Blackberry Phones

Blackberry's seem to be quite popular these days...I am not too
familiar with them. What do they allow you to do over what normal
phones do?

---

› See More: Blackberry Phones

On 9 Aug 2006 17:21:30 -0700, "Ersalan Rahman"
<[email protected]> wrote in
<[email protected]>:

>Blackberry's seem to be quite popular these days...I am not too
>familiar with them. What do they allow you to do over what normal
>phones do?

Send and receive email. Which regular cell phones can do as well or
better using the slick Google Mail WAP interface.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 01:01:59 GMT, John Navas
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On 9 Aug 2006 17:21:30 -0700, "Ersalan Rahman"
><[email protected]> wrote in
><[email protected]>:
>
>>Blackberry's seem to be quite popular these days...I am not too
>>familiar with them. What do they allow you to do over what normal
>>phones do?

Normal phones do not allow push email (<http://tinyurl.com/fjow3>) and
synchronization of calendar, contacts, etc. OTA transparently like a
Blackberry does.

Blackberry's big claim to fame is email.

>Send and receive email. Which regular cell phones can do as well or
>better using the slick Google Mail WAP interface.

Better? Come on John, get serious. Have you even used a Blackberry?

No "normal phone" (i.e., non SMARTphone) does email better than a
Blackberry, even via GMail's WAP interface.

On Wed, 09 Aug 2006 18:36:49 -0700, Anon E. Muss <[email protected]>
wrote in <[email protected]>:

>On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 01:01:59 GMT, John Navas
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>On 9 Aug 2006 17:21:30 -0700, "Ersalan Rahman"
>><[email protected]> wrote in
>><[email protected]>:
>>
>>>Blackberry's seem to be quite popular these days...I am not too
>>>familiar with them. What do they allow you to do over what normal
>>>phones do?
>
>Normal phones do not allow push email (<http://tinyurl.com/fjow3>) and
>synchronization of calendar, contacts, etc.

With a normal phone, I can do either regular pull mail or push mail with
Google Mail.

>OTA transparently like a
>Blackberry does.

I normally sync my PC with Bluetooth, but I can also use SyncML over
cellular wireless.

>Blackberry's big claim to fame is email.

I personally prefer WAP access with my normal phone.

>>Send and receive email. Which regular cell phones can do as well or
>>better using the slick Google Mail WAP interface.
>
>Better? Come on John, get serious. Have you even used a Blackberry?

Yes. Have you ever used Gmail WAP?

>No "normal phone" (i.e., non SMARTphone) does email better than a
>Blackberry, even via GMail's WAP interface.

"Better" is an elusive concept that I don't care to debate.
Gmail WAP works more than well enough for me.
My phone is first and foremost a phone, and I don't think
Blackberry is a terribly good phone. YMMV.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 05:41:30 GMT, John Navas
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Wed, 09 Aug 2006 18:36:49 -0700, Anon E. Muss <[email protected]>
>wrote in <[email protected]>:

[snip]

>>Normal phones do not allow push email (<http://tinyurl.com/fjow3>) and
>>synchronization of calendar, contacts, etc.
>
>With a normal phone, I can do either regular pull mail or push mail with
>Google Mail.

As far as I know, you cannot do true real time "push email" with a
normal phone.

Smartphones (Symbian OS, Windows Mobile), Treos (e.g., via Goodlink),
Blackberries (via BES) -- yes. Non-smart phones -- no.

See <http://tinyurl.com/kqtsm>

"It is still not push email (or even close for that matter) so
it's not a direct competitor."

>>OTA transparently like a blackberry does.
>
>I normally sync my PC with Bluetooth, but I can also use SyncML over
>cellular wireless.

Again, not transparently in real time.

>>Blackberry's big claim to fame is email.
>
>I personally prefer WAP access with my normal phone.

Fair enough.

>>>Send and receive email. Which regular cell phones can do as well or
>>>better using the slick Google Mail WAP interface.
>>
>>Better? Come on John, get serious. Have you even used a Blackberry?
>
>Yes. Have you ever used Gmail WAP?

Yes I have. For plain text, it is adequate.

For anything else, such as attachments, threaded discussions, etc. it
is clearly inferior.

>>No "normal phone" (i.e., non SMARTphone) does email better than a
>>Blackberry, even via GMail's WAP interface.
>
>"Better" is an elusive concept that I don't care to debate.
>Gmail WAP works more than well enough for me.

Again, fair enough.

>My phone is first and foremost a phone, and I don't think
>Blackberry is a terribly good phone. YMMV.

Once again, fair enough.

On Wed, 09 Aug 2006 23:31:14 -0700, Anon E. Muss <[email protected]>
wrote in <[email protected]>:

>On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 05:41:30 GMT, John Navas
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 09 Aug 2006 18:36:49 -0700, Anon E. Muss <[email protected]>
>>wrote in <[email protected]>:
>
>[snip]
>
>>>Normal phones do not allow push email (<http://tinyurl.com/fjow3>) and
>>>synchronization of calendar, contacts, etc.
>>
>>With a normal phone, I can do either regular pull mail or push mail with
>>Google Mail.
>
>As far as I know, you cannot do true real time "push email" with a
>normal phone.
>
>Smartphones (Symbian OS, Windows Mobile), Treos (e.g., via Goodlink),
>Blackberries (via BES) -- yes. Non-smart phones -- no.
>
>See <http://tinyurl.com/kqtsm>
>
> "It is still not push email (or even close for that matter) so
> it's not a direct competitor."

A Google Mail filter can be used to forward ("push") mail to a normal
phone in real time (using the email to SMS or MMS gateway). I do it
whenever I need instant delivery. I can respond directly from the phone
via messaging back to the gateway, or use the Google Mail WAP interface.
A benefit of using Google Mail is essentially infinite archiving.

Most of the time I am quite satisfied with regular "pull" mail, which is
configurable down to 30 mins.

>>>OTA transparently like a blackberry does.
>>
>>I normally sync my PC with Bluetooth, but I can also use SyncML over
>>cellular wireless.
>
>Again, not transparently in real time.

More than fast enough for me.

>>Yes. Have you ever used Gmail WAP?
>
>Yes I have. For plain text, it is adequate.
>
>For anything else, such as attachments, threaded discussions, etc. it
>is clearly inferior.

I personally find Gmail superior for attachments, converting popular
formats into small screen format much more efficiently than any
smartphone I've used.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

"Anon E. Muss" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 05:41:30 GMT, John Navas
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> As far as I know, you cannot do true real time "push email" with a
> normal phone.

Depending on your goals, my office digital land line sends a notice of
incoming calls to my Hotmail account. I did have Hotmail set to send a text
message to my RAZR.

"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Wed, 09 Aug 2006 18:36:49 -0700, Anon E. Muss <[email protected]>
> wrote in <[email protected]>:
>
> >On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 01:01:59 GMT, John Navas
> ><[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >>On 9 Aug 2006 17:21:30 -0700, "Ersalan Rahman"
> >><[email protected]> wrote in
> >><[email protected]>:
> >>
> >>>Blackberry's seem to be quite popular these days...I am not too
> >>>familiar with them. What do they allow you to do over what normal
> >>>phones do?
> >
> >Normal phones do not allow push email (<http://tinyurl.com/fjow3>) and
> >synchronization of calendar, contacts, etc.
>
> With a normal phone, I can do either regular pull mail or push mail with
> Google Mail.
>
> >OTA transparently like a
> >Blackberry does.
>
> I normally sync my PC with Bluetooth, but I can also use SyncML over
> cellular wireless.
>
> >Blackberry's big claim to fame is email.
>
> I personally prefer WAP access with my normal phone.
>
> >>Send and receive email. Which regular cell phones can do as well or
> >>better using the slick Google Mail WAP interface.
> >
> >Better? Come on John, get serious. Have you even used a Blackberry?
>
> Yes. Have you ever used Gmail WAP?
<snip>

The real problem that GMail has is that it is a "Beta" and that if you have
a problem with GMail that is the response that you will get from Google.
Also, there is a known issue that when your GMail box gets "full" (the
number is around the 350-400 mark) GMail will reset itself and show all
emails in the box as unread and - if you are getting them via the WAP
interface would mean that you get all 400 emails redelivered to your inbox.

Now what you can do is use the forwarding feature and forward it to your MMS
email address.

Thanks for the replies guys. I don't use my cell phone for internet
purposes--email, etc (at least not yet) so I don't know if Blackberries
would be worth it for me. Probably just get a good old fashioned Nokia


Cliff wrote:
> "John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > On Wed, 09 Aug 2006 18:36:49 -0700, Anon E. Muss <[email protected]>
> > wrote in <[email protected]>:
> >
> > >On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 01:01:59 GMT, John Navas
> > ><[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > >>On 9 Aug 2006 17:21:30 -0700, "Ersalan Rahman"
> > >><[email protected]> wrote in
> > >><[email protected]>:
> > >>
> > >>>Blackberry's seem to be quite popular these days...I am not too
> > >>>familiar with them. What do they allow you to do over what normal
> > >>>phones do?
> > >
> > >Normal phones do not allow push email (<http://tinyurl.com/fjow3>) and
> > >synchronization of calendar, contacts, etc.
> >
> > With a normal phone, I can do either regular pull mail or push mail with
> > Google Mail.
> >
> > >OTA transparently like a
> > >Blackberry does.
> >
> > I normally sync my PC with Bluetooth, but I can also use SyncML over
> > cellular wireless.
> >
> > >Blackberry's big claim to fame is email.
> >
> > I personally prefer WAP access with my normal phone.
> >
> > >>Send and receive email. Which regular cell phones can do as well or
> > >>better using the slick Google Mail WAP interface.
> > >
> > >Better? Come on John, get serious. Have you even used a Blackberry?
> >
> > Yes. Have you ever used Gmail WAP?
> <snip>
>
> The real problem that GMail has is that it is a "Beta" and that if you have
> a problem with GMail that is the response that you will get from Google.
> Also, there is a known issue that when your GMail box gets "full" (the
> number is around the 350-400 mark) GMail will reset itself and show all
> emails in the box as unread and - if you are getting them via the WAP
> interface would mean that you get all 400 emails redelivered to your inbox.
>
> Now what you can do is use the forwarding feature and forward it to your MMS
> email address.

On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 14:42:56 GMT, "Cliff" <[email protected]>
wrote in <[email protected]>:

>"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...

>> Yes. Have you ever used Gmail WAP?

>The real problem that GMail has is that it is a "Beta" and that if you have
>a problem with GMail that is the response that you will get from Google.

Gmail is quite reliable, on a par with other email services.

Google does discourage support requests, but does respond when there are
real issues with the mobile (WAP) service. Case in point:
<http://groups.google.com/group/Google_Web_Search_Help-Personalizing/browse_frm/thread/6a025156dd735154/5fb95f9485851970?#5fb95f9485851970>
(or <http://tinyurl.com/rnc4r>)

>Also, there is a known issue that when your GMail box gets "full" (the
>number is around the 350-400 mark) GMail will reset itself and show all
>emails in the box as unread and - if you are getting them via the WAP
>interface would mean that you get all 400 emails redelivered to your inbox.

I've not seen that problem, but then I've never let my inbox get
anywhere near that full. So I ran a test with a backup Gmail
account, and didn't see that problem with well over 400 read messages in
the Inbox and new messages arriving. Did a quick check and couldn't
find reports of it. Citation? Perhaps it's been fixed.

>Now what you can do is use the forwarding feature and forward it to your MMS
>email address.

Or SMS email address. As I said. Works great.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

On 9 Aug 2006 17:21:30 -0700, "Ersalan Rahman"
<[email protected]> wrote in
<[email protected]>:

>Blackberry's seem to be quite popular these days...I am not too
>familiar with them. What do they allow you to do over what normal
>phones do?

"BlackBerry hacking peril exposed"
<http://www.theregister.com/2006/08/10/blackjack_hack_attack/>

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 08:09:12 -0500, "Thurman" <[email protected]>
wrote in <[email protected]>:

>"Anon E. Muss" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 05:41:30 GMT, John Navas
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> As far as I know, you cannot do true real time "push email" with a
>> normal phone.
>
>Depending on your goals, my office digital land line sends a notice of
>incoming calls to my Hotmail account. I did have Hotmail set to send a text
>message to my RAZR.

Yahoo Mobile also has SMS notification of email available.

There's nothing really unique about Blackberry other than packaging and
convenience.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 08:09:12 -0500, "Thurman" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>"Anon E. Muss" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 05:41:30 GMT, John Navas
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> As far as I know, you cannot do true real time "push email" with a
>> normal phone.
>
>Depending on your goals, my office digital land line sends a notice of
>incoming calls to my Hotmail account. I did have Hotmail set to send a text
>message to my RAZR.

That's not PUSH email -- it's a "hack".

For some people, it's close enough to not matter.

For others, it's not even close to being what they need.

On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 10:16:58 -0400, SinghaLvr <[email protected]>
wrote in <[email protected]>:

>On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 10:42:56 -0400, Cliff wrote
>(in article <[email protected]>):
>
>> The real problem that GMail has is that it is a "Beta" and that if you have
>> a problem with GMail that is the response that you will get from Google.
>> Also, there is a known issue that when your GMail box gets "full" (the
>> number is around the 350-400 mark) GMail will reset itself and show all
>> emails in the box as unread and - if you are getting them via the WAP
>> interface would mean that you get all 400 emails redelivered to your inbox.
>>
>> Now what you can do is use the forwarding feature and forward it to your MMS
>> email address.
>
>In addition Blackberry provides secure e-mail ... nothing based on the public
>internet does that. If you are dealing with customer information, especially
>financial data then this is quite important.

What makes you think that? There really is no such thing as "secure"
email short of complete end-to-end encryption in both sending and
receiving email clients. Since Blackberry is just a service grafted
onto regular or enterprise email, it's not secure. The security in
Blackberry is just between the BES and the Blackberry device. "A chain
is only as strong as its weakest link."

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 21:09:26 -0400, SinghaLvr <[email protected]>
wrote in <[email protected]>:

>On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 10:30:30 -0400, John Navas wrote
>(in article <[email protected]>):
>
>> What makes you think that? There really is no such thing as "secure"
>> email short of complete end-to-end encryption in both sending and
>> receiving email clients. Since Blackberry is just a service grafted
>> onto regular or enterprise email, it's not secure. The security in
>> Blackberry is just between the BES and the Blackberry device. "A chain
>> is only as strong as its weakest link."
>
>When you are dealing with data that goes through public internet routers and
>is potentially stored on those hard drives as well (and maintained by people
>outside of your companies security policies) then it's an improvement.

How is it an improvement? That still happens right up to the Blackberry
end.

>Perfect? No ... but neither are locks on doors. They just help keep honest
>people honest. The crooks are going to find a way to break in anyway.

It's not even close to perfect -- it's like locking the door, but
leaving all the windows open.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>