whatever... junk. Apple will gladly let them have the free phone with pay as you go that you buy at 7-11.

To be sucessfull doesn't mean you have to cater to 100% of the market, make every option available, be on every carrier. But then again you know that Mr Obvious, don't you?

[CharlesS]

One big thing about the Droid is that since it’s made by Motorola, it will probably have world-class signal strength. Say what you want about Moto, but they know how to build cell phone radios. My V8 gets three bars of signal where another phone on the same carrier can’t even make a call. The Droid has the potential to do most of the stuff the iPhone does, plus actually being good as a phone for a change. I hope they make a GSM version for T-Mobile.

Oh, and:

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

I have never been impressed by motorola. The RAZR was the crappiest thing ever, I mean it didn't even have a silent button you had to hit the volume down 10 times to put it in mute.

Whoa, flashback to four years ago. WTF? I had a RAZR when I was on AT&T. It had a button right on the side. You could switch between ring, silent, vibrate, vibrate & ring, vibrate then ring, and maybe a few more also — I don’t remember. I used it to switch to vibrate mode all the time. I remember correcting you on this the first time four years ago, too.

[ort888]

Why is there so much hype around the Droid?

I DON'T know.

[starman]

Originally Posted by ghporter 

But if cell phones (especially in the last 10 years) are all of your experience with Motorola, you really don't have any experience with Motorola.

Isn't that like saying iPhone users have to own a Mac Pro to have experience with Apple?

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by starman 

Isn't that like saying iPhone users have to own a Mac Pro to have experience with Apple?

In a way it is. However the iPhone and the Mac Pro are much more similar to each other, as is Apple's approach and support of them, than Motorola's cell phone division is to their professional communications division. Further, if your only contact with Moto is their cell phones, you probably don't know anything about the rest of their products, while an Apple customer is at least somewhat aware that there are different product lines in Apple's portfolio, in part because all these product lines are marketed together in Apple Stores and online. There are almost certainly Motorola repeaters (and cell repeaters) supporting the emergency services of any sizable US city, Motorola portable and mobile radios in their police, fire and ambulance vehicles (including mobile repeaters), and Motorola base equipment as an integral part of these cities' 911 infrastructure. You would not know that based entirely on the Moto phones you see on display at BestBuy...

[CharlesS]

Except if you go by signal strength, at which point it becomes fairly obvious.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by Captain Obvious 

Actually, you were talking about introductory line phones like RAZRs and ROCKRs. The Q9 line was a pretty versatile phone and still has a following. It was far better than most of the other offerings from Kyocera, Sony, Nokia, Samsung, etc.

I just don't get why you have such a hard on for the iPhone.
Its a nice phone but it has its limitations.
Its only recently become a player in the business consumer market and unless Apple offers more models and can be sold on various carriers it will be behind Blackberry ad Nokia in this country.

Apple, with their purposely limited model range, already makes more profit on cellphones than ANY competitor - their iPhone range alone accounts for over 30 percent of the entire industry profit.



Also, FWIW, the hype around the Droid appears to be due to the fact that it's the first actual competitor to the iPhone, at least according to wired:

Why I’m Not Getting a Droid Today | Gadget Lab | Wired.com

[Rumor]

Doesn't look like the Droid sales are going to do so well. There is an article over at /. with data pricing for the Droid. $30 a month for "unlimited" data, capped at 5GB. $30 a month for "unlimited" tethering, capped at 5GB. Each GB after is $50. Exchange is another $15 a month. Also, tethering will not be available until some time next year.

Seems a bit pricey.

[Chuckit]

Unlimited data capped at 5GB is the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

Unlimited data capped at 5GB is the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

In a country full of frivolous lawsuits, I haven't figured out why someone hasn't sued the phone companies for false advertising.

[olePigeon]

Android is the Year of Linux on the Desktop! Err, phone. Close enough.

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

Unlimited data capped at 5GB is the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

Doesn’t AT&T do the same thing though?

[osiris]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

Unlimited data capped at 5GB is the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

Unlimited : "not limited or restricted in terms of number, quantity, or extent".

This is outrageous, egregious, preposterous and facetious!

[Spheric Harlot]

CharlesS: "Capping" and charging for over is a very different thing from throttling transfer speeds once you're over a certain amount.

[CharlesS]

http://wireless.att.com/media/terms

"If you are on a data plan that does not include a monthly MB/GB allowance and additional data usage rates, you agree that AT&T has the right to impose additional charges if you use more than 5 GB in a month; provided that, prior to the imposition of any additional charges, AT&T shall provide you with notice and you shall have the right to terminate your Service."

[Chuckit]

Yeah, throttling is sketchy, but overages on something unlimited are impossible by definition.

[ort888]

What would you have to be doing to download 5 gigs on a cell network? That's like 165 megs a day.

[CharlesS]

I think it’s more the principle that bugs people, of having a cap on a plan that’s advertised as “unlimited”.

edit: with tethering, of course, it’s quite plausible to go over 5 GB.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Seriously, T-Mobile is NOT better than AT&T.

Coverage map? No.
Useable coverage? Yes.

Originally Posted by Rumor 

Exchange is another $15 a month.

Only for business customers and not specific to Droid or even Verizon...

For access to corporate email (via Microsoft Exchange), company intranet sites, and/or other business solutions/applications, add an Enterprise Data Plan for iPhone for $45 per month.